Wet Hot American Summer - 9th April 2011
These types of films were mostly popular in the late 70s early 80s and then had a brief resurgence at the beginning of the 90s. They fall into three distinct genres: comedy, horror and nostalgic drama, the best example of these would be Meatballs, Sleepaway Camp and Indian Summer.
The interesting and unusual thing about Wet Hot American Summer is that it was made in 2001 but is set at the end of 1981. Unusual because this was the directorial debut of David Wain from 90s MTV comedy group 'The State' and stars many of the members of that group too and it's odd they would pick not only such a random genre but also that they would purposefully do, essentially, a period piece. That is until you watch it and realise that it's a stroke of genius actually. The setting is obvious for the weird, surreal, character based and slapstick comedy that The State specialise in and setting it when they did didn't exactly take a lot more than the clothing (how much have camps changed in the last 30 years?!) and it allowed them the ability to both feel authentic but also subtly pastiche the films that came before. To their credit there are not a lot of obvious and easy 80s music & hair based jokes, the costumes are just subtly ridiculous.
For those not in the know, this is one of those films that didn't do well with the critics on its initial release and gained a cult following on video. Watching it back now I can see why both is true because while I am a fan of The State and much of their work since (The Ten, Role Models, Wainy Days, Reno 911), this maybe isn't as funny or as satisfying, over all, as it could and should be. However, by the same token, the individual set pieces or sketches are memorable, odd and the sort of thing that if you were discovering surreal comedy for the first time would draw you in.
Any sketch comedy troupe that attempt the move to film are always going to be compared to Monty Python, or maybe on this side of the Atlantic, Kids in the Hall and WHAS certainly has both somewhere in the mix of influences however, for my personal taste, I find that this film just misses a beat somewhere and isn't as clever or sharp as it could be but that is maybe the point. A lot of the humour is derived from adults acting like stroppy or emotional kids either that or taking everything from drug use to gay sex to the graphical extreme. I think the uneven tone and unclear story leave the film unsure of what it actually is.
All that said, the performances are very strong by members of The State and other notables like Paul Rudd, Elizabeth Banks, David Hyde Pierce, Janeane Garofalo, Molly Shannon, Amy Poehler and even a young Bradley Cooper but the person who easily steals the show is Christopher Meloni as the strung out vietnam vet chef. Considering his performance in this and other smaller roles I have seen him in, it's a wonder he is not a well renowned comedy character actor instead of playing a generic cop on some Law & Order spin off.
All in all then it's well worth an hour and a half of your time, especially if you are at all interested in where a lot of the current wave of non-SNL comedic performers, writers and directors come from. It's just, it's a bit sloppy in parts, they have all subsequently done better and it's not as strong as a Holy Grail or even a Brain Candy when it comes to the first films of sketch comedy troupes.
I would check out The State first too, either clips on YouTube or invest in the DVD box set. For fans of sketch comedy it's a must!
7 out of 10 talking cans of mixed vegetables
How Do You Know - 24th March 2011
if 30 minutes into it you want to yank your own eyeballs out and eat them to save you from this sort of floundering mess in the future.
What is so completely shocking about this amateurish weak arse dribble of a film is that while Reese Witherspoon is never top of my list, she's not exactly atrocious and almost everyone else involved in this film has done much much better and will probably do much better again, we can only hope.
Yes once in a while Paul Rudd will stumble into a howler or two ("I could never be your woman" anyone?), Owen Wilson faltered his steady stream of watchable, enjoyable romps with Marley & Me and even the sheen has slightly faded on old Mr.Nicholson after The Bucket List (although his resume is still extraordinarily respectable and lacking the massive Blunders of pears De Niro and Pacino) and yet what were the chances that all four of these established Hollywood actors would show up in one almighty blunder? How would I know! I can only imagine that the usually reliable James L Brooks roofied them all, filmed them all engaging in lurid acts with a penguin and has it hanging over their heads.
The plot is utterly redundant, tedious and devoid of laughs. Basically Reese Witherspoon can no longer play softball or something and instead of just getting one of those sports-personality endorsement deals for a shoe or something, decides instead to shack up with air-headed, insensitive, womaniser Wilson and is then hideously shocked and surprised when it continually doesn't work out. One to many softballs in the face apparently.
On the other end of the banality spectrum there is Rudd and his father Nicholson. Rudd runs Nicholson's company, what that is we are never told or fully explained but the company is being investigated, again for what, no one really ever tells us that either. Rudd, being head of said company, is therefor in the firing line but we never really see this either, we are just told it and so he has plenty of time on his hands to wander about while Nicholson occasionally shows up to rain a little more on hapless Rudd's parade with little to no information other than it's bad news and Rudd should panic. Rudd is never once interviewed by the IRS or the Feds or anyone and the whole strand of the narrative seems unnecessarily sloppy, confusing and pointless. What is even more frustrating is the storyline is never entirely or satisfactorily concluded which makes you leave the cinema even more dumbfounded and gobsmacked that you sat through the whole sorry disaster to begin with.
Rudd and Witherspoon contrive to meet on the worst day both of them are having and in a very not-very-cute "meet-cute" Rudd decides he likes the gravestone chinned Witherspoon and rather than anything resembling hilarity or romance ensuing we spend the rest of the film knowing they'll get together but have to watch two hours of worthless and pitiful crap where the only obstacle to their groinal happiness is the never faithful and imbecilic Wilson and the fact that Witherspoon continues to claim they are boyfriend and girlfriend, despite her spending all her time with Rudd and hardly any with him!
The whole thing is comparable to being flogged with chicken wire while a dwarf anally batters you with a fence post and at least in that scenario the fence post has a point.
