Why the hell did Netflix green light a zombie-light prequel to Army Of The Dead?
Army Of Thieves gives an annoying supporting character from Zack Snyder’s movie a forgettable spinoff
Film Reviews Army of the Dead
There are certain films whose reasons for existing are a complete mystery, usually phrased in that eternal question, “How did this get made?” Take, for example, Army Of Thieves, a spinoff of Zack Snyder’s Army Of The Dead (in which a team of badasses broke into a casino vault in zombie-infested Las Vegas) that focuses on a mildly annoying supporting character and is set in Europe a few years before the events of the original. It is, in other words, a zombie-movie prequel without the zombie stuff.
Even as a purely commercial venture, representative of the barrel-scraping of our age of streamable franchise content, Army Of Thieves is perplexing. Are there people out there who were clamoring to learn the origin story of Matthias Schweighöfer’s safecracking German nerdlinger? Or for more of his squirmy antics, minus the distraction of charismatic stars or horror elements and perhaps in a more generic heist-movie setting? (Furthermore, the title is a misnomer: There are, at best, five thieves here.)
Given that Army Of Thieves was filmed well before the release of Army Of The Dead, there are two potential explanations: Either Netflix is testing to see how many people will watch something just because it’s new and there, or the producers expected the character of Ludwig Dieter to become some kind of breakout. Another possibility is that Schweighöfer, who also directed the film, has serious dirt on some figures of shadowy influence.
To be fair, the opening stretch of Army Of Thieves is actually sort of fun. There’s a backstory involving four elaborate safes inspired by Wagner’s Ring Cycle, built by a master locksmith who subsequently died by intentionally locking himself in an impenetrable vault of his own design. Ludwig Dieter, as we learn, is no career criminal: He’s a dorky safecracking hobbyist from Potsdam, real name Sebastian Schlencht-Wöhnert. After being mysteriously invited to an underground safecracking competition with a distinct 2000s-vampire-nightclub vibe, he gets recruited by internationally wanted thief Gwendoline (Nathalie Emmanuel) for her team.
Cue introductions of the rest of the low-rent crew, with the requisite freeze-frames, flashbacks, and on-screen text. One is a hacker who’s famous for putting a Pirates Of The Caribbean movie online; another, an action-star wannabe who’s changed his name to “Brad Cage.” The plan is to rob the first three Wagner safes, which are currently scattered in different cities, but are all due to be moved to parts unknown in a matter of days. (The fourth, called Götterdämmerung, is the Vegas vault in Army Of The Dead.)
The idea of a group of decidedly minor-league cons trying to make it into the major leagues, maybe with a Now You See Me standard of realism, is not unappealing. But the promise of a brainless good time proves false once the actual thieving begins. Under Schweighöfer’s anonymously slick and rhythmless direction, the heists turn into anticlimactic jumbles of uninspired fights and chases, intercut with numerous CGI close-ups of tumblers, pins, gears, and wheels at work. (If nothing else, the last will please diehard fans of the old Lionsgate logo.) The beginning of a zombie outbreak in the United States is playing out on the news, which occasionally gives Ludwig/Sebastian undead-inspired nightmares. But it mostly just feels like a way to insert some random zombie footage into a non-zombie film.
The pleasure of caper movies lies partly in the suspense of watching the puzzle pieces of a convoluted plan fall into place and partly in the group chemistry. Army Of Thieves has neither. The pace becomes interminable; stakes are nowhere to be found, despite the presence of a time limit (which never feels pressing) and a ridiculous Interpol antagonist (who is pursuing the crew because they once shot him in the ass). And then there’s the problem of the protagonist. Consistently unfunny and periodically grating, Schweighöfer’s wide-eyed Sebastian/Ludwig manages to scrape maybe one decent laugh out of the film’s two-hour-plus running time. Considering that anyone who sticks with Army Of Thieves long enough to finish the intro will count as a viewer in Netflix’s metrics, it’s entirely possible the real joke is on us.
171 Comments
“You know how no one ever likes the part of a zombie movie before the zombies show up? Well, hear me out…”
“We’re going to make a zombie movie…but the twist is, it takes place before the zombies happen!”
Get this: they’re just in your head. In your hea-a-ad.
Idea. A version of Dawn of the Dead (the real Romero version) where the zombies never turn up. Instead, it is about a TV reporter in 1970s Pittsburgh who is having an affair with the station’s helicopter pilot. Meanwhile, two SWAT officers, one Black and one white, form a friendship despite the tense race relations of the time.
You left out blatant messaging of “CAPITALISM BAD”
Wasn’t that FEAR THE WALKING DEAD?
Making a zombie movie without zombies is tight. It gonna be supereasy, barely an inconvenience to make money from it.
unrelated but did i miss the eternals review of this site ?
I don’t think the Eternals are doing reviews, and if they are, they’re definitely not doing them on fading pop culture websites.
Hey, who are you calling ‘fading’?*glances to the right to see article about guy who eats a lot at six flags.Oh right, fading…
*glances to the right to see article about guy who eats a lot at six flags.
-The AV Club
I’m the guy who eats a lot at Six Flags. And so is my wife.
A lot of us are over on Nathan Rabin’s Happy Place (https://www.nathanrabin.com/ ) which, if you can get past every third article being about his crippling depression, has a lot of what we used to love about the AV Club!
