The Bad Guys is alright... I guess

I honestly had no interest in watching this film. The premise and setting didn't really grab me and I don't even have a nostalgic attachment to the original Aaron Blabey series of graphic novels like many other audiences who went to see it do. However, after much convincing, my best friend talked me into going to see it in theatres. So, I went into this film with zero expectations and interest and after coming out, I'm happy to say that I didn't hate it, but I didn't enjoy it all that much either. Even movies that I saw in theatres and dwonright dispised, like Mavka: The Forest Song (2023) or The Sixth Bus (2022), atleast left me feeling something after watching them. Sure, that feeling was unquenchable anger and loathing, but it was still something. This one just left no impression on me, kinda like being punched with an empty sock full of dust... Or maybe ash. I don't know, hadn't fully decided on it.

Now, I know I'm not this film's target audience in the slightest. It's clearly catering towards fans of the original books, as well little kids, so I'm not sure if I can give it the fairest review out there, however, I'll honestly try my best. And, if you do like it (like my best friend did, for example) more power to ya. It's great that you had a fun time with it. However, given that my feelings on it are very mixed, I'll try to be as fair as possible in this review given that, as I mentioned, I didn't even hate it. Mad respect to people who liked it, because I understand why they do and I hope they get where I'm coming from as well.

Now... Onto the review itself, I'm running out of ideas of stuff to say in the intro part.

(1) Positives

I'll be fair and not start off with saying what I disliked in the film, but rather talk about some rays of sunshine that had already existed within this project. Like any property with a semblence of quality in it, The Bad Guys does have some things which I do think actually worked for me as viewer.

The animation style is very fluid, memorable, eyecatching and unique, making the film itself stand out in a sea of other animated projects starring anthropomorphic bipeds. I'm not usually a big fan of CGI animated projects (I'm more off a hand drawn and stop motion guy myself), however, if it works it certainly works, and so it does here as well. Whilst it looks nothing like the artstyle of the books it certainly does ooze a comic book aesthetic, which is welcomed in any film adaptation of such an IP and helps the two takes on the same settings, stories and characters each stand on their own separate pedestules. This, as well as the new Puss in Boots flick just go to show that Dreamworks is really finding a voice of it's own in the modern animation industry and I'm happy for them.

The film's writing is surprisingly good too.

Whilst not every joke landed for me, there was a decent chunk of various gags and references (mostly to the Steven Soderbergh 2001 remake of Ocean's Eleven) which makes me smile in just about any piece of media if it's done well, and it certainly is here. I would also really like to commend three of the characters: Mr. Wolf, Ms. Tarantula and Diane Foxington, because throught the entire runtime, they were the only characters I never found to be dull, excessive or annoying. I'm probably biased regarding Tarantula though as she seems to be heavily influenced by Millennium trilogy's lead Lisbeth Salander, who I had already previously mentioned as my all time favorite fictional character, but, hey, if it works, it works.

The soundtrack of the flick is the definition of killer, wheater we're talking about the it's one original song (Daniel Pemberton's Good Tonight), the numerous memorable instrumental tracks or the superb choice of licensed tunes. It fits the film's wacky tone as well as being memorable and hummable in it's own right, so I have no choice but to say that I had quite a lot of fun with it.

Finally there's the film's pacing.

Phew, I don't remember talking about the pacing of a film since my review of Babylon, but, if it deserves praise, I'll give it credit, and it certainly does here.

A big problem I've had with many films lately (which applies to both live-action and animated properties) is that the pacing is usually not very good. They're either too long, too short or absolutely imbalanced. Fortunately, however, The Bad Guys doesn't have that problem. It never gets to a point where it starts to drag and feel like melted caramel pulled by a proffesional throwing sport champion nor does it feel like it's too overtly short for it's own good, leaving with too many storylines unwrapped and just left behind (like most of my school years). It just achieves a perfect balance between the two, existing in a sort off a goldilocks zone (a term for a place within a solar system where all conditions for the existence of life are met, for example our Earth).

So, yeah, despite the fact that it doesn't allign with my usual tastes, there's still elements of it I thought were actually well done and I can just say kuddos to the creators.

(2) The Putrid Cliches

So, even if I don't hate the actual film, I do feel like there's room for improvement. So, I'll put on my screenwriter cap and get to what I think should have been left out for the film, in order for it to end up being a more overtly enjoyable experiance (atleast to me).

The first thing I felt dragged the whole film down is the usage of two insufferably bad cliches: liar revealed and third act breakup. They're some of the most overused, dull, poorly executed and just plain boring cliches in the entire sea of these elements. You know exactly how they're gonna end, you know you're not going to enjoy them play out and you can see them coming and going from a mile away.

Holy shit, I just realized how people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki must have felt...

Anywho, what was I blabbing about again? Ah yes, the pestilences of media...

And what's even worse, even though they're included here, the movie could have worked just fine without them. Including them just feels like an unnecessary attempt to create artificial drama within the story in order to padd out the runtime. So, instead of trying to make the storyline, world or characters a tad bit deeper, you have to resort to the weakest storytelling elements known to man.

Sorry, I got a little heated there...

So, could they have somehow fixed this? Surprisingly, yes.

If I were hired to write this film, I would have avoided including these storybeats within it. I would try to get the remaining time to get within the psyche of the less developed characters, because, let's face it, not many of them are really given proper backstory, motivation or even much characterization. Only two of them (Mr. Wolf and Mr. Snake) are given a hint of development, leaving the others to feel more like glorified extras in a movie about a beef between two best friends. I would like to see a tad bit more backstory or focus on their psyche and just overall reasons as to why they had bonded as a group. I don't want an artsy, original, psychologycal analysis of the criminal lifestyle and mindset, but have me know these characters just a little bit better.

