free counter with statistics Fool's Gold | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

matty3sm.jpg

Prolongs Active McConaughey.

Fool’s Gold / Agent Bedhead

Film Reviews | February 6, 2008 | Comments (40)


Sometimes, it’s actually beneficial to judge a film by its cover title, and audiences should be cautioned not to expect riches from Fool’s Gold. In fact, if you expect more than the evenly-tanned, glorious bodies of Matthew McConaughey and Kate Hudson, you’ll likely be very disappointed. Fool’s Gold sees the leads from How to Lose a Guy in Ten Days reunited for more begrudging romance in the form of an action-adventure caper. Unfortunately, director Andy Tennant (Sweet Home Alabama, Fools Rush In), along with fellow screenwriters John Claflin and Daniel Zelman, weaves a convoluted tale that is far too overwrought and plot-heavy for the film’s lighthearted mood. The result is mixed, but it will find its salvation with those who acknowledge that between love and shirtlessness lies Matthew McConaughey.

Fool’s Gold is not (and let’s be honest, it was never intended to be) a good film, but it is filled with low-cal, nonfat, frothy goodness for the target audience — straight women and gay men who want to gawk at a shirtless McConaughey. The actor flings himself enthusiastically into his role, but then again, he’s basically playing either his true self or, at a minimum, the McConaughey persona that he presents while jogging or assuming yoga poses in public. His character, Ben “Finn” Finnegan, is an impish treasure hunter who, naturally, is quite fond of strutting around shirtless (that is, without a shirt). In fact, it’s nearly impossible to accurately report how many times McConaughey removes his shirt (I kept losing track, what with the shirtless man on the screen). He seems to take more shirts off than he puts on, somehow, all the while, flexing, preening, and glistening. For the men who get dragged to this film by their girlfriends, Kate Hudson isn’t exactly offensive viewing material either. In fact, despite her limited acting range and lack of visible promise since Almost Famous, she’s the perfect choice for this film, even if her character is poorly drawn and lacks illustrations (and doesn’t remove her top).

Fool’s Gold opens with two dimwitted dudes, Finn and his buddy Alfonz (Ewen Bremner), who are combing the ocean floor. While they are preoccupied with their metal detectors, Finn’s salvage boat (the classily named “Booty Call”) springs a gas leak and explodes. When Finn makes one dive into the sunken boat to snatch some gear, he bypasses all his maps and belongings and returns with only one item — a picture of his estranged wife, Tess (Kate Hudson). Awwwwww. Finn is obviously very much in love with Tess, who is presently divorcing his slacker ass. As Tess finalizes things, her attorney says, “You married a man for sex, and now you expected him to be smart.”

Oh, but the sex was great, you see.

The second act involves a lot of exposition involving sunken Spanish treasure, which weighs the entire film down like a shirt on McConaughey’s back. Tess takes a job as steward aboard the yacht of the wealthy and very English Nigel Honeycutt (Donald Sutherland). Through one of many sets of fucked up circumstances, Finn ends up aboard Nigel’s yacht when his daughter, Gemma (Alexis Dziena), becomes smitten with the rogue scoundrel. Then, McConaughey smooth talks the millionaire into funding an expedition for the legendary Queen’s Dowry. At that point, the film descends into a series of needless subplots and introduces several minor characters that fade into one another without consequence.

This film isn’t something that will appeal to anyone looking for a coherent story. It is, however, passable entertainment for adults — as it includes brief nudity and constant sexual innuendo. This certainly isn’t a ride for everyone, and you probably won’t give it a second thought when you wake up the next morning. But if you like casual romps without consequence, this is the safest experience you’ll find these days. Many will be pleasantly surprised by how little of the film actually centers upon the chemistry between McConaughey and Hudson. This is a good thing, because as separate entities, these two actors are quite appealing; in their scenes together, they’re about as sexy as an emergency shower in a chemistry lab.

Fortunately, Fool’s Gold includes two supporting actors who manage to salvage the wreckage wrought by our decadent main players. Donald Sutherland easily slides into the role of wealthy Englishman who, while distinguished, enjoys an occasional adventure. The elder Sutherland is so understatedly seductive that you almost hope that Tess will run away with him instead of continuing to love her ex-husband. Then, in a clearly won demonstration of how to steal the film from a leading lady, Alexis Dziena performs an almost brilliant parody of the celebutante culture, impressing as a bouncier, far less gloomy version of Fairuza Balk.

