Movie

Skyscraper (film): Proof that the Rock can make money in just whatever

Name: Skyscraper (film): Proof that the Rock can make money in just whatever
Item: Skyscraper
Author: @gooddream

Review by @gooddream · 2869d · of Skyscraper

The fact that movies like this make loads of money actually makes me a bit upset. This movie is just awful aside from the huge budget and well, go ahead and watch. It will make several hundred million dollars which will only insure the fact that they will continue to make this sort of garbage.

I don't think i really need to get into the storyline to let anyone know what is happening here. There is a skyscraper, there is fire, and the Rock is involved. I am sure you can put the rest of the pieces into place. Insert a few bad guys with Eastern European accents and 100 million dollars worth of CGI and well, you have the whole story!

this isn't even a scene from the film, but it may as well be

I don't even want to include other screen captures of this film because honestly it isn't necessary. Dwayne Johnson is going to win in whatever movie he is in and this is not an exception. He has some kids with "Sarah," played by Neve Campbell (welcome back Neve!) and they live in a skyscraper when something bad happens and they have to sort it out.

Honestly, fill in any plot whatevers you want in the middle. It was pre-determined by the fact that the Rock was in the movie and it was called "Skyscraper" what was going to happen in this movie from the moment that any of the however many people it takes to make $300 million. I guess he just has that sort of star power. I would imagine that he gets paid $20 million a movie at this point and for that I say, well done Rock! I'm not going to come down on you for being popular and a tremendous selling point.

However, in the meantime I think I should be entitled to say that this movie is garbage and so are a vast majority of the other movies that Dwayne Johnson is involved in. I watch them only to find fault in them but I guess I am in the minority. Hollywood has found a system that makes them a ton of money and having films with any sort of substance doesn't even factor into their script equation.

This movie proves that Hollywood can take the Rock and put him into any f**king scenario and the film is going to make tons of money, thus insuring that we will only ever get this from him. I mean if I was a business owner and I knew of method of making tons of money where the product was crap, or to make tiny bits of money that took a real thought process, i would go with the former also.

I expect we will see lots of extremely predictable movies with no real substance in the next, I dunno, 10 years or so. Then it will all go away, Dwayne will be a bazillionaire and be replaced by someone else at some point where the entire process will be repeated.

If you are the type of person that wants to watch a movie with the story substance of Transformers and the acting and special effects budget of also Transformers - but without the Transformers, then this movie will be for you.

4 / 10

it gets the 4 only because well, it keeps moving quickly at least

Comments · 14

@bharat273(45)· 2869d
Hiii...gooddream

Gm Have a lovely day
@aydogdy(58)· 2869d
"Skyscraper" is a movie for Scala fans. Nothing extraordinary for the genre of catastrophe films, he does not give, there is no spectacular action, and the plot is simple and predictable. Watch is only if you by inertia go to all the movies with Dwayne Johnson. He will not disappoint you.
@rodneysreviews(53)· 2869d
"Hollywood can take the Rock and put him into any f**king scenario and the film is going to make tons of money"

Your review is hilarious and true, apart from the above statement. This movie is not a hit. It couldn't even reach $70 million ($35 million for the theaters, $35 million for the Studio, minus $15 million or so marketing spend, potentially) in the US, despite a $125 million budget. That is a disaster. Admittedly, it made a ton in China, where it was designed to be a hit, by including local talent, but Chinese theaters keep the vast amount of the takings, unlike US theaters. Result: even after DVD and Downloads and Netflix and whatever, this movie will struggle to make it's money back.

And even if it does, it would still be regarded as a waste of time, as the studios want hits, not recoupers.

Personally I love the Rock, but this was garbage. Here's why:

The Rock only works in three scenarios:

(1) Comedy - The Rock has always had a sense of humor, and oodles of charisma. We always knew what the Rock was cooking, and it was oversized, exaggerated and funny: eg Central Intelligence;

(2) Fantasy: The Rock's oversize body and likeability make him awesome when the very premise is exaggerated and unbelievable, like he is: eg Jumanji, a great movie;

(3) Action Movie Guest Star: As long as he's not at the center of the show, destroying a movie's credibility, The Rock's huge frame adds mucho macho to action pictures, which is great fun: eg Fast and Furious franchise.

When asked to play in realistic films, he destroys any semblance of credibility and suspense, as he simply isn't a very good actor, nor is he a believable presence: eg: this awful picture.

