ShareThis Page

Review: 'Wanted'

| Friday, June 27, 2008

There are bad movies, and so-bad-it's good movies, but "Wanted" belongs to a category beyond them all -- a realm of pure blinding badness that would embarrass even Jerry Bruckheimer.

It's got everything you don't want in a summer action movie -- the humor of "The Matrix: Reloaded" (none), the memorable characters of late-period Steven Seagal (none), the just-wild-enough-to-be-believable chases of "The Transporter" (a joke), and a twist ending that would make only M. Night Shyamalan proud.

James McAvoy plays Wesley, a sad-sack office drone who gets panic attacks when his obese boss berates him for his ineptitude.

But that's only until Fox (Angelina Jolie) -- yes, her name is really "Fox" -- roars into his life, guns blazing. After saving his life from a mysterious assassin, she informs him that his long-departed father was an assassin, part of an ancient cabal of killers called "The Fraternity" that keep the world in balance by killing the worst of the worst.

The Fraternity has descended from a medieval guild of weavers, the giant "Loom of Fate" somehow encoding their targets into pieces of cloth. She tells Wesley that his panic attacks really indicate an incredible surge of adrenaline that he can learn to control -- letting him do things like shoot bullets out of mid-air and make his car do backflips.

Russian director Timur Bekmambetov -- of the equally tedious "Nightwatch" movies -- is largely responsible for this fiasco, and its baffling 110-minute length.

If McAvoy feared that he would be typecast after "Atonement" in sensitive-boy romantic lead roles -- well, he doesn't have to worry about that now.

• In wide release

Additional Information:


Rated R for strong violence, language and sexuality One and a half stars (out of four)

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me