They are, but not here. It’s gotten a 72% on rotten tomatoes. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/eternals
there’s literally a review on polygon today.
I think you missed the joke he was making.
I don’t think Polygon is a “fading pop culture site”, given they’re not being slowly destroyed by Kinja….
Polygon’s visitor numbers seem dire, though. Most articles are a dead town. At least here we have people shouting at/over each other on every little thing.
Polygon just put one up. They thought it sucked, might even be Marvel’s first big bomb.
It’s right there in a big splash image at the front page. Dowd gave it a worse score than he gave Army of the Dead. Discuss!
I really liked the character, but never in a million years did I think, if anyone was going to get a prequel film, that it would be him.
It’d be more interesting to do a sci-fi film that reveals itself as a prequel at the end by explaining the area 51 thing (and maybe also those stupid robots).
I couldn’t even finish Army of Dead – soulless crap, IMO (sorry if someone really liked it, it probably isn’t bad but I wasn’t in the mood for “just fine” at that time).
A strange spinoff indeed, which makes no commercial sense – unless some relevant information is being withheld from us all-knowing internet commentators. Crime/heist movies are universally popular, so maybe Army of Dead was a big hit, then… still, hard to believe.
it was such a shit movie. tiny bit of hope with campy military monster intro and then poof, it’s shit.
Yuuuup. I wasn’t a huge fan of the beginning but it had style and action, and the movie just fucking stops for a bunch of mopey crap, I fell asleep 10 minutes later.
Exactly, the beginning had me intrigued but after the titles… the characters, the plot… so fucking “meh” it became irritating.
All the good stuff in Army was in the first ten minutes. If they’d made that movie it would have been worth watching.
That movie was so overated. I also quit about 3/4s in. And i usually like Snyder.
Based on what it said about this movie being made before Army of the Dead was released, I’m imagining it went something like:Goofy guy: I just starred in this sure-to-be-your-biggest-hit Zack Snyder/Bautista zombie/heist movie. My next movie will be an even bigger hit!!Netflix: Makes sense. Same bank account number as last time?
Oh now, it was absolute shit that most people turned off before the 15 minute mark. The zombies are so fast and powerful they can easily overrun the military, but somehow they stood still while someone built a wall of boxcars around then. Annnnnnnd I’m OUT
to top it off, the safe cracking scene from the movie was specifically bland–like he literally just listens and turns for a few minutes. amazing a spin off was created from arguably the least interesting scene in the movie.
I would say the safe cracker was the stand out character, but only because all the other characters were personality-less husks of characters with absolutely no real connection to the team or the story. Bad movie with some admittedly great visuals and a couple cool ideas here and there
my criticism isn’t so much of the character itself, but of the fact that they made a spin off from a character whose primary contribution should have been something interesting but was incredibly straightforward
I’d go with Lilly the badass coyote. She was really the only character I liked.
but but it’s ZACK SNYDER!!! THE GREATEST MOVIE MAKER OF ALL TIME!!!
You just don’t get his vision for it.- toxic Snyder cult member.
Why did I hear that in Rich Evans’s voice, Sassy After Death…?
Would you believe he’s Big in Germany? According to The Bouffant of all Knowledge Wikipedia, Matthias Schweighöfer is an award-winning actor and director over there:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthias_Schweigh%C3%B6fer#Awards
Given Netflix has a global audience, it’s likely they want to build a relationship with him to improve their reach to Germanic European audiences.
Just because Americans find him annoying doesn’t mean Germany, and possibly Scandinavia and The Netherlands, do. In fact, it looks like he’s a popular comedy as well as dramatic actor over there — after all, one country’s genius is another’s Jerry Lewis.
I was in fact thinking about that old German tax loophole (?) that gave us those great Uwe Boll -art films a few years ago… I guess that way of financing films isn’t possible anymore, Netflix cannot be using that trick, no?But there is probably some EU pressure on Netflix to use stars/production companies from local markets… Matthias might be their man in Germany, yep.
Yeah, that dried up about a decade or more ago — that’s why Dr. Uwe Boll (seriously) became a restauranteur….Though apparently, he’s back to making movies?
Huh — this is interesting: In 2018 Germany expanded its tax rebate system for VFX houses to get between 25%-45% rebate for movies partially shot and VFX work done in Germany, while in the U.S. IRS Revenue Code Section 181 was reinstated for another five years for movies that are 75% shot in the U.S. to expense out their digital media completely (thus making any movie with a budget of between $15M – $20M a complete tax writeoff).https://variety.com/2018/film/news/germany-rebates-expanded-vfx-1202982921/https://fromtheheartproductions.com/section-181-reinstated/
It was ok, but it was practically a remake of Peninsula, the sequel to Train to Busan. Almost exactly the same plot, that movie was better, not anywhere near the modern classic Train was, but a solid zombie flick.
No, don’t apologize. It’s definitely very, very bad. Army of the Dead was that movie that finally convinced me that Zack Snyder is a terrible storyteller.
Before the movie, I thought that “maybe” he needed the right movie for his particular set of directing skills. I know that he’s very good at painting a good scene, but that garbage movie was 100% his fault.