This movie stinks for the following reasons:

(1) It's a goddamn knockoff! Hollywood used to ask writers for scripts that were "Die Hard in a whatever" scripts, cos Die Hard was the prototypical action thriller template. So writers would give them "Die Hard on a ship," "Die Hard on a Plane," "Die Hard in a Burger Joint," or whatever. But "Die Hard in a Skyscraper" is just effin "Die Hard!" Throw in some cheesy badly done "Towering Inferno" and an "Enter the Dragon" mirrors scene, and you've got zero originality;

(2) Worse, everything in the movie is worse than the movies it's knocking off. Where's Alan Rickman's diabolically amusing, urbane and camp villain? Answer: Nowhere, cos this movie gives you a characterless,humorless, charisma-free nobody.

Where's the meticulously laid out geography of the building? Answer: Nowhere, cos you don't know where the eff you are from scene to scene. It all makes no realistic sense whatsoever;

Where's the charismatic hero, with his feet on the ground? Bruce Willis' character, John McClane LITERALLY digs his feet into the ground, making fists with his toes, to prove what a real regular grounded guy he is. By contrast, The Rock's character barely even acknowledges that he's got a fake leg, scaling buildings like he's fully fit and healthy, and doing superhero shit that makes no sense.

(3) Apart from the essentially invisible central villain, the other villains make even LESS impact, astonishingly. It's like they're not even there. The Rocks' wife just plods from scene to scene filling time, and the kids do generic kids-in-peril unbelievable BS.

(4, 5, 6, 7 and 8) There is not a moment of real threat in the entire movie, not a moment of believable characterization, not a shred of interesting plotting, no theme of any depth, no humor at all.

Simply put, this movie TOTALLY SUCKS! And Hollywood must think we're brain-dead to think otherwise. Please put the Rock in the comedies and fantasies and guest-starring roles he thrives in, preferably a sequel to Jumanji! :)
@calma(39)· 2869d
I don't understand how these movies sell so much. We have to stop paying for things like this and make them do better things in Hollywood.
@rocksg(70)· 2869d
Thanx for saving my bucks and time by your honest and unbiased review about the movie. Only being Rock there doesn't mean it is worth watching.
@nuthman(74)· 2869d
I had about as much desire to go see this movie as anything starring Vin Diesel from the last 10 years. I've started to call these type of movies "2012" movies - with reference to John Cusack constantly running only 2 inches in front of certain death for the duration of the movie.

All action and no contrast make John a dull boy.
@praditya(67)· 2869d
I am not a big fan of The rock neither have i watched his movies except jumanji, which was for sure good as i was fan of it since childhood. anyways, I am not up for this movie after reading your review , definitely not, and yes although I am a bit lazy at reading long blogs at times, but your's keep my interest alive and i can go through the entire blog . keep up the spirit!
@kwadjobonsu(61)· 2869d
Since no human adversary is any match for The Rock, as he has shown us in past movies, he must now take on non-human adversaries. This time, he's taking on a building. But not just any building. He's taking on a skyscraper-the most formidable and the most phallic of all buildings.

If it sounds ridiculous, that's because it is. The story is largely ridiculous, and although The Rock never actually fights the building (because it's a building), the danger that the building poses is a much greater threat than any posed by the actual villains of this film.

The villains are lame, cardboard cutout characters. They're evil because they're evil-no explanation given, no effort. So, I consider the skyscraper the main adversary in this film since its sheer height and the raging fire it contains threatens The Rock's family. I won't mention The Rock's character's name because I never once thought of him as anyone other than The Rock. The only thing here distinguishing him from the characters he plays in other movies, is his love for duct tape. This is a very pro-duct tape movie.

In this movie, The Rock is awesome because The Rock is always awesome. Speaking of awesome, I have to give it up for Neve Campbell. I should have known from the many times I watched the 'Scream' movies, but Neve Campbell is one tough cookie. She takes down her share of bad guys along the way, fearlessly and intelligently defending her kids. Well done. Despite all the flaws, I still had a good time watching this. The Rock is charismatic enough to carry any action movie to a reasonable level of watchability. Thanks to him, this one is reasonably watchable.
@naren9098(30)· 2869d
Great article @gooddream
@oraclefrequency(45)· 2869d
Lots of movies like this. They just throw money at big names, big effects, big locations and then let it ride. Cookie cutter movie, rinse and repeat.
@prince121(61)· 2869d
I know this movie because Deddy Corbuzier interview to all cast of skyscraper.. At first, I think it will be bored & not interesting.. But, waw, really unexpected, eventhough the movie just tell a little of history but the action, & many else made me unable to breathe.. So Amazing for this movie!

The Rock actually nearly hit the ground while filming the last scene you can see in this trailer. After dropping over 1000 feet, luckily he was caught by a passerby. His name was Norris, Chuck Norris
@daysiselena(78)· 2869d
That movie is very interesting.
@jumps(61)· 2869d
love dwayne johnson as always... ! love the post !!!
@zerokun(53)· 2869d
didn't watch it yet but what i see in the trailer should be a 5 or 6 no? XD