Another possible direction the movie should have taken is to develop the setting.

As I had mentioned a few times before, as a big worldbuilding nut, I enjoy it when a setting feels like a living, breathing character in it's own right, rahter than a blank background for the characters to enact their shenaningans upon. The film's setting is simply a generic unnamed large metropolitan city and it's never really given much attention. Sure, it might have been intentionally bland in order for the viewers to project their own birthplace onto it, however, I personally really dislike this, even if that really is the case. It'd be pretty cool to see the inner workings of this world, it's various social classes, maybe a tad bit of history. You don't even have to give out the full picture, but atleast give some brief glimpses of insight into this universe and it's mentality. Make it feel like a place where the viewer can clearly say Oh yeah I would love to live here or even the opposite of that. Otherwise, it feels a bit dull and static.

So, overall, whilst the writing is not bad, some tweaking would do it good.

(3) A Weak Villain

No matter the story, no matter the genre, an antagonist of any sort is at the core of most narratives. You can't have a truly great hero story if you don't have a truly great antagonist. And that is one of the film's biggest weakpoints. Professor Marmalade, an intelligent bipedal guiney pig, is not a very interesting, complex or even intmidating antagonist. Yes, I get it, it's supposed to be an ironic and comedic twist that serves to present the film's main message (don't judge a book by it's cover) and I don't fault the film itself or even the writers for that matter since it does do the job it's tasked to do.

However, that does not make him an actually good villain.

The film tries to make him seem intimidating, a mastermind that lurks within the shadows and who has every single movement of his throughly planned out, however, at the same time, he's a comedically over the top bafoon. Movie, you can't have your cake and eat it. Either have your villain be a complete idiot or a force to be wreckend with.

Now, now, I'm not saying comedic villains shouldn't exist. There's a plethora examples of such characters in media that actually function perfectly fine (for example The Organization in Cabin in the woods). However, in most cases, these villains aren't ment to be taken seriously at any given moment. They're supposed to be goofy, over the top and just generally unbelievable. There's also the option of having a villain of a comedy be an actual serious threat (for example, Bill Cipher in Gravity Falls, or The Carver in Nip/Tuck), however, that's not what we're dealing with here either.

Sure, I could also complain that he's written very generically, but, lots of other movies, books and shows still work, even if their antagonists are walking cliches, so that would be unfair.

Now, is there an option to fixing this?

Again, there certainly is (*puts screenwriter cap back on*).

If I were writing this film, I would have left the antagonist out altogether... Sort off...

It would still follow the same basic premise, however, the society would now be the main antagonists. Their judgemental perception of the leads who try to adapt to a regular, much more peaceful, lifestyle would sort off be the closest the film would have to a bad guy (hehe, see what I did there?). It would be a fun philosophy trip that would get both kids and adults thinking, whilst still providing enough entertainment and crazy hijinks in order to not have them be bored. Not every great story needs to have an antagonist and I'm honestly kinda sad the movie didn't go this route.

(4) Potty Humor

Now...

I'm a human...

I'm prone to weaknesses.

And one of those weaknesses is that I can occasionally smirk at potty humor or some other type of a low brow joke. However, I wouldn't call this type of humor the peak of all comedy or particularly intelligent. And that's where another aspect the weaknesses lies in.

But Kristian, it's a kids movie and kids love their potty humor, you might say. Even though that probably is true (I'm not a parent nor an educator, so I can't vouch for anything), I still feel like a comedy aimed at children can do perfectly fine without restorting to potty humor, especially one as smartly written as this movie. Case in point, the entirety of Gravity Falls, whilst also being a comedic animated project aimed at children never fell to the low of featuring a fart joke, relying instead on smart writing and great comedic timing in order to provide it's jokes.

However, I believe the main reason behind this wrecking mistake can be easily pinpointed to one of the film's writers: Etan Cohen (whose name sounds incredibly similar to Ethan Cohen, so much so that it literally hurts). Now, our boy Etan has previously worked on some relatively well made properties such as Men in Black 3 (my second favorite entry into that franchise) and the second Puss in Boots flick, however, when it comes to those projects he atleast shared writing credit with other screenwriters, which is also the case here, and one can clearly tell from the varying degrees of quality when it comes to jokes in any of the films he's worked on, as to which joke was written by Cohen and which by someone more talented. My personal hatred of him comes from the fact that he both wrote and directed Holmes and Watson (2018), which is, without exaggeration, not only the worst comedy (althought calling it that is an insult to that genre as a whole) I've ever witnessed, but also the worst film I've ever seen in any genre. Why do I feel this way?

Well, for a very simple reason. That being the fact that Holmes and Watson was LITTERED with jokes which are on the exact same level as Mr. Piranha's farts or Mr. Shark pretending to wet himself. And, in both cases, they aren't funny, they're just incredibly annoying, a tad bit disgusting, tiresome and groan enducing.

So, at the end of the day do I reccomend this one?

As a matter of fact I do. For all it's faults, it's competently written (for the most part), has consistently great animation, a brisk pace and a great soundtrack. Sure, some elements of it were either cringe enducing or just plain annoying and I struggle to call it an excelent film, but, for what it's worth, it's not nearly as bad as it could have been and I do reccomend giving it a watch if you're a fan of animated flicks, heist movies (especially Ocean's Eleven) and/or comedies. Not my usual cup of tea, but, most people will probably have a really good time with it.

Trailers: