Summer Blockbuster Season Starts With The Hilarious Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2

The Good: Very funny, Good effects, Engaging character moments, Good performances
The Bad: Less distinct music, Imbalance in serving the characters
The Basics: Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 does a decent job of tying up some big loose ends in the far corner of the Marvel Cinematic Universe with style and humor!


There are few elements of the Marvel Cinematic Universe that have aged as well as Guardians Of The Galaxy (reviewed here!). Comedies, especially, tend to have a shorter half-life than dramatic films, but Guardians Of The Galaxy has held up much better than a number of the Marvel Cinematic Universe origin stories and sequels. Arguably, the reason Guardians Of The Galaxy has endured so well over the years (and many, many viewings) is because it found the right balance of humor and action and paired both with an incredible and memorable soundtrack. So, of course, enthusiasm for Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 would be very high, perhaps to an unrealistic extent.

But Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 actually does an excellent job of creating an exceptional sequel and successor to the original film. Instead of having to work to assemble a new super hero (or anti-hero) team and build an entire franchise within the Marvel Cinematic Universe from scratch, Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 is allowed to play within the established corner that was created in the first film. And the pretty amazing aspect of Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 is that the entire film is built on an allusion in the first film and a throwaway joke at the end of the film's teaser/first act.

Peter Quill, Gamora, Drax, and Rocket have been contracted by the leader of the genetically-perfect race living on the planet cluster Sovereign to thwart an impending attack from an interdimensional creature. The quartet works to take down the giant alien when it appears, while keeping Baby Groot safe from the conflict. Victorious against the creature, the Guardians go to Ayesha's throne room to receive their payment; Nebula, who was caught by the Sovereign security forces trying to steal the planet's rare and valuable batteries. Ayesha recognizes something in Quill, but in the process insults him and the team. Either because of the insult or simply on a whim of his own, Rocket steals the batteries from Sovereign while Gamora stows the new prisoner.

As the Guardians head to deliver Nebula to collect the bounty on her head, Yondu finds himself excommunicated by the Ravagers for breaking the Ravager code of dealing in children. Ayesha does not take long to realize that the Guardians have taken the batteries and she sets the Sovereign drone fleet against Quill's ship. The Guardians are facing certain death until they are rescued by a previously-unknown alien who destroys the Sovereign fleet right before the ship crash lands. With the ship out of commission on a distant world, the crew is met by Ego and Mantis. Ego tells Peter he is his father and invites him back to his world. Peter, Gamora, and Drax accompany Ego and Mantis back to Ego's idyllic world, leaving behind the angry Rocket and Nebula to fix the ship. Left vulnerable, Rocket falls prey to Yondu and his Ravagers who have been hired by Ayesha to recover the batteries and the Guardians. But Rocket and Yondu soon find themselves at the mercy of the Ravagers and Nebula with only Baby Groot to save them. And on Ego's World, Peter Quill learns his father's origins, his own powers and the destiny his father has for him. While Quill embraces his father's vision, Gamora and Drax learn from Mantis that Ego is not all he appears and they discover a threat to all life in the galaxy!

First off, one of the big aspects that separates the first Guardians Of The Galaxy from Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 is the music. The first film had incredibly distinct music that resonated and became inextricably tied with the scenes it was in. For all of the apparent popularity of "Awesome Mixtape Volume #2," the film's music is hardly as iconic or memorable as the works from the first movie. In fact, after watching the film, I could only recall two of the songs used in the movie and - unlike the first movie - my mind resonated with the thought that director James Gunn absolutely missed the mark on one of the musical cues. There is a big, key scene in Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 that features a bit of violence and one of the film's utterly unmemorable songs that would have been made absolutely hilarious and entirely memorable if James Gunn had used "It's Raining Men" in the scene. Seriously, there's arguably no bigger musical misstep in the film than that missed opportunity - and when viewing Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2, with that bug in your ear, it is virtually impossible not to watch the scene and imagine it with "It's Raining Men," laugh at how funny that would have been and then grimace at how the film's big moment there loses something by the musical piece that was worked in.

The only other major flaw in Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 - outside, perhaps, wasting any time in the film to seed a potential future incarnation of the Guardians Of The Galaxy - is that the story has so many characters to service that in giving each one adequate screentime and story points, the film has an unfortunately erratic flow. Gamora draws the short straw for the major characters, largely because Zoe Saldana's best character moments are reflections of Karen Gillan's Nebula's character growth. Gamora acts as a sidekick to Star-Lord before reacting to Nebula's surprisingly deep realization that her hatred for Gamora is very reasonable. Gamora's bits are peppered throughout Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 without her actually getting a very strong narrative of her own (though she does have some big action moments and, ultimately, some decent character moments).

Similarly, Drax begins Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 with an impressive number of the film's funniest lines before the movie gets packed with a slew of other character and plot threads. Drax has almost no presence in the film's middle and he comes back late in the film with retreads of some of his earlier jokes. Rocket is presented as taking the brunt of everyone's ire and lashing out obnoxiously, but his practical joke motivates almost all of the film's action. Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 devotes a significant amount of time to developing Yondu and utilizing Rocket as a foil for a whole "buddy comedy" subplot within the film. To be fair, Michael Rooker (Yondu) plays off the virtual Rocket amazingly well and Bradley Cooper's deliveries for Rocket have an impressive emotional range from snarky to hurt to goading in the funniest way imaginable.

Chris Pratt does well as Peter Quill, starting authoritative and moving fast into reasonably shaken by Ayesha's remarks about his heritage. Pratt has been thrust into the role of action hero and he rises to the occasion with good physical performances and - in some key moments as Peter learns about his father - acting through his facial expressions alone. Beyond that, Pratt plays to his comedic strengths is familiar deliveries of deadpan and sarcastic lines that made Quill memorable from the first film.

