![\"what-happens-in-vegas_l\"](\"http:\/\/regrettablesincerity.com\/test2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/01\/what-happens-in-vegas_l-225x300.jpg\" "\\"what-happens-in-vegas_l\\"")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Roger Ebert, writing about Dice Rules<\/em>, an Andrew \u201cDice\u201d Clay concert film said that \u201cit could not be more damaging to the career of Andrew “Dice” Clay if it had been made as a documentary by someone who hated him.\u201d Well What Happens In Vegas<\/em> is the equivalent, except this time the target is Cameron Diaz.<\/p>\n \n Harshly lit, splotchy faced, overtanned, and frighteningly skinny, the fact that she\u2019s supposed to appear sexy is either some kind of joke on her \u2014 by the director, director of photography, and makeup people \u2014 or everyone was going through the motions so much during the making of this film that they forgot the most important thing about forgettable star vehicles, which is to make the stars appealing and attractive.<\/p>\n Granted, this is the new custom for middling studio comedies in this decade. They are using a particular kind of film stock that makes black colors blacker (thereby reducing compression issues for DVD) but makes skintones look pasty and unattractive. This is a deeply cynical move \u2014 they expect the audience who pays for this in a theater to be too stupid or indifferent to care (recent, prominent examples include Renee Zellweger in Leatherheads<\/em><\/span><\/a> and Uma Thurman in My Super Ex-Girlfriend<\/em>). They expect the real money will be on DVD, where it will look much better, anyway. So why not just release direct to DVD instead of shooting it on video in the first place? It would save them a hell of a lot of money.<\/p>\n \n As a result of this, the movie itself is a complete afterthought, What Happens in Vegas\u2026<\/em>, is completely slapped together, with a plot stolen from a very bad Larry David film called Sour Grapes<\/em> (in that film, cousins argue over who gets to keep a slot machine jackpot, this is the same, only Diaz and Ashton Kutcher had a quickie drunken wedding the night before). The jokes are telegraphed five minutes in advance, the slapstick is so contrived as to be distracting (there\u2019s a scene where Diaz throws oranges at Kutcher, while he\u2019s on a skateboard, in the middle of NYC traffic), and the plot forgets what its own rules are at several different points (a judge forces the couple to stay together for six months to prove they are really trying, and then when they get the money, he doesn\u2019t say anything about one side keeping the whole thing if the other side doesn\u2019t cooperate, and yet Kutcher and Diaz are immediately scheming to foil each other). The only saving graces, apart from its comedically overextended \u201cromantic ending,\u201d are Rob Corddry and Zach Galifianakis as Kutcher\u2019s friends. A better way to handle the movie would be to let these two scene stealing forces star in their own movie, as no one would care how bad their skin looked.<\/p>\n Speaking of bad skin, Tim Allen\u2019s haggard and bloat set the stage for David Mamet\u2019s superb Redbelt<\/em>.<\/p>\n The film is another one of Mamet\u2019s twisty mindfuck con games that answers the burning question, would it ever be possible for Jean-Claude Van Damme to star in a legitimate film?\u00a0 The answer would be, \u201cYes, as long as Van Damme wasn\u2019t actually in it.\u201d<\/p>\n![\"redbelt\"](\"http:\/\/www.regrettablesincerity.com\/test2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/01\/redbelt-300x225.jpg\" "\\"redbelt\\"")
<\/p>\nRedbelt<\/strong><\/h1>\n