All of this twatting about would probably be bearable if the whole film didn't look like it was put together by the same team that put together the sets for televised puppet shows in the 50s. Considering the pedigree of it's director, Mr. James L Brooks, it looks like he is trying to take tips from the people who make daytime soaps in which evil twin brothers steal the ruby of eternal life from the nuns only to find out the girl he had a crush on in high school is really his aunt.
So slam bad writing and bad directing together with impossibly poor production values and a cast who all look like they could do with a long lie down, some strong drugs or a damn good talking to and you have this years worst romantic comedy so far, mainly because it's neither romantic nor at all funny in any way at all. The bit in the trailer about the lamp is the best bit in the film and it's funnier in the trailer.
Unfortunately a sad day for all involved, Witherspoon will take this in her stride, she's used to this sort of mindless, inconsequential project that's not unlike being forced to smell the flecks from big foot's arse hair but the rest of them, not unlike actors thinking that working with Woody Allen now is still something to be happy about, need to read the script closer in future, it's only worth doing if it's any good.
Next up Owen Wilson works with Woody Allen (I slap my head with despair).
2 out of 10 sneezes into a salad that's already glazed liberally with giraffe shit
Points from The Wife 2 out of 10
Dinner for Schmucks - 28th January 2011
With the critical mauling this film took and with the remake factor, you maybe screaming at the blog saying 'well why the blazers did you watch this rubbish in the first place!' or you may use more expletives and less British slang than that in your every day speech but either way, let me defend my position.
Basically it comes down to three things:
Firstly it was a snow/sick day, there wasn't much else going on and on days like that I fancy mindless comedy, secondly I like both the lead actors and all the cameo actors as well and thirdly, often if a film is as terrible as this one was made out to be in the general printed press, I confess to a slight weakness for wanting to see films like that, partly to see how, sometimes, a group of popular people can put a foot so wrong and partly because I don't believe the press half the time. How can a film with Paul Rudd and Steve Carrell be all that bad, really? I don't really need to list their remarkable resumes do I? Ok so I wasn't all that bothered by Carrell in Date Night and I didn't see How Do You Know and I hear it was pretty bad but apart from that they are usually both, good for a laugh.
I will say one more thing before the review, am I the only one who was sort of expecting a Paul Rudd backlash but really glad it hasn't happened? because he is usually the sort of person that generally people get sick of pretty quick, either that or start saying 'I hate Paul Rudd' just to be different but I, personally, think he's brilliant.
He has aligned himself with all the right groups of comedians from the David Wain/State group, to the Judd Apatow stable and also is a vocal fan of British comedy such as Little Britain, amongst others. He also seems to have remained pretty down to earth, which is often a good sign to. So where as I can completely understand people getting sick of Seth Rogen, the voice alone was enough along with his lack of range, I think what keeps people coming back to Paul Rudd is that he is handsome enough for women to like him but goofy and male enough for the men not to turn against his handsomeness, find out where he lives and en masse turn up and urinate through his mail slot.
As for the film, what the hell were all those reviewers going on about?! While it was in no way as genius, original or as funny as Anchorman it does remind me of that situation where a big group of people just didn't seem to get the joke.
Now I haven't seen the original (I know! I will!) but it struck me that firstly, they tried really hard to make it a genuinely amusing and slightly surreal farce in a very European tradition and secondly, they did try to give it a fair amount of social commentary and even depth below the very superficial yet, often times, hilarious surface.
In case people don't know it's about a guy who, in order to get ahead in business, has to find an idiot to come to a special dinner hosted by his work superiors and obviously, in the process has his life pulled apart, realises the truth of the matter, comes to learn real values and then proceeds to put his life back together with said idiot in toe.
The curious thing about this film was how much better it was than the trailer. It feels like, having read some of the negative reviews that they were reviewing the trailer and not the film because after seeing the trailer, I too felt that this band of modern comedians had wildly missed the mark and finally all banded together to make a bad film, however, in my household, a dumb farcical comedy starring people you like has two jobs:
1. To make you laugh
and
2. To make sure you still like the people by the end of the film that you liked at the beginning of the film
Dinner for Schmucks, I am glad to say, succeeded on both counts.
Now were there weak moments? sure, of course, there was bound to be some, for example, David Walliams is not as funny as he thinks he is, not all of the final collection of idiots were as laugh-out-loud as they could've been but sadder than that, the character that the marvelous Jermaine Clement played grew a little tiresome by the end.
All in all though the film had some really inspired flights of creative lunacy, a great pace, Steve Carell, along with Zach Galifanakis in a bonkers cameo, were very very funny, the film juggled the surreal, the light and, sometimes, the very black humour well and the farce, for me, never became annoying and never gave me occasion to shout "No! no please don't do that! no!" as someone did something obviously stupid to a vintage car/house/work of art (as is so often the cliche with these things).
As I started with Mr.Rudd, I will end with a comment about him. while he was perfectly fine in this film and played a good semi-straight man with the right dose of charm and timing, he is better than this role.
He is at his best when he is playing an actual character, like the amazing and smooth Brian Fantana from Anchorman, complete with comedy tache, or the grumpy, world hating and quick witted energy drink salesman in Role Models. At his best, his straight man schtick is the awkward, ridiculous nickname spouting, bass slappin' real estate agent in I Love You Man but at its worst it can be a little dry, flat and bland, which, in the case of Dinner for Schmucks is of course to do with the script but also so that he is the sane little eye of the big crazy storm, if he had a wacky character too then there really would be no one for the audience to hitch their wagon to.
Still, I could do with more Fantana sytle roles for Rudd and less cookie cutter romantic leads.
All that being said, maybe I went in with low expectations, maybe it works better on the small screen or maybe I watched in such a stupidity induced stupor that I wasn't thinking straight but I enjoyed it and would even go as far as to recommend it.
7 out of 10 fake cheeses in a stuffed mouse diorama