Project 52: 'Project X'
Posted Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 5:19 PM Central
Last updated Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 5:19 PM Central
by John Couture
This is how committed I am to this project. I was cruising through HBO on Demand last weekend and this was pretty much the only film on there that qualified for Project 52.
Now, being a man and all, I'm not going to try and lie and say that it was incredibly painful to sit through 90 minutes of gratuitous partying and nudity, but let's face it, this movie isn't going to stand the test of time. In fact, my wife hadn't even heard of it when I fired it up.
But then again, she's not the target demographic, now is she?
It's an interesting social experiment though comparing this exploitation film with the upcoming theatrical release Spring Breakers. Despite both films using debauchery and nudity as their launching pads, it seems that the latter film is being called a modern art piece, while Project X is simply trash.
Perhaps, if I get the chance to screen Spring Breakers before Project 52 is completed, I can compare and contrast the two films. For now though, I will give you my raw, unabashed review of Project X.
Project X
With last month's news that Girls Gone Wild had filed for bankruptcy in light of massive legal awards against the company, men of a certain persuasion everywhere were left wondering where they would get their fix of teen nudity (besides of course, the Internet). Well, all they have to do is buy Project X and they will be set for at least a day or so.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not even close to being a prude, but the amount of gratuitous nudity in this film was borderline criminal in my opinion. Much like it's voyeuristic cousin Girls Gone Wild, Project X has nudity for the sake of having it and it's really more sad than the least bit titillating.
I decided to get that out of the way first since I'm sure that some people probably found this article thanks to Google and the wonderful search terms contained in the previous two paragraphs. Let's get to the review of the actual movie, shall we?
I'll be honest, there really wasn't much here to review. Right off the bat, the film soured me with the two disclaimers that popped up before the action got started. The first one was your standard legal disclaimer that the film is fiction and that all of the stunts were performed by professionals and not to try it at home.
On its own, I have no problem with that disclaimer. I mean the studio is covering its butt and with this movie, it probably needed to state that up front. What I didn't like was the next blurb that popped up that tried to purport that the events in the film were real and taken from footage that party attendees had sent to the film makers.
Look, that's one of my core arguments against "found-footage" films, you can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't claim that the film is real and then announce that you're casting the star in your next big film. It just doesn't work that way.
Warner Bros. could have salvaged the entire situation had they simply played along with the film. They could have claimed that the film was a recreation of true events. You know, basically what they did for every episode of Unsolved Mysteries. Man, I miss that series, now there was some "must-see" TV. But I digress.
While I'm not a huge fan of the genre, at least I can respect the granddaddy of them all The Blair Witch Project. They used truly unknown actors and they completely sold the story at the time by not allowing the stars to do press for the film. Of course, this was a simpler time when the Internet was still getting its feet wet, so we were more easily led astray than we are now.
It doesn't take anymore time than it takes to rattle off a Google search to learn just how fake Project X (or any "found-footage" film for that matter) is. And yet, studios continue to champion this doomed genre. I guess they'll never learn.
Even if you dismiss the whole idea of the film and take it for what it really is, a high school party film, it doesn't even come close to measuring up to the classics. Can you imagine saying Project X in the same breath as Dazed and Confused, The Stoned Age, Superbad or House Party?
Heck, I'm not even comfortable saying it in the same sentence as House Party 4.
And speaking of Superbad, could you honestly have been any more of a blatant ripoff Project X? Three friends, one of them on the heavy side, all trying to get laid and party all night. Yep that pretty much describes both films to a "T." However Superbad is a film and is actually funny at times. Project X reminded me of the Jackass chicanery in which they all try and outdo each other with something bigger and dumber.
Well, guess what Project X, you win in the schlock department, but if you're trying to shock me, I was too busy yawning from boredom to notice. The only semblance of a plot revolves around a deranged lunatic who has a most unhealthy obsession with his garden gnome that is never explained and the tired romantic story of best friends who turn into lovers.
The plot is only there for convenience sake. It provides a starting and ending point between which the director convinces young women to take their tops off and go swimming, dance provocatively or jump up and down on a kids bounce house.
I haven't even mentioned the biggest degradation of all which involves party goers stuffing little person Martin Klebba in an oven and holding him hostage in there. Upon finally gaining his freedom, Klebba decides to enact his revenge by punching every guy he can find in the groin.
Really? Do we have to debase ourselves to that extent simply to procure a laugh? Maybe I'm just getting old, because I didn't find many laughs in the film at all.
No, instead what I found was the empty reservoir of taste that Hollywood as become. It's films like this one that make Hollywood such an easy butt of so many jokes. They should be ashamed of themselves, but they won't. No, they'll simply green light the next incarnation and call it a day.
Thankfully though, we have a choice and we can choose to avoid it when the time comes. I think you can tell from the tone of the article that the film didn't score highly, it didn't.
I give it the lowest rating allowed, high card.
