And Yet, They Allowed Him To Continue Making Movies . . . 1941

The Good: I'm stretching here, so I'll say the cast
The Bad: Not funny, Acting is terrible, Just about everything
The Basics: Despite generally talented cast members, 1941 is terribly unfunny and it demeans the career of Steven Spielberg to consider he ever directed it.


Sometimes, there comes a movie that is so terrible that all one wishes to do is erase it from their memory. Wrong Turn, which is my all-time most hated movie is almost completely forgotten by me. I know I don't like Wrong Turn (reviewed here!), but I don't even remember why. I'd have to go read my review and I know enough about how much I hated that movie to know I shouldn't do that. Similarly, every now and then I hear a song from Bush's album Sixteen Stone (reviewed here!) and I develop a bit of a tick. Steven Spielberg, apparently tuckered out from making classic films like Jaws (reviewed here!) and Close Encounters Of The Third Kind, squeezed out 1941 before making Raiders Of The Lost Ark (reviewed here!). Checking out the IMDB, none of the titles under his directing credit since then jump out as comedies. Perhaps he learned his lesson. I learned my lesson and I'm filing this movie in the Outbox of my brain with other movies I loathed.

1941, appropriately enough, happens in 1941. Approximately one week after the attack on Pearl Harbor, a Japanese submarine ends up lost near Hollywood, fueling the belief that the Japanese are about to attack California. Sgt. Frank Tree prepares for the attack by trying to get the military organized. The crazy and frenetic Captain Wild Bill Kelso is determined to keep the skies clear of Japanese and generally California goes into hysteria as relations between the Germans and the Japanese on the submarine fall apart.

1941 is a comedy with what could have been a clever concept. Instead, it's just plain dumb. Most of the humor is slapstick, which is the lowest form of comedy. None of it is particularly clever. Things crash, houses get run into by tanks, it's pretty basic stupidity humor. There is nothing clever in the execution of 1941.

The idea, though, is not bad. The idea of California going into hysteria following the attack on Pear Harbor is a decent enough idea. I'm not sure how well it works as a comedic idea, but it certainly does not work in this comic rendition of it. Instead, we are subjected to slapstick gags, banal character and obvious attempts for cheap laughs.

A perfect example of this is embodied by Captain Kelso. Wild Bill Kelso is played by John Belushi and the role runs like an extended Saturday Night Live sketch. Belushi as Kelso falls down, bugs out his eyes, chomps on cigars in a parody of masculinity of the time and blusters his way through even the least complicated of lines. The thing is, we've seen Belushi act like this. It's familiar. It's not Kelso, it's Belushi and that's poor use of the actor or poor acting.

Similarly, Dan Aykroyd, who plays Tree, is familiar for his overly serious delivery, much like how he played the anchor on the Saturday Night Live news. John Candy is in the movie far too briefly and if you blink, you miss Christopher Lee. In short, any talent that could have made the movie funny or allow it to possess a certain quality is lost in either preconceived notions of how the actors ought to be used or drown in a terrible script.

And Steven Spielberg phones this one in. There is nothing spectacular in the direction. In fact, there is nothing even visually interesting in 1941. And the problem is, where some truly lame movies do not take themselves seriously, like camp classic The Attack Of The Killer Tomatoes, 1941 does take itself seriously. So there are no gaffs with production design or production elements. Things like the house being barreled into with a tank happen in a meticulously constructed way that a serious director would.

Still, the net effect is garbage. 1941 is not funny. It is not entertaining and I shudder to think that there now exists an even longer Director's Cut. Part of the shudder is astonishment that Steven Spielberg would admit he remembered making this movie. I know I shall do my best to forget it.

For other works with Tim Matheson, be sure to check out my reviews of:
No Strings Attached
The West Wing
The Story Of Us

2/10

Check out all the movies that were better than this one and read reviews by visiting my Movie Review Index Page where films are organized best to worst!

© 2012, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Elf Is A Fun Christmas Movie That Feels Like P.R. For The Actors Involved.

The Good: Moments of humor, Moments of mood/message
The Bad: Very predictable, Virtually all of the performances are good casting over good acting, Very repetitive
The Basics: Elf is fun and has its moments, but ultimately, it is a bunch of great lines strung together through a thin, predictable plot.


It actually surprised me that I had not watched and reviewed Elf before tonight. But my wife and I had hot cocoa and homemade cookies and she was in the mood to watch her favorite Christmas movie, so I decided to watch Elf with her. She is a big fan of Will Ferrell's works, so it did not surprise me that Elf would be her favorite. We had just finished watching Frosty The Snowman, so I was pretty well done with kid's programming for the night.

Elf is pretty much a fish-out-of-water Christmas story and while the setup is interesting enough, it feels like writer David Berenbaum had a good idea and did not know quite what to do with it. The movie has some very fun lines, but most of them have a disconnected, almost generic humor quality to them that made me feel like they could have been a part of virtually any Will Ferrell movie. And Elf feels very much like a Will Ferrell film. When it does not feel like a Will Ferrell movie, Elf seems very much like an advertisement for Zooey Deschanel's music career. When the movie is not focused on Ferrell, it is tightly focused on Deschanel, so the film has the sensation of jerking between two channels of commercials more than being a truly engaging or cohesive story in and of itself. In other words, the plot is so simple, thin and repetitive that it falls to the performers to wow us and they stay so squarely within their known talents that Elf fails to shine beyond that.

Buddy lives and works in the North pole at Santa's Workshop for thirty years oblivious to the fact that he is a human living among the Elves. When one elf lets it slip that Buddy is human, Buddy is shocked and goes to New York City in search of his biological father. After an extended "fish out of water" montage sequence, Buddy goes to meet his father with the implicit quest to get his father, publishing tycoon Walter Hobbs, off the naughty list.

Tossed out of his father's offices, Buddy goes to a department store where he begins working in the seasonal department. He decorates the store and meets the jaded Jovie. When he gets arrested for assaulting the false Santa that comes to the department store, he is bailed out by Walter. When Walter takes Buddy back to his home and family, Walter finds his son does not truly fit. After condemning Buddy to the publishing company's mailroom, Buddy gets into more trouble until Santa's sleigh crashes and Buddy must come to the rescue to save Christmas.

In the final act, Elf falls apart into an unpleasant mix of schmaltzy Christmas movie and utterly nonsensical comedy. When the Central Park Police Horses enter the movie, the film becomes a mess. So, while the movie starts out engaging with a number of truly great, hilarious lines delivered by Will Ferrell with an enthusiasm that only Ferrell could reasonably sell to the viewer, in the last act, Elf becomes a surprisingly typical Jon Favreau action film and it lacks the charm the movie began with. But, it does offer an opportunity for Zooey Deschanel to sing and show off her pipes, which seems like her big part in the movie. Jovie is pretty much a generic love interest for Buddy outside her singing and her presence feels very much like an oscillation between utterly generic and "hey! Look at me! Listen! I can SING!"

That said, Will Ferrell and Zooey Deschanel do play to their strengths. Ferrell has a great sense of absurdist humor and he has very funny deliveries in Elf. He sells absurdist non-sequitors like "So, good news; I saw a dog today!" exceptionally well with his boyish enthusiasm. Unfortunately, many of the lines like that could have been put into virtually any Will Ferrell movie or SNL sketch and sold the same way. Similarly, Zooey Deschanel - who is disturbingly blonde for Elf - performs musically much the way she did in Yes Man (reviewed here!).

In a similar fashion, James Caan and Bob Newhart offer nothing truly new in their performances. Instead, Caan plays Walter as a pretty generic workaholic and Newhart delivers with is trademark mumbled deliveries and the movie seems more like a triumph of good casting over decent acting. At the end of it, Elf is more of an average Christmas film than anything enduring or extraordinary.

For other Christmas movies, please check out my reviews of:
Disney's A Christmas Carol
Four Christmases
Love Actually

5/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

Seamless Sequels Without The Spark: The Godfather, Part II Leaves Me Less Impressed.

The Good: Decent acting, Great DVD bonus features
The Bad: Character conflicts/developments are actually minimal, Plot has largely been done before
The Basics: The Godfather, Part II might be the only sequel to win Best Picture after its predecessor won, but it is more a tired continuation of the original than something new.


The Godfather, Part II, for those who do not know, holds a distinction that no other movie holds at this point. It is the only movie that is a sequel to a film that won the Best Picture that also won the top Oscar prize. While there have been a few oddities as far as winners for Best Picture goes, there are few noteworthy films that have Best Picture trivia that have less going for them than The Godfather, Part II. While this is the only sequel to win following the first film in the series winning, there are far better sequel movies. Sequels that hold their own with the original or are even better than the first film in the series, like The Empire Strikes Back (reviewed here!) or The Dark Knight (reviewed here!) are not unheard of. But in the case of The Godfather, Part II, writers Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola (who also directed and produced the film) created an extension of the first film which is so closely mirrors the look and feel of the original that one feels more like they are watching some alternate take of the original.

With most movies, it is tough for me to nail down a precise moment when I opt not to recommend the film or I decide that it is not quite the work I thought it might have been at moments I was enjoying it. This is not the case with The Godfather, Part II. Instead, the moment Michael Corleone belts his wife, Kay, across the face, I decided that this was not a film I was going to recommend or one that I was particularly enjoying. I went into The Godfather, Part II blind, so I was actually quite excited to see Robert De Niro playing the younger version of Vito Corleone. But my pleasure at the inspired casting dissipated the longer the film went on and I was left feeling what many people feel when they watch a sequel; that the memory of something great has been brought down by prolonging it.