After I saw Henry Cavill be completely charming in The Man From U.N.C.L.E, I knew that the uninspiring portrayal of Superman was Snyder’s fault.
Don’t be sorry. The only people who should feel bad are the people who made it.
First 15 minutes of Army of the Dead are better than Zack Snyder’s last two movies. It basically coasted on that for the rest of the time. But they did promise like a time loop zombie heist movie at some point so I’m sticking with the series for that.
Youre correct. I couldnt finish it either. Just utter garbage.
It was such a “nothing” movie that I consider it to be Snyders worst (I have seen that Owl film and wont). I mean technically Sucker Punch is the worst but at least it is something, same with BvsS, you can have interesting discussions about both but Army of the Dead isn’t worth anything.
It was a friggin’ crime for a movie that violent to be that boring.AoT is also boring, so don’t waste your time.
Thanks for the heads up, I won’t. Yeah, violence in itself can be entertaining but it still has to be justified.
I don’t understand why a society that is making such leaps and bounds in terms of tolerance still engages in something so petty as judging a person’s mannerisms. Like it seems more people hate James Corden or Justin Bieber because of mannerisms rather than the fact that they are assholes. And now this guy who has apparently done nothing wrong than…not being charismatic? Like most people? Shouldn’t we strive for a world where we don’t “like” someone more than others? Or is that a bridge too far for mankind?
He’s an actor playing a role, and presumably criticisms of his mannerisms and lack of charisma are directed at the character. Seems fair game to me, since all those should have been deliberate choices for the character and not just Schweighöfer being himself.
“not being charismatic?”Crazy what people want in a movie’s lead actor.
“And now this guy who has apparently done nothing wrong than…not being charismatic? Like most people?”
Most people don’t get to write and star in their own movies.
Also, who the FUCK wants to watch a movie without charismatic actors in it? I mean, what are actors known for if not their charisma. THAT’S WHAT MAKE ACTORS WATCHABLE.
Well a bunch of points in response:1) There’s a reverse Halo effect. If someone is deemed to be an asshole, the idea then spreads out to their other qualities and people deem it fair to note their deficiencies that they wouldn’t otherwise necessarily be judged for. Is this fair or moral? I don’t know.2) It seems disingenuous at best to pretend there aren’t mannerisms and physical ticks that are annoying or even problematic. I have a friend who constantly touches people’s legs. It’s annoying, make some people uncomfortable and we make fun of him for it, but it is just what he’s used to and he means nothing by it. Being tolerant doesn’t mean never noting the existence of a flaw. Ideally, I would think tolerance means a greater understanding and generosity as to why flaws exist and why we tolerate them (note: we need not celebrate them)3) When you talk about being charismatic, you have to also note we’re talkign about public figures whose job it is to be charismatic. I wouldn’t want an actor to star in the movie I pay for whom I actively can’t stand in the same way I wouldn’t want a surgeon with a hand tremor or translator with a bad lisp. It’s their job to be likeable or at least compelling, if they’re failing at that, as subjective as it may seem, it’s worth noting.4) We should in no way strive for a world where we like all people equally. Not all people deserve to be liked equally and in a moral society, family should, in my opinion, still come first. It’s like saying we should strive for a world where we view all art as equally good or all political stances as equally moral.
*fambly
I stand by fambly. Vin Diesel will probably use it as part of a new catch phrase.
If you were familiar with any of the German language schlock he’s starred in and/or directed, you’d be a lot less inclined to rush to defend him in any capacity, I can promise you that!
quite possibly the dumbest thing i’ve ever read.
Being an obnoxious asshole is a protected class now, or didn’t you know? And if you disagree, you are cancel culture incarnate.
this movie should be renamed ‘tolerated & tolerateder’
Army of Dweebs: Tolerability Drift
Because why would I want to watch a not charismatic person play at being an action star? Look at Scott Eastwood — aside from the fact that he’s a dead ringer for his old man at least half the time and better-looking the rest of the time, moves well and is in the prime of his life, he barely registers in anything he’s done. Why? Because he lacks the presence and charisma of Clint Eastwood — the only time he gets your attention is when he squints and hisses a line out like his movie-star father, and that’s only because you go, “Oh, he’s Clint Eastwood’s kid!”If it’s prejudice, then it’s a prejudice we all share — if an actor doesn’t draw the audience’s attention, then nothing else will help.
“Who asked for this?” is never a valid critique. Art doesn’t need to be necessary or important, and there’s no shortage of good stuff that was initially regarded with scepticism or indifference (including genre-leaping spinoffs).Going by the latter part of the review there’s plenty to criticise, so there was really no need to lean so hard on such an odious take.
THANK YOU!
Indeed, a more fair question would be, what compelling reason did the creators have to make this? If the creators themselves at best were hoping to make a bad idea less bad in the execution, I think you can fairly complain there was no reason to make it. But again, whether any audience wanted it or not is irrelevant.
100% agree. This movie looks like detestable garbage and I have no interest in it, but “who asked for this?” is a shallow and unilluminating question, usually because anyone asking it has no way to answer it. If we really knew the motivations (financial, cultural, otherwise) of the producers, we wouldn’t have to answer this question, but it’s extremely rare for those answers to be made public.The question is essentially a synonym for “I don’t care about this, and none of the people in my cultural bubble care about it, therefore it can’t possibly have enough widespread appeal to exist, and anyone who does care about it is a fool.”
also, in this specific case we know quite literally noone was asking for it because it was done filming before the movie that introduces the character was released.