Newcomer to the Guardians team, Mantis, is an intriguing addition who is ultimately integral to Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2. Whether the character has enduring value beyond the specific story told in Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 remains to be seen, but she is utilized well in this film. And, despite being given lines that are variants of her one trick pony, Pom Klementieff delivers them with credible, wide-eyed innocence that plays as very funny. Klementieff and Dave Bautista have great on-screen chemistry as a rare successful comedic pairing of dual straightmen.

While Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 has a somewhat erratic plot execution as the various threads work to come together in a fairly predictable "stop the super-villain" way, the result is surprisingly satisfying. Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 finds the right balance between action-adventure violence and humor. Seeing the film in the theater, both my wife and I were shocked by the number of children being brought to Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2; it is not a soft PG-13. Between hilarious lines - "I have famously large turds!" - complex character motivations (are children truly likely to understand the motivation of the Celestial?!), a disproportionately large spider, and a fair amount of action violence, Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 is not intended for kids.

But Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 is funny, has clever moments and the characters are motivated by surprisingly deep psychological factors. And for a film opening Summer Blockbuster Season - which is historically known for being vacuous and spectacle-based - it is hard to ask for more than what Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 delivers.

For other science fiction comedies, please check out my reviews of:
Ant-Man
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
Men In Black

8.5/10

For other elements of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, please check out my Marvel Cinematic Universe Review Index Page for a complete relative listing!

© 2017 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Famous Animated Characters Exposed! I Know That Voice Is A Middling Documentary!

The Good: Cool idea, Well-directed
The Bad: Very basic idea beaten to death, Not complicated or in-depth
The Basics: I Know That Voice is a basic documentary that is like a facebook of voice actors, but little more than that.


Ever since I got involved with the woman who quickly became my wife, I have watched a lot of animated works. My wife loves Disney movies, Invader Zim and many other animated works that we’ve watched over and over and over again. So, she was very interested in the documentary I Know That Voice when we learned about it. I Know That Voice is an interesting concept for a documentary, but it is not one that lends to a very complicated analysis.

I Know That Voice is a concept that takes half the film before it actually hits. For the first half of the film, I Know That Voice - which is a documentary intended to explore the nature of the voiceover industry – is simply a collection of almost random comments from various performers who have recognizable roles in animated works, where the voice actors are put in front of the camera. The first half of I Know That Voice is made almost entirely unnecessary thanks to the existence and success of the IMDB. The Internet Movie Database features complete biographies of actors past and present and virtually every actor’s page on the site has pictures of the actor, along with their entire resume. So, the first half of I Know That Voice trades on a novelty that no longer exists for the die-hard fans who might love this documentary; they have already looked into their favorite voice actors and seen who the actors are behind the voices of their beloved characters.

All of that changes around the fifty minute mark on I Know That Voice. At that point, director Lawrence Shapiro shifts the movie to what the documentary originally promised; a discussion about the animation/voiceover industry. In the latter half of the movie, I Know That Voice finally starts to discuss the process of getting jobs in the Industry, what the industry is like and how it is changing.

To his credit, Shapiro gets an amazing cast of voiceover actors to discuss the industry in I Know That Voice. Instead of simply seeing the human faces behind the voices that people know and love, the pretty impressive collection of voice actors do open up about their experiences in the industry. The film meanders, though, between the exposing the actors to the audience, then to a general discussion of the process actors have in defining their characters’ voices, to getting the jobs to discussing ComicCon . . . I Know That Voice is less structured or revelatory than it is entertaining.

I Know That Voice is worth a watch for anyone who loves animation, but it’s a tough sell for rewatching or recommending because it is not conceptually complicated or well-structured. At best, it is a mildly-informative vocal facebook for the most important voice actors working in animation today.

For other documentaries, please check out my reviews of:
Done The Impossible: The Fans' Tale Of "Firefly" And "Serenity"
PoliWood
Craigslist Joe

5/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my Film Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2014 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

If The Avengers Were Made As A Science Fiction Comedy: Guardians Of The Galaxy!

The Good: Good humor, Decent soundtrack, Good plot development
The Bad: Rather obvious (and rushed) character development, Nothing exceptional in terms of performances, Distracting 3-D in several points
The Basics: Guardians Of The Galaxy further expands the Marvel Cinematic Universe while amusing viewers . . . without resonating the same way as the prior installments.


Guardians Of The Galaxy has a number of reasonable comparisons to the giant Marvel film The Avengers (reviewed here!), not just because both are set within the same storytelling universe. The Marvel Cinematic Universe was established in Phase One (reviewed here!) as a surprisingly grounded place: Tony Stark needed time to train within his suit of armor, Steve Rogers was a unique warrior set in place as the only stopgap against an army powered by an extraterrestrial device and for the bulk of his time on Earth, Thor was without his godlike powers. For all of the supernatural and comic book conceits that exist in science fiction and comic book movies, the Marvel Cinematic Universe did not employ most of them (save in the Hulk movies, which is arguably why they failed). In other words, most of the Marvel Cinematic Universe strove to generally recreate the real world and then add slight twists to it and explore how “real people” and the “real world” would react to those twists.

Until the climax of The Avengers, when an interstellar alien force invades, and outside the climactic event of Thor: The Dark World (reviewed here!), the Marvel Cinematic Universe has worked hard to keep a realist sensibility to itself. Taking an entirely different tact is the new addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Guardians Of The Galaxy. Guardians Of The Galaxy, as the name implies, is set (mostly) in the farthest reaches of the galaxy (where a sizable population still looks mostly human) and explores the larger consequences of the artifacts that the other films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe have been introducing. Those artifacts, like the Tesseract and the seed in the Thor sequel, are given an explicit name in Guardians Of The Galaxy: they are Infinity Stones (which Marvel geeks knew years ago). Guardians Of The Galaxy introduces another one and reveals what their purpose is . . . along with the motivation Thanos had for hunting the Tesseract in The Avengers. More than just in its outlandish setting, Guardians Of The Galaxy transforms the Marvel Cinematic Universe into a much less grounded place. Guardians Of The Galaxy feels like exactly what it is: a film based on a comic book.