Now the godfather of the Corleone family, Michael Corleone is extorted by a U.S. Senator when he wants to expand his family's gambling interests in Las Vegas. As Michael confronts the legitimate business interests that have lined up prevent him and his family from taking more of an interest in gambling, he finds himself the target of an assassination attempt. Dealing with Hyman Roth, with whom his father did business despite distrusting, Michael soon begins to suspect that the hit on him came from within the family and it becomes quite clear that his brother Fredo is deeply involved in the conflicting interests in Las Vegas.

As Michael works to go legitimate, save the family business and retain the power his family has accrued over the past fifty years - with the aid of Tom Hagen, his consigliore - the film presents the life story of Vito Corleone, from his younger years in Italy (in the village of Corleone) to his emigration to the United States. Vito's story is told as he arrives in New York and slowly builds power in the community. Starting with helping out a woman who is being evicted for having a dog, Vito becomes more of a powerhouse by refusing to take guff and by doing what others will not to take power.

The mirroring stories are shown with the same sense of color and depth as the original film The Godfather (reviewed here!). This is, in part because Coppola and Puzo wrote and directed the original as well as this sequel. In many ways, The Godfather, Part II continues the story of The Godfather and the characters and their backstories are very much considered assumed knowledge by the producers. So, for example, elements like the climactic scene of the film mean absolutely nothing to people who have not seen the first film. Because the some of the characters in that final scene were only in the first film, the significance of it is only truly realized by those who know the story of all of the characters involved.

What the movie does well - which is why it took me so very long to decide that I did not actually like the film - is both continue the story of the Corleone family and Michael's consolidation of power and casting. When Robert De Niro appeared on screen as the younger Vito Corleone, I instantly saw the resemblance to Marlon Brando's iconic character from The Godfather. De Niro confirms what everyone knows now about him; he is a master actor with a great physical presence and his ability to mimic the mannerisms and even vocal tones of Brando. But the brilliant aspect of De Niro as the younger version of Vito is that he plausibly builds the character from a child into a young man who slowly becomes authoritative and reasons out how to get what he wants from life and those around him.

But beyond that, the movie is remarkably disappointing for those looking for a fresh cinematic experience. While the casting of De Niro is brilliant initially, the mirroring stories start with clear labels of the time and place. As the movie goes on, The Godfather, Part II drops the labels, but the color palate between both times is so remarkably similar that it takes a few moments for the viewer to realize when they are in the story being told. What doesn't help is that Al Pacino and Robert De Niro are frequently made to look like one another and this makes figuring out when one is in the story a bit more difficult.

But more than having real character development in the Michael Corleone plot, The Godfather, Part II simply rehashes much of what viewers have seen before. Michael is slow-burning, but lacks anything to set him apart from the other Corleones. At this point, he is simply a wannabe Vito. As well, he illustrates some of the traits - like smacking around his wife - that he has previously despised. As a result, it becomes quite easy to not care about large chunks of the film. Similarly, while seeing Vito's rise to power is interesting, because viewers who have seen The Godfather know how his story ends, the process is distracted from being truly engaging by the cutaways to Michael's story. As well, peripheral characters like Tom Hagen do not develop or evolve at all in this film.

On the two-disc DVD, The Godfather, Part II is presented with a commentary track and in widescreen format. There may be additional bonus features on newer DVD releases, but the two-disc version is fairly spartan. The film is also not cleaned up ideally for DVD and there were several points in the movie - not correlating to time periods - where the print looked grainier than others.

As far as those who love great drama, The Godfather, Part II is liable to disappoint. There are moments that the film is engaging and the Senate hearings into the Corleone family are different, but for the most part the movie feels like a familiar character study with some scenes we have not seen before. And, considering I'd already sat through three hours of this family doing similar things, this movie just seemed more redundant than incredible.

[As a winner of the Best Picture Oscar, this is part of my Best Picture Project online here! Please check it out!]

For other films with Robert De Niro, please check out:
The Untouchables
Brazil
The Deer Hunter

7/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

One Man Allows Circumstances To Change His Life With The Godfather (An Almost Perfect Film).

The Good: Amazing acting, Moments of character, Great plot development, Decent soundtrack, Great DVD bonus features.
The Bad: None of the characters are particularly likable.
The Basics: Powerful and well-shot, The Godfather tells the story of the passing of the guard in a Mafia family.


According to the American Film Institute, The Godfather is the second-best film of all time, right behind Citizen Kane (reviewed here!). Neither film made it onto my own "Top Ten Films Of All Time" list, but The Godfather at least makes a run at a perfect film, whereas I'd argue Citizen Kane is largely successful because of the hype as opposed to the substance of the film. Even so, having seen The Godfather twice now, whether or not it is a perfect film or not can be the subject of debate; and ultimately, my take on it is that the film is a near-miss on perfection.

For sure, I understand that The Godfather is an epic tale and that it has depth and subtlety and even a character arc that develops wonderfully throughout the film. But even as the tale of Michael Corleone develops, I find it hard to care. Despite the story developing and unfolding well, Michael Corleone is hardly the greatest character of all time and the true disappointment is not how Michael rises up to become a Mafia Godfather, but rather his failure to resist the pressures on him. In fact, Michael is a weak man whose bad behavior is supposed to be somehow justified by the tragedies that surround him. This makes him far, far less impressive to me and I tend to prefer characters who act, who make their destinies, as opposed to those who surrender to the pressures that overwhelm them. Even so, there is enough in The Godfather to enthusiastically recommend it.

In New York City, in 1945, Connie Corleone is marrying Carlo Rizzi, which brings together the entire Corleone family, a powerful Mafia family that is one of New York's Five Families. On that day, Vito Corleone - the Godfather of the Family - cannot refuse the request of any who request favors of him, as part of an old Sicilian tradition. He is asked by his godson, singer Johnny Fontane, to help him get a movie role and Vito dispatches his consigliere, Tom Hagen, to California to take care of the problem. Among the guests is Vito's youngest son, an American Marine, Michael. Michael has effectively distanced himself from the family business. In fact, he is at such a distance that when rival gangster Sollozzo attempts to get the Corleone's into the heroin trafficking racket and Vito refuses (whatwith it being impractical for the other rackets the Corleones are involved in) and a hit is placed on Vito, no one bothers to take Michael out.

With Vito hanging onto life by a thread, Michael takes out Sollozzo and corrupt cop McCluskey and goes into hiding in Sicily. While Michael is in Sicily, the hotheaded Sonny keeps the Corleone family together during a turf war that wages on. When Carlo begins beating Connie, Sonny is drawn out and killed by his rivals. Michael is forced to return to the United States (his young wife also being killed) and he assumes the mantle of power from Vito, after the Godfather does what he can to end the war.

The Godfather is a weird combination of being packed with characters and being very plot-heavy. The thing is, characters in the film are annoyingly monolithic and as such, the film lacks some emotional impact in that none of them are terribly likable. Almost all of the old guard Mafia types are racists (which brings the drug trafficking plot to a pretty easy, if disturbing, resolution), Carlo is a dumb, abusive wifebeater, and the only aspect of the personalities we see of almost all of the primary characters is their business life. I'm not saying that the film would be better if one of the scenes opened with Sonny being interrupted while making additions to his stamp collection, but it certainly would give him some element of character that is unique and distinctive other than being a violent mobster.

In that regard, the two characters who actually have the most going for them are the Godfather, Vito, and Michael, but both are ultimately unsatisfying characters. Vito actually stands for something in that he does not want to risk his business interests over drugs when he is happy to control more reasonable vices (drinking and gambling). He is a pragmatist in this regard and he doesn't want to jeopardize his political connections with something politicians will never support. He is also something of a family man, but that level of character is displayed in the three lines a rival boss has at the climactic meeting (one of the bosses argues against getting involved in the drug trade because he doesn't want kids to get hooked). As a result, we are left watching a goon for two and a half hours and it is difficult to care what happens to a corrupt individual who is happy to employ murderous henchmen to do his bidding.

Similarly, Michael Corleone starts out as having more character than he ends up with and the transition is problematic in that circumstances change his life, not his strength of character. Michael is off living his own life when he makes a bad decision - getting revenge on the corrupt cop and the man who tried to have his father killed. After his one moment of actually acting and making a choice of his own, he spends the entire film reacting until he is pigeonholed into a role others (or "fate") select for him. He does not have the strength of character to refuse the wishes of others or to get out while he still can. This climaxes in the final scene of the film where he makes a conscious choice to do something truly despicable and by the end of the film, all of his promise is gone.

The thing is, too few people want to make the argument that Michael controls his own actions, but the truth is, he does. After one bad choice, Michael continues to make bad choices, but they are his choices. As a result, when he strikes out in a direction that is problematic or takes his character in a disappointing direction, he owns those mistakes.

