34 of 41 people found the following review helpful
This review is from: The World's End [DVD] (DVD)
Don't get me wrong, World's End isn't a bad film, it's brilliantly filmed, well acted and funny in places, it's just you get a sense of deja vu watching it.
I know a lot of Wright and Pegg's work has revolved around comedic homage to other popular culture references but they are ripping them selves off dreadfully here. The central premise is lifted straight from Sean of The Dead only with robots instead of zombies, the subtext is lifted straight from Hot Fuzz (strange underground movement trying to retain the niceness of an otherwise arse end of nowhere location using somewhat unpleasant means) and the unnecessarily gratuitous swearing is lifted straight out of Paul. Even Pegg's character is a less likeable version of Tim Bisley from Spaced. Possibly, after 15 years, it's just run it's course. Sean Of The Dead and Hot Fuzz set the bar incredibly high but transparently rehashing old ideas does smack of a creative block.
I'd hate to think that with Pegg getting increasingly bigger parts elsewhere, he's losing interest in his own work.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-3 of 3 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 29 Nov 2013 00:33:31 GMT
I wish people wouldn't put Paul in the same boat as Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz and The World's End. There's a reason it's called the Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy, and it doesn't include Paul. It had no involvement from Edgar Wright, just because it's a Pegg/Frost film doesn't make it comparable to these three films. As for ideas wearing thin, since it is a trilogy this could very well be it now. The three of them could of course move onto a new set of films with a different blend of comedy, but I look forward to seeing whatever they do next.
In reply to an earlier post on 29 Nov 2013 07:29:16 GMT
Why is Paul not comparable to these, just because it involves only 2 of the 3 main protagonists, it's still written by Pegg and Frost so should be included in any discussion about their body of work as a whole. Anyway, it's the gratuitous swearing that irks me, it's so 1983.
With World's End is that it just feels like they made the decision to a trilogy but only really had ideas for 2 and it is very weak in comparison to the other 2 films. As I said in my review, it's not a bad film, if it was, I would have given it 1 star, just a poor film in comparison to their other work, which is really what most people reading an Amazon review would want to know, how it stacks up against their other work .
Posted on 29 Dec 2013 10:21:40 GMT
G. Robinson says:
I agree. The general reception The World's End got from the public must have given the boys something to think about. They've probably got another two years of commitments already lined up in Hollywood, so I think this lame duck may be the Pegg/Frost/Wright swansong. Maybe it's time!
‹ Previous 1 Next ›