That is not to say Guardians Of The Galaxy is not good. It is. Guardians Of The Galaxy is a fun and funny science fiction comedy, continuing the tradition of the niche genre like Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (reviewed here!) or Men In Black (reviewed here!). Unlike the former, Guardians Of The Galaxy lacks a sense of theme and universal resonance and treads more toward entertainment than enlightenment.

Opening in 1988, Peter Quill’s mother dies and the young boy flees into the night where he is promptly abducted by aliens. Twenty-six years later, Quill is scavenging on a dead world where he recovers an orb from the ruins. Moments after he gets the item he was sent for, he squares off against Korath and his forces. Evading them and retreating to his ship, the Milano, Quill decides to betray his employer and sell the recovered Orb on his own. While Quill heads to Xandar to sell the Orb, the villainous alien Ronan dispatches Gamora (who volunteers) to recover it. When the potential buyer for the Orb freaks out – after learning Ronan is after the artifact – Quill is attacked by Gamora, a sentient genetically-modified, cybernetically enhanced raccoon named Rocket and his humanoid plant companion Groot, and the Nova police force.

The quartet is imprisoned on a remote world, the Kyln, where virtually everyone wants to kill Gamora, especially Drax The Destroyer. Quill manages to save Gamora’s life and refocuses Drax on finding and killing Ronin. The quintet stages an incredible escape from the Kyln by working together, with the four aliens actually waiting for Quill when he goes back for his prized mix tape. Hunted by Ronan, Quill’s regular employer Yondu Udonta and the police force from Nova, Quill and his compatriots become determined to keep the Orb from falling into the hands of Ronan and Thanos when Ronan reveals that the Orb contains an Infinity Stone with virtually unlimited power to destroy. Working together, Quill, Gamora, Drax, Rocket and Groot must protect the citizens of Xandar from the genocidal plans of Ronan and Thanos.

In many ways, Guardians Of The Galaxy is a very typical science fiction film. In fact, its reliance upon humor makes it fun, but also as formulaic as virtually every comedy to grace the big screen . . . ever. Guardians Of The Galaxy transforms the Marvel Cinematic Universe simply by realigning the physics of the galaxy to allow virtually every comic book conceit as opposed to conforming to realistic physics. That makes the fight scenes in Guardians Of The Galaxy extraordinarily dynamic and animated, especially when Groot and Rocket are involved. They hop around without clear boundaries on their abilities (Groot, for example, is entirely inscrutable and only reveals the extent of his powers and abilities when they become relevant and necessary).

Peter Quill is a decent anti-hero; he does the right thing when it suits him, but he is a Han Solo-esque bounty hunter who also strangles small animals to use them as microphones when the mood takes him. In his quest to get respect in the galactic underground as Star Lord, Quill does not actually distinguish himself in any strong or meaningful way. Less the function of his personality or values, Quill manages to survive Guardians Of The Galaxy simply by biology. Heavily alluded to in the film’s very first scene, Peter Quill is not simply a human, but his heritage is only a minor subplot in the larger film.

Far more of a component of Guardians Of The Galaxy is establishing and then defying the premises of the universe and characters Peter Quill is a part of. In this regard, Guardians Of The Galaxy is painfully formulaic. Elements that are established in an obvious way include Groot’s limited vocabulary (he, we are told, only speaks the three words “I am Groot,” though Rocket seems able to interpret what he means by it as the film goes on), Gamora’s absolute refusal to dance, and the obviously seeded gift Quill receives from his dying mother that he has not opened over the lapsed twenty-six years. For sure, viewers need a film with character development to make any movie worth watching, but Guardians Of The Galaxy is like watching a checklist of the elements that are used to establish the characters getting checked off. Virtually everything established about a character, up to and including Drax’s lifelong struggle with metaphor, is defied by the film’s end. Guardians Of The Galaxy is obviously intended to build a franchise, but the way the film ends, there is almost nowhere to go for the characters that will not force the writers to completely redefine them. This would be analogous to Bruce Banner learning to control his ability to transform in Hulk (such an ability would have left the character with nothing compelling for The Incredible Hulk or The Avengers). So, in some ways, Guardians Of The Galaxy undoes its own attempt to build a franchise by making a solid (if formulaic) story.

In a similar fashion, Guardians Of The Galaxy is nothing extraordinary on the acting front. John C. Reilly is (mostly) goofy as the Nova Police Officer Dey and Glenn Close is appropriately authoritative as Nova Prime, the leader of Xandar. Djimon Hounsou plays the villainous Korath with virtually the same presence that he has played many other adversaries over the years. The film’s lead, Chris Pratt, plays Quill as an everyman and he does so with a similarly goofy quality (but without the slouch) to his character from Parks And Recreation. Even Zoe Saldana (who plays Gamora) is used in such a familiar way that director James Gunn doesn’t even bother hiding the allusion to her playing Uhura by throwing her in a miniskirt at the movie’s end.

Guardians Of The Galaxy is charming and worth watching, but it is hardly a great and enduring film the way some other, recent super hero films have managed to be.

For other works in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, please check out my reviews of:
Ant-Man
Captain America: Civil War
Doctor Strange
Iron Fist - Season 1
"What If . . . " - Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D.

7/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my Film Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2014 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Family Guy Volume 10 Continues The Disappointment!

The Good: Some amusing allusions, Great animation
The Bad: Not terribly funny, Bland plots, Dull sense of characters, Only one truly funny joke the entire boxed set.
The Basics: Family Guy Volume 10 is a collection of fourteen episodes that continue to illustrate just how far the series has fallen.