The Godfather has a pretty immense cast of characters and they rotate throughout the film and come up or are referenced with such frequency that it might help to have a map. And while the casting of The Godfather is exceptional in that it uses some truly amazing talents, it is problematic in that some of the roles are cast far too closely to one another. So, for example, James Caan (Sonny) and Giani Russo (Carlo) have some resemblance; I stepped out for a moment and returned during a scene where Carlo is beating Connie and it took me a moment to realize it wasn't Sonny. Even Simonetta Stefanelli (Apollonia) looks like a younger, more tanned version of Diane Keaton. But for the essential roles, the casting is wonderful and Robert Duvall, Al Pacino and Marlon Brando are all amazing. Duval plays Tom Hagen and he is respectably smart in the role, embodying a lawyer quite well.

It surprised me to realize how few works I've seen Marlon Brando in before The Godfather. For all of the films I've seen, I've only seen Marlon Brando in The Score and On The Waterfront (reviewed here!). The Godfather is his comeback role and the one that defines him for pretty much anyone born after 1975 or who is not a fan of older movies. Brando mumbles his way through the film as the powerful Vito Corleone, easily establishing himself as one of the most memorable cinematic characters of all time. He has a dignity and strength of presence on screen that never dissipates. In fact, when Vito retires, he manages to change his entire body language and it works.

Similarly, Al Pacino is wonderful as Michael. For all of the problems with the character, Pacino is amazing as Michael. Distinctly different from his role in Glengarry Glen Ross (reviewed here!), Pacino starts the film with Michael as a likable guy who is just trying to avoid becoming like his parents. In those scenes, he is wonderfully casual, he's just a guy and seeing him smile and relax makes him seem like the most unlikely character to go down such a dark path. Pacino is electric as he slowly changes his whole demeanor to become more methodical and cold as the film goes on.

On DVD, The Godfather is packed with bonus features. There is an impressive commentary track that is very informative. In addition, there is an entire disc filled with featurettes on the translation of the novel into the film, the filming of The Godfather, its place in cinematic history and more. As well, there are the theatrical trailers for the movie and extensive interviews with the cast and crew on the effect of the film. Truly this is one of the most impressive DVD sets for a classic film.

In fact, it is just enough to bring up a film that has lousy characters to the status where I can enthusiastically recommend it. The Godfather is close to perfect, but as far as DVD special editions go, it is hard to ask for more.

[As a winner of the Best Picture Oscar, this film is part of W.L.'s Best Picture Project, available here! Please check it out!]

9.5/10

For other film reviews, please be sure to visit my index page on the subject by clicking here!

© 2011, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.


| | |

Get Smart: Summer Blockbuster Season Gets Fun And Funny!

The Good: Surprisingly well constructed, Funny, Well-acted, Engaging
The Bad: Some of the humor falls flat and obvious, Not a huge character film.
The Basics: Get Smart is a flat-out fun movie that is enjoyable, surprisingly clever at parts and laugh-out-loud funny in others, making it worthwhile.


Lately, I've taken a notebook with me to the theaters to watch movies so I remember things better. Unlike DVDs, which I rewatch and pause and fast forward and the like, in theaters, I concentrate and make notes. I was honestly not anticipating Get Smart living up to the amusing potential of the previews because I found I had more notes on a pretty extensive rant about how the previews began. Yes, I was prepared to rant at some length about how I, as a United States Citizen and taxpayer should not have to be subjected to a commercial for the National Guard - which, as a taxpayer, I paid to have made (against my will, in case anyone from the Congressional Appropriations committees are reading this) - featuring a band whose c.d.s I'd not buy (Three Doors Down, not my favorite and their jingoistic "Citizen Soldiers" which played for the commercial did not sell me on them), and be forced to pay to watch it! Yes, I've got some pretty righteous points on this one and after the huge disappointment of The Love Guru I was prepared to waste much of my review space with said rant.

The thing is, Get Smart was so good that I stopped taking notes. Seriously. Get Smart lured me in with its preview before Iron Man (reviewed here!) and the truth is, I haven't enjoyed a film this summer this much since Iron Man. Get Smart is funny and entertaining and surprisingly, it is well constructed in a way one would not usually think of from a comedic action-adventure film.

It is also worth noting that I've never seen an episode of Get Smart. This review will make no comparisons between the current film incarnation and the original television series. Other reviewers might have that knowledge and experience; this review is solely for the current film. It's a movie that works and truth be told, if it becomes a franchise, that might not be the worst thing in the world (assuming they all were this good).

Maxwell Smart is an analyst for CONTROL, a U.S. superspy organization that for all intents and purposes appears shuttered since the collapse of Soviet Communism. CONTROL's arch-nemesis, KAOS, appears to be as alive and well as CONTROL actually is and the villainous Siegfried is acquiring yellow cake uranium for KAOS to distribute to unstable dictatorships around the world. When Max manages to pass his test to become a numbered Agent, he finds himself disappointed by the Chief, who needs him for his meticulous reporting ability and efficiency.