Fool’s Gold manages to charm in many ways, but it entirely fails when it comes to important things like, say, coherence of plot and character development. Tennant shows his inexperience in directing action and adventure by stuffing the last twenty minutes of the film with the bulk of the action. Compared to the meandering slapstick humor of the first 90 minutes, the final act is unsettling in its sheer amount of violent bloodshed. Also troubling is the film’s stereotypical treatment of race. Representing Jamaica, mon, is a very inflated and dreadlocked Malcolm-Jamal Warner. To add even more splendid ignorance to the filmmakers’ repertoire, every African-American character is either a gangster, rapper, henchman, or some combination thereof. The Scottish Ewen Brenman is entirely unintelligible here, which I guess is the filmmakers’ cutesy way of depicting his ethnicity; in fact, his character is generally referred to not as Alfonz but as “the Ukranian sidekick.” Personally, I preferred Bremner when he was shitting himself in bed as Spud in Trainspotting, if that tells you anything at all about how I roll.

If this film manages to produce any lingering philosophical questions at all, one can only wonder why McConaughey has pretty much abandoned substantive roles in films that have earned critical acclaim (e.g., A Time to Kill, Contact, Amistad) to step into piles of cinematic crap like The Wedding Planner and Failure to Launch. To some degree though, you gotta respect the guy for embracing a caricature of himself and not endlessly complaining to journalists about how he wants to prove himself, not as a sex symbol, but as a real actor. After all, things could have turned out much worse for Fool’s Gold, say, if McConaughey had kept his shirt on.

Agent Bedhead (a.k.a. “Kimberly”) lives in Tulsa, Oklahoma. She and her little black heart can be found at agentbedhead.com.


Pajiba Love 02/06/08 | Vince Vaughn's Wild West Comedy Show



Comments

When I first saw the trailer, I thought it looked like a revamped Romancing the Stone. And it's obvious that with McShritless that you'll get your money's worth.
Agent, did the audience gawk and giggle when he did take off his shirt, or were they just hiding it on the inside?

I did hear a few cheers at the beginning of the film, but those people must have passed out in fairly short order. - AB

Posted by: Kamakaze Feminist at February 9, 2008 9:44 AM

Sounds about like what I expected. This one's for watching on basic cable when there's nothing else on.

Posted by: rlr260 at February 9, 2008 9:51 AM

Matthew McConaughey is gross. Kate Hudson is the least interesting actress working today. This movie looks like the screenwriters from Sahara *Clive Cussler gags* and Into the Blue got drunk, had mad monkey sex, and an unexpected and unwanted pregnancy was the result. Too bad they decided to keep the baby.

Posted by: Kitty X at February 9, 2008 9:57 AM

Looking forward to seeing this on TBS.

Posted by: Kolby at February 9, 2008 10:22 AM

AB, your title made me laugh out loud and choke on my bitey bitey cranberry juice.
It was still awesome, I say that through the pain.

Posted by: Loob at February 9, 2008 11:22 AM

Now I gotta go find Matt Damon's impersonation of McConaughey on Youtube.

"I think this'd be a good scene for me to take my shirt off, Mr. Soderbergh."

Posted by: BFFredo at February 9, 2008 11:24 AM

I don't know why anyone would pay $10 to see a shirtless McConaughey.

Isn't that what the Internet is for?

Posted by: Wednesday at February 9, 2008 11:39 AM

Kolby, you just stole the words right out of my keyboard.

Posted by: Armando at February 9, 2008 11:49 AM

If Hollywood thinks I'm gonna lay down my hard earned coin to watch Yoko Hudson, aka "titless wonder" aka "almost a doode" aka "my mommy's connections got me to where I am" theeeeey've got another thing comin.'

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at February 9, 2008 12:02 PM

I wouldn't have seen this movie anyway because dear LORD it looks retarded, but I can't get behind McConaughey at all anymore now that I know he smells like pits.

Posted by: Mella at February 9, 2008 12:43 PM

I never found Mcshirtless (is that what we're calling him now?!) appealing. He was passable in Lone Star and a lil loin quivering (to borrow a phrase from my fave celeb blogger Lainey) in A Time to Kill; He sorta looks redundant now. A texan home boy with buckets of charm who brings home a new girl every night after shots and shots of whisky and Bud beer. It's a cliche.