I was, for the longest time, a fan of Family Guy; I was thrilled when it was brought back on the air and I kept watching it even after the last of their Star Wars parodies fell flat. I never truly got into American Dad! and The Cleveland Show struck out even faster for me, but I generally enjoyed Family Guy until the point where it seemed like there was some form of directive from Seth MacFarlane that each episode would contain at least one incest joke and that wore thin ridiculously fast for me.

Family Guy Volume 10 comes after that point and the show has truly jumped the shark. More than in any prior DVD set, I found myself not laughing and the stories to be truly derivative. In fact, episodes in this set like “Baby, You Knock Me Out” seem like they are taken directly from The Simpsons. There was truly only one sequence in the three-disc set that led me to laugh; a (mostly) live-action sequence wherein Bill Maher calls out Brian on being a fraud.

In this boxed set of Family Guy, episodes tell the story of Peter, Joe and Quagmire’s escalating Halloween pranks on one another and Meg and Chris’s first big high school party (where they grossly end up making out together). Lois channels her anger into foxy boxing and Brian writes a self-help book that makes him a best-selling author, at the cost of the respect of the people he actually cares about. This is the set that includes the stories of Stewie and Brian’s journey to the North Pole to meet Santa and Peter needing a kidney transplant, which threatens to be the end of Brian.

Joyce Kinney’s backstory is explored when she outs Lois’s past . . . as a one-time porn actress! Peter and Brian join Alcoholics Anonymous, but get all the drunks in Quaohog off the wagon. Chris makes a new friend, in the form of an old man who Herbert believes is an old Nazi he was once captured by. Meg develops an unhealthy infatuation with Joe, Chris and Meg swap places with Peter and Lois and discover being adults is easier for them than being kids, and Quagmire and Brian war with one another over their lost loves: Cheryl Tiegs and Jillian. Lois’s sister gets engaged to Mayor Adam West, Bertram returns to kill Stewie (inadvertently destroying the universe), and Lois has to try to stop Bonnie from having an affair in France while Peter home schools Meg and Chris.

The jokes in Family Guy hit few and far between. After gross-out jokes like Meg and Chris making out in the closet at a party and then being proud about it, the show only effectively hits with live-action gags like Brian appearing on Bill Maher and Lois and Bonnie appearing as Muppet-style puppets for a sequence.

As a largely episodic show, there are few episodes that have real consequences past the episode that is currently on. There remain some ramifications from the prior set’s murder mystery episode – Joyce Kinney’s presence and the absence of Jillian’s husband and Muriel Goldman – but there is no real character development. Peter home schooling the kids seems familiar to loyal viewers because Lois taught them in a prior season, yet that is not referenced in that episode.

The animation in this season is exceptional; the CG animation looks great on HD televisions. On DVD, there are numerous commentary tracks, but (like the episodes) none of them really rock the way some of the earlier ones did. Instead, this is a boxed set that illustrates that the shark has been firmly jumped with Family Guy and it is hard to remain a fan at this point.

For other animated works by Seth MacFarlane, please check out my reviews of:
Family Guy Volume 1
Family Guy Volume 2
Family Guy Presents Stewie Griffin: The Untold Story
Family Guy: Live In Vegas
Family Guy Volume 3
Family Guy Volume 4
Family Guy Volume 5
Family Guy Presents Blue Harvest
Family Guy Volume 6
Family Guy Volume 7
Family Guy Presents Something, Something, Something Dark Side
Seth MacFarlane's Cavalcade Of Cartoon Comedy
Family Guy Volume 8
Family Guy Presents Partial Terms Of Endearment
Family Guy Presents It's A Trap!
Family Guy Volume 9

2/10

For other television shows, please visit my Television Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2013 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Family Guy Volume 9 Is A Flat-Out Disappointment.

The Good: Animation quality, DVD bonus features
The Bad: Largely not funny, No genuine character development, “Jokes” that are predictable and just gross.
The Basics: In a predictable sequence of dull plots fleshed out with at least one incest joke per episode, Family Guy Volume 9 rapidly distinguishes itself as the worst compilation of the series.


It used to be that I was right on top of Family Guy DVD releases. It’s not like now I am not on top of them because I am unable to be, either; it is because I have lost interest. I caught the episodes from the last two DVD sets in their first run on FOX, loathed them, and decided not to waste my effort on considering them. However, on Black Friday last year, my wife and I were out and the first set I had not yet added to our permanent library or reviewed was on sale for less than $10. I figured that was about the right price for me and she picked it up for the holidays. It took us until last night to get through the fourteen episodes contained therein.

Family Guy Volume 9 makes it clear that the show has jumped the shark and overstayed its welcome. Gone is the clever, edgy, often satirical lampooning of politics, pop culture and history. Instead, we get an incest joke per episode and plots that feel like they have been done before (if not on Family Guy, then on The Simpsons). More than ever before, Volume 9 of Family Guy makes the viewer feel like Family Guy is unimaginatively treading where The Simpsons (which it, admittedly, exceptionally tired now itself!) had already gone several time and in order to keep the illusion of originality up, the writers go for jokes that aren’t funny, aren’t original, and are homogenously rape or incest-related. Note to the Family Guy writers: it’s not funny. The rape and incest jokes were not funny the first dozen times you told the joke; why did you think it would suddenly become humorous the twenty-fourth through thirty-eighth times?!

So, what is in Family Guy Volume 9? This three-disc set contains fourteen episodes – one of which is double-long. This is the collection that features Peter taking over Carter Pewterschmidt’s business when his father-in-law falls into a coma, Brian tries writing a magazine article and discovers Meg is dating a convict, which results in Meg going to prison and coming out hardened and evil. Peter pretends to be psychic, is sexually harassed by his boss at the brewery, and goes in search of the origin to a particularly raunchy joke. In the meantime, Brian dates Quagmire’s post-op transgendered father, the residents of Quahog fall victim to a killer in a mansion and have to solve a whodunit, and Carter’s marriage is threatened when he has an affair, which Peter takes advantage of to blackmail him.