Shortly after Max is disappointed, a bloodbath ensues at CONTROL headquarters and it is hit by agents of KAOS. Max, Agent 99, and Agent 23 liberate the survivors, who include the Chief, 91, Larabee, and the technical wizards Bruce and Lloyd. Establishing a new control center from their safe house, the Chief orders the only two agents who have not been compromised into the field: Agent 99 - who just had extensive plastic surgery - and Max, as Agent 86. 86 and 99 track Siegfried and KAOS in an attempt to find the uranium and the agent who arranged the hit on CONTROL. In the process, they develop a friendship and escape escalatingly dangerous situations.

Get Smart reunites actors Steve Carell and Alan Arkin, who appeared together in Little Miss Sunshine. Carell plays Maxwell Smart with his trademark deadpan, but he manages to keep the performance as an actual performance. There is rarely a hint of his holier-than-thou irony that he infused to make his reporter persona on The Daily Show seem real and satirical. Carell plays Smart as a well-actualized character who has mannerisms that are unique to the actual character.

As a result, Carell establishes Max as an incredibly intelligent, thorough and engaged analyst. In short, Max is a fully believable special agent working for a secret government project that would be used to find and eliminate terrorists and other threats to the United States. He is has the ability to remember vast amounts of information and he there is evidence he has great insight into codes, psychology and using gadgets.

Paired with Agent 99, Agent 86 finds his technical knowledge blends well with 99's field experience. 99 is efficient, physically able and knows her way around a dance floor, high heels, and a firearm.

Get Smart works so well because it manages to blend telling a serious story with dialogue that is rich in double entendres. There is great physical humor as characters like the massive Agent 23 pounds a coworker with a stapler only to be told by the Chief that that is not the kind of people they are. The humor is very consistent and there is a lot for adults to enjoy. Indeed, this is the first time in a long time I found myself laughing out loud at a movie ("I'm suddenly feeling very sexually threatened"), even more than the other people in the theater. This is very rare for me; comedies usually suffer when I watch them because as someone who watches a lot of movies, it takes a lot to surprise and thrill me. Humor, being based largely on surprise, becomes very predictable to me. But in Get Smart, there are lines that were outright funny that managed to surprise even a seasoned cinephile, the most notable of which involves a swordfish. In a movie rich with deadpans that Carell delivers, physical comedy performed by Dwayne Johnson, it is the more subtle Alan Arkin who gets the best line.

In fact, the only real problem with Get Smart is when it diverges from the specific humor of this world to play on the more typical and obvious conceits of PG-13 comedies. To wit, the moment there is a flashback involving Carell in a fat suit, the viewer is pulled out of the movie. The typical fat person joke is challenged later on by a scene opened by the use of mocking a fat woman, who dances with 86 and yet holds her own with him. The thing is, analyzing the scene becomes a stretch of logic; in order for it to truly redeem the humor of the earlier scene, the dance scene can't be funny in a way that mocks fat people, which . . . it does not manage to do. The scene works as "Fat Person Pride" only in the last moments when Agent 86 dances with her and she is a magnificent dancer and she is able to give the finger to the skinny girls who had been mocking her. Two fat jokes, a pretty standard gay joke, and the use of a pretty lousy fat suit pull the viewer out of Get Smart.

And some of the jokes just seem to go a little far with the repetition. The mini-crossbow scene, for example, is just too much.

The only other serious problem with this movie is that it has elements that are timely that would have worked better unseen. References to the Vice President as a dismissive controlling demagogue and the President being portrayed as an ignoramus work remarkably well for today's audiences. The problem is, they work much better - especially the Vice President's new pacemaker remark - only today and would have been better as barbs with the characters kept off-screen. Instead, the Bush-Cheney references are muted by the actual appearances of the President and Vice President characters.

These may seem like nitpicky things, but they are enough to rob the movie of enough merit to keep it from a seven of ten in my usual rating system.

What works, even if the characters are not impressively developed, are the casting and the acting. Get Smart features appearances by Terence Stamp, Dwayne Johnson (known more commonly as the wrestler "The Rock"), Masi Oka and Nate Torrence. Also present and notable is Ken Davitian, who was the sidekick producer in Borat. Here he plays Siegfried's lackey and he's good in the role, even if it is not that meaty. As well, there is a recognizable cameo by Bill Murray and some that are no doubt associated with the original Get Smart series.

At the time I saw this, this was only the second film I had seen featuring Anne Hathaway. Hathaway, in addition to being astonishingly good looking in a very classy way, is articulate and has a great physical presence in Get Smart. Hathaway plays Agent 99 and when she needs to, she emotes beautifully and presents the hints of fragility within her character. And the rest of the time, she has a cold, efficient facade that makes her a believable - if young - agent. Hathaway is great as 99. Sigh.