As for the movie, I'll wait till basic cable shows it on saturday a night.

Posted by: carrie at February 9, 2008 1:03 PM

I'll admit I love the Wedding Planner while fully acknowledging its awfulness. For some reason I really like Jennifer Lopez as an actress, and the glasses McConaughey wears is enough of a disguise to think he might be smart. And who doesn't like fake Italian accents?

Posted by: kelsy at February 9, 2008 1:18 PM

Maybe to make up for its less redeeming qualities I'll just watch it with the sound off.

Posted by: Janette at February 9, 2008 1:57 PM

I hate, hate,hate McConodouche, but holy christ, his body is fucking rockin! I'd soooo do him if I happened to be gay and he happened to be interested... However, I'm not, and I think he sucks ass.... As Will Smith will forever be associated with "Aww Hell No" will McConodouche be linked with "mmaAllright".

By the way, I can do a perfect McConodouche for anyone interested... Answering machine, sound-clip wedding invites, last will & testament, etc.... Let me know.

Posted by: Skittimus Maximus at February 9, 2008 2:19 PM

The idiocy of the people who made this clunker is off-the-charts. They're banking it solely on the malodorous shoulders of the shirtless Mac' who can't open a movie to save his life. Seriously the man is *this* close to being the white Wesley Snipes and moving to Romania to start putting out straight to DVD/Internet "features." On the other side, you've got the adulterous, fornicating, "flower child" of a bimbo. A cunt, who has ZERO goodwill with the public after fucking that suicidal Wilson douchebag behind her husband's back.

One of the pre-requisites for a successful rom-com is that the leads be accepted and liked by the public, assclowns.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at February 9, 2008 2:26 PM

"in their scenes together, they're about as sexy as an emergency shower in a chemistry lab."

Classic Bedhead. I am a straight, single dude so there is no way I will be seeing this movie, but I still loved this review.

Posted by: the_Wakeful at February 9, 2008 3:11 PM

My most favorite moment of McConaughey movie career was when he got pissed on by that mobster guy in Two for the Money. I'm surprised to see Malcolm-Jamal Warner in this shitfest. I thought he would have saved his Cosby money.

Posted by: Pookie at February 9, 2008 3:14 PM

Didn't they already do this movie and it bombed?

Now I gotta dig up the 'Lose a guy...' review and see if anyone said 'the movie sucked but the stars had such chemestry together...' or some nonsence that would explain why you put two leads from a failed movie BACK as the two leads in another failure of a movie.

Posted by: Spike at February 9, 2008 3:15 PM

Some people say Mac's best moment was as that guy in Dazed and Confused but real geeks KNOW it was when he jumps thru the air, battle ax in hand, bearded and reeking of B.O. to lay the smackdown on some dragon ass.

Of course, he was snacked-on, but still...

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at February 9, 2008 3:22 PM

You lost me at "and doesn't remove her top". What a shame.

Posted by: jvon at February 9, 2008 3:46 PM

yes, he's always shirtless but his chest is so shiny and hairfree. I'm just saying: is McC constantly waxing or just a mutant?

Posted by: gunter at February 9, 2008 4:07 PM

I sense this would be a good girl night movie rental with a drinking game revolving around shirtless Mc. Oh hell, in the theater even.

Posted by: frogirl1978 at February 9, 2008 6:31 PM

"he's basically playing either him true self or..."

First paragraph. Just thought you might want to know.

Posted by: Lyra at February 9, 2008 7:39 PM

Ladies and Gentleman, Mr February Cinema himself: Matthew McConaghey!

Posted by: TajMc at February 9, 2008 7:51 PM

Pass. Even attached to a glistening, hairless, tanned, and rippling chest McConaghey's stumpy t-rex arms are a deal breaker. That and the grease monkey aspect.

Posted by: yogh at February 9, 2008 8:07 PM

...Mac's best moment...was when he jumps thru the air, battle ax in hand, bearded and reeking of B.O. to lay the smackdown on some dragon ass.

Soooo true...I think I'm gonna have to re-rent that cinematic semi-precious gem.

Ladies and Gentleman, Mr February Cinema himself: Matthew McConaghey!