Outside the death of one peripheral character in “And Then There Were Fewer,” which leads to a new peripheral character filling their same role, there is no real character development in Volume 9 of Family Guy. Meg goes to prison, comes out and sodomizes Peter with a luffah on a stick in the shower, but is back to being the butt of everyone’s jokes by the end of the episode. Similarly, Stewie and Brian do not really grow or develop and Lois and Chris have remarkably little air time.

On the plus side, the animation in the episodes in this volume is incredible. Sets and many of the situations are now handled via computer animation, so there are smoother transitions, bolder designs and the show looks good. Similarly, on DVD, there are wonderful extras, like commentary tracks, deleted scenes, and multiple featurettes on each disc.

Unfortunately, the bonus features do not bring up the quality of the source material and Family Guy Volume 9 is a pretty stunning waste of time and money. Even at less than $10 on sale, it boils down to: this is a series of episodes that have not stepped beyond the bounds of good taste, they have simply stopped making us laugh. We wish, despite the many hours of enjoyment they used to bring us, they would simply stop.

For other animated works by Seth MacFarlane, please check out my reviews of:
Family Guy Volume 1
Family Guy Volume 2
Family Guy Presents Stewie Griffin: The Untold Story
Family Guy: Live In Vegas
Family Guy Volume 3
Family Guy Volume 4
Family Guy Volume 5
Family Guy Presents Blue Harvest
Family Guy Volume 6
Family Guy Volume 7
Family Guy Presents Something, Something, Something Dark Side
Seth MacFarlane's Cavalcade Of Cartoon Comedy
Family Guy Volume 8
Family Guy Presents Partial Terms Of Endearment
Family Guy Presents It's A Trap!

3/10

For other television shows, please visit my Television Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2013 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Not Even Worth The Free Library Borrowing To Watch: America’s Sweethearts Flops.

The Good: A Somewhat decent cast, moments of Walken
The Bad: Not funny, Unlikable characters, Predictable, Low denominator humor
The Basics: In a film devoid of any characters who are empathetic and a plot that seems like it was written by a third grade student, the viewer has nothing to enjoy from America’s Sweethearts.


When was the last time you watched a romantic comedy that actually surprised you? One where you couldn't call the ending in the first two minutes of the film and where the characters were actually interesting and likable? How about one that was actually funny and that stood up over multiple viewings? If you're looking for a movie that meets all of those criteria . . .

. . . keep looking, it's not America’s Sweethearts.

The premise of this dullard is that a famous movie couple has broken up. Gwen and Eddie were box office magic when they worked together and their last film is ready to be released, but it needs the two of them to work the press to sell it. So, their agents work tirelessly to arrange a press junket where it will appear that the two are still together. The problems? Eddie has had a complete, crippling nervous breakdown and Gwen is a hellish diva.

Right off the bat, the only moment of this film I enjoyed was Christopher Walken's character. When Hal plays the movie he filmed that the press junket is supposed to be for, I laughed. That was once in 102 minutes. That's not enough.

What went wrong? The script is horrible. It's not funny. It resorts to stupid jokes like a dog nuzzling into a man's crotch (and the man is Billy Crystal). It resorts to stupid fat jokes in reference to Kiki, Gwen's sister and agent, and it tops it all off with stupid attempts to make Eddie's mental state seem funny.

All of the meetings between Gwen and Eddie at the resort are obvious, contrived and insult the intelligence of the viewers. That Eddie can't see Kiki's obvious love for him is ridiculous and the way all of the characters behave is appalling and insipid. This movie reads like a tabloid, without the emotional resonance of celebrities one actually cares about.

Catherine Zeta-Jones portrays Gwen as a hellion without any redeeming qualities such that it makes it impossible to see why the nice guy Eddie, much less anyone, would be attracted to her. John Cusack never makes Eddie anything special. He plays the wounded man much like his other parts, like Jonathan in Serendipity. Put Eddie and Jonathan in the same room and I couldn't tell them apart at this point.

America’s Sweethearts continues the trend of leaving me baffled as to how Julia Roberts continues to keep getting work. Indeed, like Cusak, there is nothing distinctive that she does as Kiki to differentiate from some of her other roles.

In short, America’s Sweethearts is a contrived piece that works under the idea that if you put two feuding, unlike people together in a situation where they have to be on their best behavior, hilarity will ensue. It does not. If you want a good romantic comedy that puts two different people together and actually works, try When Harry Met Sally.

For other works featuring Stanley Tucci, be sure to check out my reviews of:
The Hunger Games
Captain America: The First Avenger
Easy A
Swing Vote
The Devil Wears Prada
The Terminal

2/10

For other film reviews, please visit my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing of all the films I have reviewed!

© 2012, 2004 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Seth Green Is All Worth Watching In Without A Paddle.

The Good: Seth Green is funny, One decent line
The Bad: Predictable plot, character arcs and humor.
The Basics: With a few decent lines, but hampered by a great sense of predictability and silly physical comedy, Without A Paddle flops for me.


My wife has taken to jerking me around by playing with me about movies (a very serious subject for me, not so much for her!). When we merged our DVD collection, there was a pretty stark difference between what she brought to the relationship and what I had there. My shelf was filled with dramas and television series'. Her collection was filled with comedies, many of which I am predisposed against whatwith their young casts and emphasis on slapstick. With few exceptions, they involve drug use, dick and fart jokes that are either not funny, have been done before or are just gross, or utilize humor that pokes fun at different ethnicities, sexualities or body types in ways that hinge on shock value or offense and thereby hold up poorly upon multiple viewings.

My wife has taken a perverse delight in sitting me down in front of movies from her shelf and having me watch them, while she watches me squirm. The thing is, for some of them, she will engage me in conversation afterward to ask me how I intend to review said film only to reveal that she is not a fan of the movie and has been waiting for me to view and review the video to get rid of the DVD. Gotta love her sense of humor. One of the shelfwarmers she recently subjected me to was Without A Paddle, a movie she had picked up on a friend's advice without viewing beforehand only to discover she was not a fan of it. That said, our mutual love of Seth Green makes the movie bearable and it has a few good lines, but largely it is predictable in both character and plot elements and lacking in enduring humor.