But much of the film hinges on Steve Carell. Actually, it hinges on how Carell and Hathaway act together and they have some real chemistry. Carell is able to infuse wit into a character who could be very dull and dry as an analyst and genius. Instead, from the moment Hathaway appears on screen with Carell, the film becomes about revealing the very human side of Max and Carell plays it out perfectly.

And in writing that, it brings me full circle to what made Get Smart such a fun and worthwhile movie. This is an exceptionally well-constructed movie. In his initial briefing for CONTROL, Max makes the point that everyone working for CONTROL and KAOS is, at the end of the day, human. This seems like a throwaway line, but it is the line the entire movie hinges on, not just a few convenient plot twists. As a result, the level of character that is more subtle than any other is the journey whereby Max and Agent 99 realize that they are more human than Agents and this is what will make Get Smart worth seeing more than once.

As it is, it's certainly worthwhile summer fare and I cannot imagine that when it is released on DVD this would not be a fun addition to anyone's collection. On DVD, Get Smart is indeed fun. It comes with a few featurettes on the making of the movie, including a fun one with Steve Carell in Moscow (or on a soundstage). There is no commentary track, but there is a decent gag reel and an advertisement for the straight-to-DVD sequel.

For works featuring Anne Hathaway, please check out my reviews of:
Anne Hathaway For Wonder Woman!
Love And Other Drugs
Family Guy Presents: It's A Trap!
Alice In Wonderland
Valentine's Day
Twelfth Night Soundtrack
Bride Wars
Rachel Getting Married
Passengers
Hoodwinked!
The Princess Diaries

7/10

For other movie reviews, please be sure to visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2008 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Parody Of A Perfect Film, Something, Something, Something, Dark Side Is No The Empire Strikes Back!

The Good: Funny, Moments of clever, Great DVD/Blu-Ray bonus features!
The Bad: A lot of the humor falls flatter than in "Blue Harvest."
The Basics: Something, Something, Something, Dark Side is a parody of The Empire Strikes Back which is entertaining, but not quite as funny as the first Family Guy Star Wars parody.


Last year, abruptly, fans who had been watching Family Guy learned about a little Christmas gift from the franchise: the second Star Wars parody! While the television release of the parody of The Empire Strikes Back, entitled Something, Something, Something, Dark Side (fans know what that's from!), was scheduled for May as that season's finale, fans were able to buy it early! Yes, three days before Christmas last year, Something, Something, Something, Dark Side was released.

And it's good. But it's no Blue Harvest. I write this with some irony because while many fans of science fiction love A New Hope (the first Star Wars film in theaters), I've always been partial to The Empire Strikes Back (click here for that review!), the Family Guy parodies have gone the other way. The other irony is this: Seth MacFarlane and his team seem less committed to making this episode funny than they are to simply remaking The Empire Strikes Back with Family Guy characters. Even so, there is some decent humor in Something, Something, Something, Dark Side and it will please fans of both Family Guy and the Star Wars Trilogy.

While watching the new Aaron Sorkin television show, the power goes out in the Griffin house and after Peter tells the story of Black Snake Moan, he begins to tell the story of The Empire Strikes Back. Following a witty comment on how Fox has made bad calls in the past, Luke Skywalker and the Rebels find themselves on Hoth where Han is preparing to leave when Luke Skywalker is attacked by a Cookie Monster and left for dead. Rescued by Han, Luke recovers right before the Empire arrives and wipes out the Rebels there.

Fleeing into space, Han and Leia take refuge in an asteroid field, before the Imperial forces drive them out (of Meg!). They make a trip to Bespin, unaware that Darth Vader's bounty hunter Boba Fett has arrived and is waiting to trap them! Meanwhile, Luke trains with the movie-trivia guru Yoda who teaches him about the Force, until he sees his family in peril and leaves Dagobah to try to rescue them. This leads to a climactic battle between Luke and Darth Vader!

Something, Something, Something, Dark Side is another fun romp through the Star Wars galaxy which is somewhat muted in its humor. Unlike the thrill of Blue Harvest where there was some excitement about which characters in Family Guy will impersonate which Star Wars character, Something, Something, Something, Dark Side is more a retelling of The Empire Strikes Back. The fifty-four minute film is designed to appeal to fans of Family Guy and it is a bit more subtle than Blue Harvest. So, for example, Cookie Monster as the Wampa creature on Hoth is not a bad choice, but is a very obscure callback to one of the flashbacks in Family Guy. Similarly, Don Knots appearing as a "Don Don" (Tauntaun) and the use of "Phony" guy are more obscure than even James Woods making a cameo as an Imperial officer.