In the literal sense, sure; there’s no way members of the public could have been asking for a standalone movie focusing on a character they didn’t know existed. It doesn’t change the fact that “who was asking for this” is code for a judgmental “I don’t find this appealing and I think anyone who does is a fool.”
maybe! i don’t think that’s the end-all, be-all interpretation. i mean, if you’re a film critic you certainly run the gamut of stuff that won’t necessarily appeal to your personal taste, but (ideally) have an understanding of what audience it appeals to. i think in this case it could be taken as ‘i have a hard time conceiving of an audience for this, because it’s a spin-off of a zombie movie that happens before there are zombies’…which, okay, COULD be ‘i don’t find this appealing’, but i think it comes off just as much as ‘i can’t conceive of who this would appeal to’ which isn’t judgmental of an audience.and i mean, this IS a unique case, too. there are rarely spin-off movies in the can before the original thing comes out. but mostly i just think it’s funny that in this case, noone could have asked for it! it was made purely with a hypothetical audience in mind.
i think in this case it could be taken as ‘i have a hard time conceiving
of an audience for this, because it’s a spin-off of a zombie movie that
happens before there are zombies’Fair point. Two things, though:First, I’d consider the possibility that “is there an audience for this” is not necessarily the reason a movie gets made. Film financing is a mysterious black art that the public generally has very little information about, but it’s entirely possible that a movie might get made because it can be done relatively cheaply, doing so satisfies some contractual obligation, it might be a tax write-off, or any number of other reasons aside from “we want audiences to see this.”Second, even if we assume that “there’s an audience for this” was their goal, it’s not difficult to conjecture that the audience for this is the huge mass of people who trawl through Netflix who aren’t very picky and are looking for anything that might be even of momentary interest. It isn’t just “how many people will watch this the week it comes out,” but “how many people are likely to watch this over the next several years when they stumble across it?”
It’s the equivalent of commenting “who?” on any Jez article about Rita Ora.
Who?
She’s a pop singer and — WAIT A DAMN MINUTE
Here you come arguing for the merits of sub-mediocrity. Who asked for this mindless, meaningless shit of a movie? You apparently. Go read the Dunciad ffs.
How about “Who is this for?” for a question?Like, not for your average Oceans Eleven fan. Not for those weird Snyder obsessive fanboys, because it’s not even directed by him. I’m always for shitty movies being made, as long as they’re being made with proper safety in place, because hey, work for crew is work. That’s great. I do think it’s an interesting question though, the why, and the who for.I will also say that it’s a little galling that in such a white male dominated artistic world, mediocre, instantly memory-holed garbage absorbs so much funding and production and scheduling space.
Again, I don’t think it’s a good critique. You could just as easily level it at an idiosyncratic indie piece, and the landscape definitely wouldn’t be richer without those.I think these are interesting questions to ask when discussing a film, because there are question marks that can tell us something about the process or circumstances or culture that birthed it (in this case, I’m inclined to put it down to Netflix’s policy of greenlighting everything); but the idea that a work has some sort of relative value that depends on it having an audience is a toxic one.Of course, you’re totally right about how the homogeneous, risk-averse industry produces a load of forgettable trash, and better diversity would give us a more compelling variety of media. I just don’t think that the films themselves are any less “valid” for it.
“You could just as easily level it at an idiosyncratic indie piece”Disagree. The indie piece is specifically intended to be smaller and not catering to a wide audience… this is part of a multi-part franchise funded by Netflix.So we know that this was made to attract Netflix subscribers, and one would assume that it was intended to get in front of as many eyeballs as possible. It’s also piggybacking on another one of their properties… but as far as I remember, there was never a fan outcry for more Deiter. So why make THIS film, focused on THIS character?I wouldn’t even call it a criticism, it’s genuine confusion as to how Netflix is determining what content gets made and what doesn’t.
Netflix’s strategy for years has been to greenlight/acquire pretty much everything, then cancel stuff that isn’t hitting the metrics.That’s why there’s a lot of weird/interesting stuff like imports and indies, as well as a lot of crap. It’s the scattershot approach. No mystery about it.As far as the review goes, it’s pretty clearly meant to be a criticism, seeing as it takes up the headline, the subheading and half the article, which again is a review.
“As far as the review goes, it’s pretty clearly meant to be a criticism, seeing as it takes up the headline, the subheading and half the article”Fair enough! That said, I would genuinely like to know more about how this film came to be, if only to better understand what the hell Netflix is trying to accomplish. Maybe scattershot is the best answer I’ll get! lol
It is a fair question when millions of dollars were spent on making it. That’s money that could be spent of feeding or housing poor people, but it was used for a thing that very few people will even get the slightest enjoyment out of. Yes, we are allowed to ask this question.
I would agree with you if we were talking about art, but the film industry doesn’t produce art, it produces commodities to be valued and capitalized on. Army of the Dead was designed to be an MCU-like franchise of spin-offs, it isn’t an expression of an artist’s vision. From this angle it makes sense to ask “who asked for this?” as these films exist within the space of studios and filmmakers catering to specific audiences.