Billy, Tom, Jerry and Dan are the best of friends growing up and they go through many adventures as children, graduate high school together and go their separate ways after college. Ten years after graduation, Dan is a doctor, Jerry is experiencing growing pains in his relationship with Angie, Tom is a screw-up who is too busy bullshitting his way through life to get anywhere and Billy abruptly dies. Billy's funeral brings the other three back together from their disparate locations and while reminiscing in their old treehouse, they discover their old lock box with a treasure map to D.B. Cooper's fortune and are surprised to find it was recently updated by Billy.

After a brief discussion, the three men pack up and head out into the Oregon wilderness in the attempt to find D.B. Cooper's loot as a memorial to Billy. As Dan faces his fears about everything in the world, Jerry pines for Angie and Tom goads the other two into continuing down the river. But an encounter with a bear, a pair of rednecks growing pot and two hippie chicks living in a massive redwood pull the friends apart and force them to ask themselves and one another what is truly important to them.

Sadly, Without A Paddle's lessons are obvious from the initial characterizations. Dan needs to learn to stop letting fear rule him, Jerry needs to commit to his girlfriend and Tom needs to stop lying to everyone about everything and stop gambling (if he can even be trusted with that explanation for his misery). So, the movie sets out to teach the characters what the viewers already know. Unfortunately, the methods are hardly the most impressive, obvious or reasonable. For example, Dan learns to overcome his fears, in part, by an encounter with a bear where he is nearly killed. This is a strange place to learn to not fear the outdoors in that the fear of being mauled by a bear is quite real to poor Dr. Mott.

Similarly, nothing earthshattering occurs to Jerry during the adventure to suddenly wake him up to the realization that the woman he loves is the woman he loves. In fact, throughout the movie, he looks eagerly at the only other women to pop up and outside Dan yelling at him to commit, there is nothing he shouldn't already know - given that he was part of this quartet of incredibly close and loyal friends - from the outset to change his mind.

As far as the humor goes, Without A Paddle is a real miss in many ways. In fact, the most funny joke in the piece is delivered by a character who is only on the screen for less than two minutes ("Thanks for breaking glass where my kids play"). The rest of the humor is mostly in the form of the bear mauling Dan, the hicks chasing the trio and . . . well, even in that there is not much humor at all. Instead, the movie plods along as Dan, Tom and Jerry outrun two angry guys with big guns who seem determined to shoot or gut them. The humor of the rednecks wears thin quickly and the fact that the viewer can pretty much tell where the movie is headed makes it go at a pace that is interminably slow.

This brings us to the acting. Burt Reynolds is wasted in his cameo and Ethan Suplee and Abraham Benrubi - who play the rednecks Elwood and Dennis - quickly wear thin without any sense of their comic timing being utilized in their performances. Benrubi especially is underused and given little chance to show off his acting chops as he is forced to dumbly chase the three leads.

For the leads, the movie definitely is appealing to the current twentysomething crowd, but it only insults their intelligence. Matthew Lillard, who was impressively cast in the dismal Scooby-Doo (reviewed here!) illustrates no particular talent as Jerry and, in fact, did not deliver a single line that garnered a laugh. As well, Dax Shepard, who I recognized from the show Parenthood (season one is reviewed here!) - which seems to appeal to the same niche - is trading more on celebrity than talent. In fact, I've no idea how he became a celebrity, but in Without A Paddle, his deliveries are obvious, flat and devoid of any spark that would give them a sense of enduring humor.

Seth Green is given just enough to work with to salvage his place in the movie. As Dan, Green asks the questions that the viewers are most likely to ask, like "why are we doing this?!" Green is able to balance his abilities as a serious actor with his comic timing to give a performance that is one of the better straightman performances in recent years. Still, it is not his funniest work and it certainly lacks the emotional gravitas of some of his better characters, like Oz.

On DVD, Without A Paddle has a commentary track that is more funny in parts than the actual movie as the cast comments on the stuntwork they did. There is an MTV featurette on the making of the movie, as well as deleted scenes (which do not make the movie any funnier or more enduring) and the movie trailer. These are not bad, especially for this type of movie, but they do not negate the overall underwhelming source material.

Without A Paddle is not as funny as the previews might make it seem and it is easy to pass on for the viewing or the buy.

For other works with Seth Green, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Family Guy Presents: It’s A Trap!
Old Dogs
Robot Chicken - Season 1
Seth MacFarlane's Cavalcade Of Cartoon Comedy
Sex Drive
Buffy The Vampire Slayer

3.5/10

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

© 2012, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

THE Surprise Film Of The Year: I Laugh At Sex Drive! Ack!

The Good: Legitimately funny, Moments of character, Moments of acting
The Bad: Utterly predictable plot, Overbearing soundtrack, Rampant homophobia
The Basics: Sad to say, Sex Drive is fun with its dumb, raunchy humor, even with its homophobia and obviousness.


It seems every year since American Pie, viewers are to be barraged with a "lose your virginity" comedy. It's a tired plot and I have managed (largely) to avoid this whole sub-genre. However, I managed to get into a screening of the new film Sex Drive and I decided it was time to actually . . . sigh, pop my cherry on this genre of movies.

Going in to Sex Drive, I had remarkably low expectations and consideration for the genre as a whole. After all, as near as I can tell, there are only two ways a "lose your virginity" comedy can end: the protagonist(s) either lose their virginity or they do not (I imagine in the latter case, they might learn a very valuable lesson about the value of love, sex and life). It's a pretty simple premise, it seems like the resolution would be pretty simple. From the previews, to Sex Drive, it appeared that this one would be mixing the "lose your virginity" comedy with a road trip movie.