Heeee. I'm going to go around calling him that from now on.

Posted by: Jerce at February 9, 2008 11:14 PM

So he's shirtless you say? But does the McConaghshlong make an appearance?

Say what you will about the guy, but I'd totally go to one of his barbecues.

Posted by: katy at February 9, 2008 11:41 PM

Plot-heavy? What plot? Andy Tennant oiled up Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey, then sent them on a scavenger hunt. BTW, McGreasy was shirtless for most of the movie but was bottomless for only a millisecond. Fair? I think not.

Posted by: Kris at February 10, 2008 12:15 AM

When I first saw the previews for this, I was convinced it was a sequel to How to Lose a Guy. While I will admit my love for Wedding Planner (I have no idea why, he just seems so damn charming), I cannot bring myself to even want to catch this one on television.

Posted by: artificialsweet at February 10, 2008 11:51 PM

To some degree though, you gotta respect the guy for embracing a caricature of himself and not endlessly complaining to journalists about how he wants to prove himself, not as a sex symbol, but as a real actor.

Plenty of actors and actresses have had to prove they could really act, but what male actor has ever had to prove he wasn't just a sex symbol? And if there is someone like that, did he complain about it?

Posted by: Todd at February 11, 2008 8:32 AM

I just finished a PS3 game called Uncharted: Drake's Fortune. It's about an adventurer and his sidekick, and a girl he constantly bickers with, as they search for treasure.

I'm pretty sure it was probably far superior to this mess. Especially since I don't find Kate Hudson even remotely attractive, and shirtless sweaty guys aren't really my thing.

Posted by: TK at February 11, 2008 9:59 AM

TK - go on, embrace your geekdom. I actually think Kate Hudson is adorable, especially her cute little nose.

Posted by: Kolby at February 11, 2008 12:07 PM

Kate Hudson is hotter when she's not trying to be hot. When she's just cute and girl-next-door...then I find her irresistable (200 Cigarettes, anyone?). I think in recent movies, though, she's become convinced she's the romcom sex symbol her mom was, and it affects her casting choices. I mean, I'd still do her, but I wouldn't call the next morning.

Posted by: Shadows of Dakaron at February 11, 2008 12:39 PM

I can't wait until I'm home sick with the inevitable spring flu. I will be On-Demanding this one. Fleece socks, hot tea and glistening McConaughflesh. Perfect.

Posted by: go big red at February 11, 2008 1:11 PM

I mean, it's no Overboard, but it will do.

Posted by: go big red at February 11, 2008 1:11 PM

Like artificalsweet, I thought this was a sequel to How to Lose a Guy, and was properly revolted. To my recollection, the last sequel to a romcom was The Jewel of the Nile, which was terrible. After reading the review, I don't know if I should be relieved or even more horrified. I mean, thank goodness it's not a romcom sequel, but on the other hand, it sounds as if Fool's Gold is to the Indiana Jones series as Catherine Coulter is to Tom Clancy.

[shudder]

Posted by: Minty at February 11, 2008 4:52 PM

"..but what male actor has ever had to prove he wasn't just a sex symbol? And if there is someone like that, did he complain about it?
Posted by: Todd at February 11, 2008 8:32 AM"

Elvis Presley wanted to be taken seriously as an actor. Of course for that whole notion to work, you have to first try to allow that he was *acting* at any point, in any film. Ever.

Posted by: Loob at February 11, 2008 5:27 PM

Wow, guys .. lighten up. It's JUST a lighthearted, cute movie (for the most part .. except, of course the bloody part near the end). Matthew doesn't take himself seriously, and I doubt he expects you to, either. My teenage daughter & I saw this a couple of nights ago, and had a few good giggles. If you don't go into it expecting some award-winning flick I think you might just enjoy yourself for an hour and a half! And really, girls ... he's not too hard to look at without a shirt for half the movie! ;-)

Posted by: Whammy at February 11, 2008 6:45 PM

Overboard is an underrated CLASSIC!!!

Posted by: Plobes at February 12, 2008 4:07 PM

""..but what male actor has ever had to prove he wasn't just a sex symbol?"

Brad Pitt. George Clooney. Plus others who tried and didn't succeed.

Posted by: flickfan at February 14, 2008 12:10 PM