“Who asked for this?” is never a valid critique.
You could say that about anything you don’t like — Australian former podcaster/YouTube movie commentator Terry Frost (https://www.youtube.com/c/TerryFrost ) wonders WTF STAR WARS is so damned popular, when to him it’s an unoriginal mash-up of Flash Gordon, The Hidden Fortress, The Wizard of Oz and Edgar Rice Burroughs’s John Carter, Warlord of Mars!It’s kind of funny, really, to hear Terry navigate his loathing of George Lucas’s former empire when so many people he’s friends with and even his wife are STAR WARS fans….
I dunno. When looking at it through the cynical lens of material gain, one could ask where the demand for such a product is coming from. Considering this is Netflix, such a question isn’t unwarranted.
Sure… but Ignatiy is questioning the producers reason’s for greenlighting it, not the artist for wanting to create it.
I would argue that “Who asked for this?” is a valid question specifically in the case of spin-offs, since their existence is predicated on the assumption that someone enjoying the original IP will also enjoy the new work.
In a vacuum, I would agree with you. But given how much commerce is a part of moviemaking (especially when regarding the ever-ravenous maw of streaming services), it is a valid question since studio execs had to sign off on this. This isn’t some scrappy DIY project; this is a prequel to a major film that Netflix is clearly hoping becomes a franchise.
He (Matthias Schweighöfer) is one of the biggest movie stars in Germany. I’m trying to be as neutral here as possible.
I’d assume Netflix took a gamble on his fame. Some people in German speaking countries will definitely stream it. It might appeal to a wider European audience due to the cast and if they’re lucky they get some IngloriousBasters/Christoph Waltz internationel crossover success. Which they won’t.
Hum… German cinema being, you know, in fucking german, doesn’t get that wide of an european audience. This is the first time I’ve seen any of the name on the cast here except for the one dude that was in the first movie. Which I had never seen before that…
Eh, it stars Missandei on her post-Game of Thrones victory lap. That’s kind of a “get”.
THAT’S why her name sounded so familiar. Thank you for solving this very brief mystery in my head only.
I should think you, because now I know that some good came of me watching Game of Thrones after all.
I gave up on GoT at like, season 4, because I got tired of the gaps between seasons meaning I couldn’t remember which old white guy with a stupid name and a shaggy beard was which.
I thought I’d let it end and binge all of it, but then it ended and people were so damn pissed about it I figured it wasn’t worth my time ^^
It’s a pretty steep downhill after season 4.
Not just that – it also stars Guz Khan, the least well known of the contestants on (the currently ongoing) 12th series of Taskmaster. Zeitgeist!
pretty sure i only read positive things about his character over on reddit, so you know, they might just have an audience for this movie.
I think people liked the actor primarily, and to a lesser extent the character he played. I don’t, however, recall anyone saying they would be interested in watching his backstory when they don’t even really reference it in the first film and the entire rest of the cast seems to have more relevant backstory to explore.
No they won’t, because Christoph Waltz became a household name in large part because he is an excellent actor. Matthias Schweighöfer on the other hand overenunciates his lines loudly for a living.
I am still amazed, and it is a testament to Bautista, that I sat through all of “Army of the Dead.” I really count that movie, Sucker Punch, and Snyder’s superman garbage (especially the Snyder Cut) among the most dispiriting “culture is degrading” things I’ve ever seen, even moreso than Michael Bay’s Transformers which I thought was similarly depressing…but at least Transformers is skippable, the Superman and DCEU movies are just too culturally ubiquitous for me to skip and then suffer through. MARTHA, the worst Brazil rip-off of all time (with a performance that should have got Oscar Isaac a razzie), Superman murdering a dude, we owe it all to Zack.But really, Army of the Dead often ground to a halt to brightly showcase Schweighöfer, and I could not tell why. The movie seemed to believe he was a great and hilarious character, to the point where when I found out about this prequel I wasn’t surprised…I just have no idea where that impression came from…it sounds like they wrote him to be that way but didn’t write him that way.Hopefully this dies a quick death
Honestly, I’ve long since given up criticizing Snyder as a director. Not because I don’t think he’s a shitty director who incorporates right wing, reactionary imagery and themes into his movies without thinking of the implications of using them (Why put Sean Spicer, a fascist collaborator, into your movie when you can literally hire any doughy white guy to a Sean Spicer impression for much cheaper?). Rather, it’s because there’s nothing left to say about him and his career has basically plateaued. I mostly just spend any article on Zach Snyder talking about stuff that has nothing to do with him because I don’t feel like Snyder has any further influence on pop culture as a whole anymore.
Yeah, unless something massive changes he’s pretty much done and can be easily ignored for the most part. I still feel good skipping his 4 hour Justice League thing.
because I don’t feel like Snyder has any further influence on pop culture as a whole anymoreHe may still have an impact on the cohort of people (people who probably do not hang out where you and I hang out) who do watch his movies and think they’re cool.
people… who do watch his movies and think they’re cool.
Oh, you mean nihilistic incel edgelord wannabes, who think they’re Klingons but are really Pakleds…if Pakleds were even more uncool and lived in their Mom’s basement?