There is also less humor on the overall Trilogy in Something, Something, Something, Dark Side. So, for example, the resolution to the film is called out (leading to a clever Back To The Future parody) and there is a detail about Lando's wardrobe which is referenced. But there is a greater use of general humor in the Star Wars setting - commenting on electrical wiring on the frozen planet of Hoth, one of the AT-ATs wearing sandals, and a Darth Vader fart joke - than in Blue Harvest. This might actually make it more accessible to a wider audience than just Family Guy fans.

But it is the lack of humor which makes it more appropriate for just fans of Star Wars. During, for example, the invasion of Hoth, there is a full minute without any jokes as the Rebels are attacked and everyone flees. Star Wars fans are likely to appreciate this as a necessary evil based upon the source material, but those looking for laughs will not find this to be as nonstop funny as Blue Harvest.

That said, the animation is exceptional. When tripped, one of the AT-ATs does a hilarious callback to Peter's recurring gag of him falling, clutching his knee and groaning. And another AT-AT does a great callback to a cutaway where Brian had worms. The backgrounds are exceptionally detailed and the production value of the episode makes viewers feel like they are getting their money's worth. However, it is worth noting (what I suspected all along) that Family Guy has no real benefit in HD over standard DVD. Having seen this on Blu-Ray three times now, there is no quality difference between what I see in the HD televised episodes and the Blu-Ray quality.

As a result, only the die-hard fans will want this on Blu-Ray for the Deluxe edition. Yes, I am heavily advising that unless one wants the collectible Something, Something, Something, Dark Side lunchbox and extra large t-shirt that come in the deluxe edition, they purchase the DVD version instead of the Blu-Ray version of this work (the vast number of DVDs sold in the past ten years makes it highly probable that all Blu-Ray players will be backward compatible to DVD for at least the next fifty years). ALL of the programming features on the DVD and Blu-Ray discs are identical, so there is no loss of bonus goodies by buying on DVD as opposed to the standard Blu-Ray version. Only the Blu-Ray appears to be available in the exclusive deluxe edition. The Deluxe Edition with the lunchbox and t-shirt is not quite as deluxe as the Blue Harvest deluxe edition which also included a bunch of trading cards, a production journal and other non-programming swag.

That said, on DVD and Blu-Ray, Something, Something, Something, Dark Side includes two commentary tracks, an audio commentary and a text commentary which pops up throughout the episode (like "Pop-up Video") when the feature is activated. The audio commentary is only worth it for the comments from David A. Goodman and the fact that MacFarlane reveals that while there is a Return Of The Jedi Family Guy episode coming soon, there will be no prequels. He attributes this to the idea that the prequels are already animated, but I think it's laziness based upon the content of Something, Something, Something, Dark Side. This version of a Star Wars parody would force Family Guy to use obscure characters in big roles - Carl as Yoda, Carter as Palpatine and the Chicken as Jango/Boba Fett - but what MacFarlane seems to be forgetting is that Lucas ran the same risks of alienating his audience when he made the Prequel Trilogy. So, the idea of a Jillian as Padme interacting with Stewie Anakin and a younger Herbert, makes the possibility of the Prequel Trilogy more exciting, rather than less. The ambitious nature of the backgrounds and character designs in Something, Something, Something, Dark Side illustrate that this is not out of the depth of creative ability of the Family Guy staff.

Also on the DVD and Blu-Ray is a featurette on how the Something, Something, Something, Dark Side poster/DVD cover was made and table readings of the first two acts of Something, Something, Something, Dark Side and a scene of We Have A Bad Feeling About This (the Return Of The Jedi spoof). Fortunately, the We Have A Bad Feeling About This (the name of which has subsequently been changed to It's A Trap!) table read has only about five minutes of footage, so it does not mortgage the next episode by revealing too much in advance. Unfortunately, Seth MacFarlane seems entirely oblivious at the table read that only he is consistently laughing. Gags fall flat and while the gag they read through with Han Solo having O.C.D. will undoubtedly work as a visual gag, other verbal gags that the script had garnered no laughs from the table, nor me. If the Animatic feature on Something, Something, Something, Dark Side is any indication, there is the potential these problems will be changed before the final installment is released.

That said, this is a very pure parody and it is fun, but not quite as funny as Blue Harvest was. Still, there is enough in it that is funny to make Family Guy and Star Wars fans feel like they've gotten their money's worth!

For other animated works by Seth MacFarlane, please check out my reviews of:
Seth MacFarlane's Cavalcade Of Cartoon Comedy
Family Guy Volume 8
Family Guy Presents Partial Terms Of Endearment

7/10

For other television program reviews, please check out my index page!

© 2010, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.



| | |