Ian is a high school senior who is a nice guy and a virgin. Having developed an on-line relationship with Ms. Tasty, Ian is troubled by how his best friend in the world, Felicia, seems to be hung up on his other friend, Lance. Lance, for his part, is a smarmy womanizer who is fiercely loyal to Ian, so much so that he ignores Felicia's crush on him. Ian's older brother, Rex, is a homophobic jerk who loves his car more than anything and pretty much despises everyone. After a night of on-line chat and a wet dream, Ian becomes enchanted with the idea of meeting Ms. Tasty in person, an idea that seems to appeal to her as well.

So, Ian, Lance and Felicia steal Rex's 1967 GTO and begin to drive to Knoxville, Tennessee. Along the way, the car breaks down, exposing Lance to another man's wife, the trio to a sleazebag, and ultimately to a rescue by the Amish of all people. As the road trip continues, Ian and Felicia begin to realize they might be more than just friends.

First, I was on the fence about this movie for a long time while watching it. In the first ten minutes, the words "fag," "faggot" or some derivation of anti-gay slur is thrown out at least eight times, mostly from Rex. "Gay" is used as a pejorative and it is especially foul the way it is expressed. It's enough to make the audience (save the thirteen year-olds or Neanderthals who sneak in to Sex Drive) cringe. But more than that, it's not funny. Writers Sean Anders and John Morris try to undo the damage in the last few minutes of the film, but by that point, it's more of a pathetic afterthought likely put in to appease GLAAD (or just to make somewhat more subtle gay jokes).

The problem I ran into in watching Sex Drive was that the longer it went on, the more I found myself laughing. The humor is dumb and crude, usually involving slapstick - which I generally despise - or humor based on how the body works (erection humor, dick and fart jokes, etc.), but it is surprisingly well executed. I found myself laughing. A lot. Kudos to the writers and director Sean Anders for that; Sex Drive is surprisingly funny. And, actually, the best joke in the movie (I thought) is actually a line, not a physical gag. Strangely, I was the only one in the theater to laugh at it, too (and I laughed especially loud at it, which is why I recall it). Lance, having hooked up with a young Amish woman during their festival of debauchery, tells Mary, "You've got my number and you'll call me, right?" I thought that was funny because, of course, the Amish don't use phones and Mary's deadpan, "No I won't" was timed for that to be a joke and it is well delivered (I was surrounded by an audience that was more into the physical comedy, I suppose). At the end of the day, though, Sex Drive is laugh-out-loud funny, and I went into the film with low expectations, probably biased some against it. And I laughed . . . a lot.

What Sex Drive isn't is original. The plot is so hackneyed and obvious that it could have been written by a high school student or generated by a computer. This is a ridiculously simple plot; a challenge of "get here by x time and we'll have sex!" Combined with the completely predictable character arcs of Ian and Felicia (even Lance's arc was pretty obvious going in), this is a terribly obvious movie on virtually all fronts. There are no surprises coming from character or plot. Even the climax scene when Ian and Ms. Tasty finally meet did not seem terribly surprising to me.

But the movie felt remarkably familiar from the very beginning and that is because it feels like a cheap rip-off of a Kevin Smith movie. And in many ways, this movie follows the same basic structure of Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back with a noticeable difference in the lack of allusions to other works. Sex Drive comes with its own version of Jay and Silent Bob even, in the form of Andy and Randy. In some ways, though, they are like two Jays who have their own banter between them. It lent for a remarkably familiar feel in the characters as well as the plot.

What left me more impressed than anything were moments of acting throughout the movie. Amanda Crew, Josh Zuckerman, and Clark Duke play off one another well. For three young leads, they play the parts surprisingly well. Crew, for example, is able to perfectly embody the body language of a teenage girl with all of the slouching and eye rolling. And she does it well. Seth Green, who electrified the third season of Buffy The Vampire Slayer (reviewed here!) is memorable as Ezekial. The clips from the previews are only his first appearance in the film and he holds his own with his unique brand of understated sarcasm.

But it is James Marsden who cuts his acting chops on Sex Drive. Yes, I'm talking about James Marsden the white-bread-bland actor who was excruciatingly dull on Ally McBeal and in X-Men (reviewed here!). Marsden plays Rex and he is physically active, vehemently spewing hate dialogue with his homophobic slurs and he is utterly convincing doing it. Marsden is anything but bland and the level of discomfort I felt watching him rip into everyone (especially Zuckerman's Ian) was intense. He is impressive; it is Marsden like we've never seen him before.

My last thought on Sex Drive, though, was that it has a very overbearing soundtrack with lots of music from young people. There is a cameo by the band Fall-Out Boy (thank you closing credits sequence!) and the music is rather loud and intrusive throughout the movie.

Still, it's not enough to sink Sex Drive in my book and no one is more surprised I would like this film than I am. It is fun. It is dumb fun, but it's fun and even with its faults, there is enough to recommend it.

For other sex farce movies, be sure to check out my reviews of:
She’s Out Of My League
Fired Up!
No Strings Attached

6/10

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

© 2011, 2009, 2008 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Buffy The Vampire Slayer Graduates Into Something Pretty Fantastic With "Graduation Day Parts 1 & 2!"

The Good: Funny, Quirky, Action-packed, Decent character development, Good acting
The Bad: Fairly predictable plot
The Basics: In a near-perfect two-parter, Buffy takes on the Mayor after being forced to take out Faith, the rogue Slayer, on her "Graduation Day!"


Buffy The Vampire Slayer is a show that did a pretty remarkable job at reinventing itself as needed over the course of the seven years it was on. Some might wonder why a show would need to restart itself so frequently, but to those of us who watched it, this is less of a mystery and more of a selling point. To that end, there are a few milestones that were pretty much essential times when the series needed to reboot. The first major one was at the beginning of the fourth season. The reason for that reboot was quite simple: in the third season finale, "Graduation Day, Parts 1 and 2" Buffy Summers and her friends graduate from high school.