To be fair, I think you can hire Sean Spicer for fairly cheap, probably cheaper than an actor that can do a decent Sean Spicer impression.
And he is easy to direct. If you want to get him angry, just show him a container of Dippin’ Dots!
Yeah, Melissa McCarthy’s price went up since she got those Oscar nominations….
From your lips to a wish-granting frog’s ears, you are way more optimistic than I amYou say plateaued…I’m still waiting for Disney to greenlight him for a star wars trilogy from the Empire’s perspective… “The Act of Sithing”
“Hopefully this dies a quick death.”It was released on Netflix, so it was stillborn.
All I can say is that my money would not have been on Schweighöfer ever becoming internationally known in any way shape or form. He is a terrible terrible terrible terrible terrible TERRIBLE very bad very terrible actor and always has been.His screen presence is nonexistent. In Germany he’s been able to have a successful career only because the average German moviegoer barely has any understanding of their own emotions, let alone of characters, stories, cinema and indeed acting.
Why we are now talking about him here is beyond me, but it seems that most everyone agrees that this whole situation was a mistake.
throughout all of Army of the Dead he delivered every line as though he was 1000% certain he was totally killing…and he was very much mistaken…I can see why that would work on Zach Snyder.
I take it you’re a German native, Old Man Schultz?I think Netflix thinks Schweighöfer’s “big” enough in Germany that they want to get in bed with him to help build their European content market — and the Synders producing and co-writing this with him seems another inducement for the streamer. Also, amazingly, this movie’s got a 73% “Fresh” rating on Rotten Tomatoes(!).
Not only a native, but also a resident.Yes, it’s all based in the absurd, nay, grotesque world of market research, of course. God, what a nightmare to have Schweighöfer creeping into the world of international recognition.I wanna say he clearly doesn’t have the chops to make it work, but I mean, he’s done nothing but fail upwards his entire career, so I guess we can never be too sure. Yikes.
Congratulations, your written English is excellent. I had assumed you were second-third generation German-American like I am….Sometimes you just can’t explain popularity, or as I said already “One nation’s genius is another’s Jerry Lewis.” Or James Corden, who single-handedly set LGBTQ relations back at least five years!
Well, thank you! No, I’ve never even been to an English-speaking country. It was my childhood dream to move one day (preferably the US) but mental health issues have made such ambitious endeavors pretty much impossible for the time being.James Corden is if tone-deaf was a person, certainly. Next to him even Jimmy Fallon looks like a professional, for crying out loud.
I just always thought the likes of Schweighöfer and Schweiger were bad in a way that would never fly in Hollywood. You know, hacky and boring at the same time. I can look past the former, but the latter is the real crime.
::nods:: I get it, but…what can you say?Yes, coming to the U.S. if you have any health issues at all is a bad idea, because we have one of the world’s most fucked-up health care systems.
Yup, and that makes it a non-starter even when ignoring the fact that my nervous system can’t handle the move and everything associated with it.
Germany has its perks for sure, but the bureaucracy can drive you insane and in many cases homeless as well. I’m lucky enough to have friends and family members who have been helping me with that stuff.And say what you want about the US, but people are largely tuned in to the culture, in all its facets, subtleties and different mediums. The same cannot be said for Germany. A near psychotic adherence to rules and standards and regulations is to blame, in my opinion. Which is great if you’re designing jet engines, but it’s the death of art and creativity.
not only was this greenlit and filmed before army of the dead was released, they filmed it entirely over relatively early covid, too.i understand that the guy had an opportunity to write, direct and star in a big netflix movie and break out of german filmmaking into the mainstream or whatever…but i just can’t imagine risking my life for this.
“We’re not going to be bribed into letting you direct a non Zombie prequel to Army of the Dead with one lousy Happy Meal, Herr Schweighöfer!”
Didn’t this come out 3 months ago?? How is a spin-off dropping in 3 days?
Time isn’t real any more
There was a prequel to Army of the Dead, it was called Evil Dead 2.
God knows why, he was a pointless character in Army of the Dead. He didn’t need to be there at all. I think the actor is a friend of Snyder’s and that’s why he was in it and that’s why he’s got this film too. Snyder getting gigs for friends who just make as shit films as he does.
Looks like a neat experiment. It reminds me of when Get Smart tried it with a direct to dvd movie that was taking place at the same time of the movie. The movie itself was ok but I like the idea of what they were trying, especially getting Anne Hathaway to do a cameo.I’m sorry to hear that Ignatiy didn’t enjoy it very much, except for the parts that he did. I’m probably going to catch it. I like this idea of a zombie outbreak being contained, but affecting how worried people are in doing normal stuff. Or criminal stuff. I did enjoy Army of the Dead. Interesting film. Not great, but introduced some interesting zombie stuff and some cool themes.
Vaults themed according to Wagner’s Ring cycle sounds like an intriguing idea… until you get to the incest in Die Walkure.
Oh baby hot vault on vault action!
Without question the most problematic part of Wagner!
Well, just try to stay away from Poland, if you start getting the urge…
Why the hell did Netflix green light a zombie-light prequel to Army Of The Dead?Turns out, leadership at Netflix is making some stupid fucking choices these days.
But then, I think we have all seen corporate leadership in general making some extra stupid fucking choices in the last 2 years, so this tracks. Makes you wonder why they get paid 10-1000 times what we get paid…
For never being caught out being wrong, even though they almost always are?See, if you knew how to pass the buck and evade being blamed for anything, you could be a corporate leader, too!
They get paid a lot because Netflix makes a lot of money. And they won’t care what grade the AV Club gives their zombie movie prequel as long as they got enough subscriptions out of it.
…leadership at Netflix is making some stupid fucking choices these days.
They rescued and then allowed Lucifer to finish properly. That buys them a world of latitude from me, anyway.
“If nothing else, the last will please diehard fans of the old Lionsgate logo.”
*golfclap.gif*
I laughed out loud at that. And I am a fan of the old Lionsgate logo! Cheesily busy, it really sets the tone for the movies to come.
I might have been intrigued by this movie of it had been about digging into why Army of the Dead had robot zombies, a suggested time loop, and possibly aliens. Mostly just to hate watch it, but it would have gotten Netflix a view nonetheless.
Cue introductions of the rest of the low-rent crew, with the requisite freeze-frames, flashbacks, and on-screen text.Just once, I’d like to see the tail end of such a sequence transition into: It turns out that one of the team members has actually created this clip in-world, and the other members are like “why the fuck would you make a clip with our names and faces in it? we’re about to rob a bank” and he’s like “but I thought it would be cool” and they force him to delete it.
they sort of did that in the marvel zombies episode of what if
There’s a lot of that type of humor in this movie. Like the montage where they talk about how perfectly a heist is going to work, then the main character says “It’s not going to work” and everyone says “But we already pulled off the heist.”Honestly, if you removed the references to the zombies, this movie would’ve been fine sitting on its own as an entertaining way to spend two hours.
You don’t understand why Netflix greenlit this movie, Ignatiy? Sure you do: Netflix gives tons of cash to most anyone who can make them a movie. They don’t care about quality, there is no oversight, apparently—it’s just a cash-for-trash transaction. Then they take that shit product and throw it into the sea of sub-mediocrity known as their library. The Netflix library makes Redbox at the grocery store look like the Criterion Collection.And sure, people watch that shit, because Netflix, like Spotify, has proven people don’t give a shit and will consume whatever turd they’re served. Shall I stare at Twitter for two hours or watch a meaningless movie about a character I don’t remember from a movie that fully sucked ass? Maybe the better way to come at it is to ask: has Netflix ever created any real movies that will stand the test of time? Mank, Roma, the Irishman—those are considered Netflix’ best efforts, yes? And has anyone alive ever watched any of them more than once? They are among the worst films by three good directors.Netflix is pure shit, the Donald Trump of media empires just here to keep exchanging diarrhea for subscription fees as long as idiots like us are willing to pay. (And yes, I subscribe too, so that my kids can continue to stare mindlessly at the even shittier shit they serve to kids.) Everything fucking sucks, especially Netflix and especially Zach Snyder.
I consider Snyder’s Dawn of the Dead to be an excellent movie, so I found Army of the Dead extremely disappointing. Not funny or over the top enough to be comedic, not scary enough to be a good zombie movie, and the characters were dull and one dimensional. Just a two hour+ slog that utterly wastes the cool premise of zombie Vegas. So I’m not going to watch a lame caper with characters I already don’t like.
Hell yeah, that’s right. Fuck you, Schweighöfer. Stay out of the international spotlight, you fucking hack.
I am amused that you seem to be the only person in these comments who actually knows who he is (beyond the first movie and a vague “I heard he’s popular in Germany”), and you have nothing but venom for him. Its like if a German movie had James Corden in it and commenters were like “I dunno, I guess he’s popular in America or England” and one of us showed up in the comments to say “fuck that piece of shit!”
Man, I’ve been building this up basically my entire life. I’ve hated him for so long.Not only is he a bad actor and known for starring in and sometimes also directing cheap, soulless and laughable imitations of the worst of Hollywood romcoms, he’s also made many appearances on TV, for interviews or other weird shit, in Germany’s pathetic attempts at variety entertainment, and he’s always come across as a guy who is exceedingly self-satisfied, as if nobody’s ever given him any constructive criticism in his entire life (or if they did, he tuned it all out). I think he even thinks that he comes across as humble and congenial… and frustratingly, the emotionally stunted general populace seems to agree.
He deserves every bit of flak that he gets for his lack of talent, but he’s also representative of the disconnect I’ve felt with the culture happening around me all my life. Modern day Germany is the country of the uncultured bourgeoisie.
I love this comment.
Why the hell did Netflix green light a zombie-light prequel to Army Of The Dead?FTFY
I though Schweighöfer was the lone torchbearer of absurd fun in Army of the Dead, which was absolutely set up as some wild zombie-laden romp through Vegas but wound up being an incoherent, blurry navel-gazing mess (though Dave Bautista was quite good in it, despite the script and direction). Shame about this movie, as it looked like some goofy B-list fun.
I kinda liked his character but I didn’t think he should get a whole movie. I will say casting in some of these horror movies on netflix are strange. The Star of Fear Street was one of the most annoying human’s I’ve seen in a horror movie since the 90’s and I wanted her to die all movie long.
She was so grating and her girlfriend was just kind of meh. I really liked the 2 friends and wish it focused more on them
Agreed, the two friends were way better. Her and her girlfriend were so bland and somehow as you said grating as well. Really took away from the story.
This sounds and looks so fucking stupid.
His character was also pointless. Why would they have needed a safe cracker? The guy who sent them there was only asking them to get his money for him by going into the zombie-infested casino. He would have had the combination to his own safe!
Because Army of the Dead was a success? Next?
Release the Schweighöfer Cut, you cowards!
Is there even a hint of the zombies to come, or nada?
I watched the trailer and I think it showed some early in the outbreak news footage
There was a soap actress and game show panelist in the ‘70s and early ‘80s who called herself Melinda O. Fee. I’m sure Ruby O. Fee is not intentionally modeled after her, but it’s the most interested I’ve ever been in these movies.
Netflix is weird sometimes, like the horrible I-Land from two years ago that was so bad people actually speculated they were experimenting with a computer generating a plot to see if it was possible. (spoiler..it soooo did not work) This movie gives me the same kind of vibe.
Wait, they have to break into the safes before they get moved? Large room sized safes are going to be relocated in tact? Just wait and steal them from the trucks that are moving them. Have they never seen Mission Impossible in the Army of… universe. I thing I will wait for the Army of Tigs spin off where every character is played by a CGI Tig Notaro.
My take is that they had a script but needed a way to get people to watch it so they shoehorned in a “known” character who they thought would be really popular.
Hard to say whether he is actually popular or not by asking an echo chamber like kinja. Personally I thought he was ok in Army of the Dead. That movie was just ok imo and was Bautistas worst movie imo.
Are there people out there who were clamoring to learn the origin story
of Matthias Schweighöfer’s safecracking German nerdlinger?If you commit to giving Army of the Dead the good ol’ MST3K razzing it deserves, then it’s a hilarious movie, and Dieter was quite adorkable in it.So…yeah? I mean, it’s all garbage, but I eat Cheetos too.
When I saw the trailer for this, I went back and re-watched his final scene in Army of the Dead… and y’know, I think they might try to pull a fast one here. We don’t actually see him get bit there, he just gets hauled away from the closing door by the Head Zombie. And (I confess I faded out on this movie long before the end) I don’t recall if we ever see him as a zombie later on (maybe I missed it?). There’s any number of … loosely plausibly ways he might have escaped and survived the blast.
I wouldn’t be shocked at all if they intended to try and bring this character back for a sequel, were he popular enough.
“How did this get made?”
That’s something we in Germany ask us for years whenever a Matthias Schweighöfer movie comes out.
Can’t wait for the spin-off of this movie that goes even further back and now it’s about aliens.
1. Because not everyone thought Dieter was annoying. I was quite fond, actually.2. Because it’s not a zombie movie, nor is it marketed as such. It’s a heist movie. Criticizing it for not having zombie movies is like complaining that Halloween Kills didn’t have aliens, or 12 Angry Men didn’t have a romantic subplot.
Should nothing better turn up this weekend, I might try.
I imagine part of what got this made was someone pitching the experimental potential in having a zombie movie, and then telling a non-zombie story in that setting. I can see a Netflix executive being intrigued by building that sort of not-quite-cinematic-universe, or at least intrigued enough to throw some budget at the idea. Especially if you can convince said executive that the vestigial connection to a Zack Snyder project will at least get his internet cult on-board.
This movie is so weird. As far as we can tell, the guy’s safe-cracking process is . . . listening real carefully? Okay, maybe he has great ears, but wouldn’t that imply that someone with a stethoscope could do just as good of a job? But then later he cracks the final safe while roaring down the road in the back of a truck—what, that didn’t affect his instrument AT ALL? How loud ARE those tumblers in the masterpiece super-safe, anyway?
I will watch this garbage.
So, I just watched the AoT and, man, both movies are an amazing exercise of pointlessness.
The zombie movie wasn’t about zombies and the bank heist movie was just stealing two bags of money (from a mountain of cash) so that they could move on to the next, more difficult safe and steal… two more bags of money. All the while being chased by an overacting (and …eye gouging?) French officer.
Every bank was the same. They walk in, go down the elevator and the lead actor sticks his ear to a safe and bad cg effects happen. We don’t even feel how difficult each safe is because we “know” that he’s opening it. What was the point?
I swear Snyder films (directed or produced) are the new M. Night movies, wherein I get roped into watching them and ultimately regret doing so by the end.
I don’t understand the hate for this movie, and I thought Army of the Dead was extremely stupid. Army of Thieves is far more entertaining than it has a right to be considering the source material. If you’re looking for a fun, self-referential heist movie, I highly recommend it.
I know 100% that no one is ever going to read this comment, but I have to say that I loved Army of Thieves. The love story was sweet, the locations were gorgeous, the script was funny, and there were definite stakes. The plot could have made a little more sense, but who cares — it’s a heist movie.In fact, I liked it so much that I wanted to watch the original movie that Thieves was a prequel for. And much to my dismay, it was a Zack Snyder piece of crap. The intro, as many have commented here, was fun and lively, and then it immediately devolved into a morass of cliches and eye-rollingly terrible acting.We may never know why Thieves was made, but I can say for a fact that it’s a hell of a lot better than the original movie because at least it was fun.