For sure, the show could have tried to keep the Scooby gang Seniors forever (anyone looking closely in the first season will catch that Buffy is listed as a Senior on one of the computer monitors, despite being reduced to a sophomore for the television series), but wisely, Joss Whedon and the other show runners kept the group evolving, growing and growing up. As a result, "Graduation Day" represents the closing of the high school chapter of Buffy The Vampire Slayer and for those who like the richness of the metaphor in Buffy The Vampire Slayer, this might make for the most sensible ending point of the series.

"Graduation Day, Part 1" finds the Mayor of Sunnydale in a state of virtual invincibility as the day of his Ascension nears. At Graduation, he will become something different, something horrible and in preparation for that, he has made himself impervious to any attacks from Buffy and her gang. Defended by his own Slayer, Faith, the Mayor seems poised to destroy Sunnydale and transform into something that could threaten the entire world. Recalling all that they know about the Mayor and the Ascension, Buffy and Angel - with Anya's help - stumble on part of the key to defeating the Mayor and Buffy commits to taking out Faith.

As Faith and Buffy fight for their lives against one another, Giles and Xander make preparations for graduation and a fallback for the impending Ascension.

In "Graduation Day, Part 2," a deeply wounded Buffy gets the last of what she needs to defeat the Mayor from the comatose Faith. Armed with the information and a plan, Buffy makes her fellow students into an army to survive the legions of vampires the Mayor has called in to protect him in Faith's absence during his Ascension.

In some ways, "Graduation Day" is a predictable Buffy The Vampire Slayer season finale. The Big Bad of the season is rearing its ugly head and it is about time for Buffy to put an end to it. This series does a pretty decent job of building up the evil force for an entire year, but then, by the end of the season finale, one way or another, the creature is dispatched. In this fashion, for all of its greatness and decency as a television program, "Graduation Day, Parts 1 and 2" are not terribly surprising. The viewer has a pretty decent idea that the Mayor will be defeated and Sunnydale will go on.

But, in true Joss Whedon fashion, the mystery in this two-parter is: at what price will Buffy and her gang succeed? Angel has already - in prior episodes - alluded to his intent to leave Sunnydale and Buffy behind following the Ascension. In reality, Angel is off to star in his own spin-off and that's a fine excuse for him to make the plot a little more complicated. But the true gem of the price of Buffy's success comes in a three second (if that) throwaway shot that will change everything. Yes, one of the supplemental characters is taken out in the finale in a way that makes them a much more interesting character when they recur from this point forth!

And, in truth, what makes "Graduation Day" so interesting is the character work. After a large part of the season at each other's throats, Buffy and Faith come to a head with their conflict, just as the romance between Buffy and Angel is more or less resolved as well. The thing here is that Buffy has always been an archetype for good and Faith has been far more chaotic. In the second part of "Graduation Day," Buffy and Faith share a special link and it is in that meeting that Faith is given the opportunity to show her true colors.

As well, the Mayor has always been a more intriguing villain than most because he is nowhere near as monolithic as most of the Big Bads in the Buffy universe. Instead, he has been quirky, often expressing a disgust at germs. He is known to be at least as old as Sunnydale itself and he has maintained a special relationship with Faith that provides the young woman with the closest to a father figure that she has ever had. Following Buffy dispatching Faith, the Mayor proves his character by illustrating that he still has a love for Faith and that is a clever and decent trait that makes him possibly the most interesting Big Bad to come along.

"Graduation Day's" gimmick hinges - yet again - on the second season episode "Halloween" and it does not spoil anything to say that Xander's legendary Army training from that episode is part of what allows Buffy to achieve her victory. It's a card that keeps getting played and this might well be one of the last times that it is played reasonably and well, in a fashion that the viewer thinks is plausible. The clever aspect of it is that while Xander's character is enhanced with Army training from a spell gone wrong, none of his peers have had such luck. As a result, the carnage that comes up in the climactic battle after the sun is blotted out is realistic and deadly to many of its participants.

In fact, arguably the only character that does not have any real growth in the two-parter is Principal Snyder. But, he has his moment and having met Armin Shimerman at various conventions, he is quite pleased with the resolution to Snyder's arc.

"Graduation Day" works as well as it does because of three truly outstanding performances (and some fun CGI work). The actors who truly move this two-parter are Harry Groener, Eliza Dushku, and Sarah Michelle Gellar. Groener plays the Mayor and as Richard Wilkins III prepares to Ascend, Groener is given the difficult task of making the Mayor seem quirky and confident without being seen as ridiculous or just offbeat for the sake of offbeat. He does this in large part through his body language. He manages to keep a very serious posture, no matter what comes out of his mouth. And when the Mayor discovers Faith has been wounded, it is Groener's eyes that one needs to be watching because he sells the plot point that's coming through the performance there.

Similarly, Eliza Dushku makes the viewer believe that Faith is not all bad. Dushku takes a pretty simple script - especially for the second part - and layers her character with real depth involving her ability to emote with her voice. Indeed, after the big battle scenes, it is Dushku's quiet performance as a wounded Faith that makes her worth watching. And the scenes she shares with Groener are precious.

But it is Sarah Michelle Gellar who is charged with selling the reality of the extreme situations that Buffy is put into in this two parter. Gellar takes the role seriously and she makes Buffy into a serious character, transforming her finally from a pawn or tool into a true leader. Gellar infuses Buffy with serious confidence in this episode, especially in the climax of it, that makes the episode work wonderfully.

This is one of the essential episodes (or two episodes) of Buffy The Vampire Slayer and it is one that will appeal to anyone who likes a good action-adventure story. It will be appreciated much more by those who have seen - at least - the rest of the third season as the entire season has been building to this. It's fun either way and it does manage to be something more as well.

[Knowing that VHS is essentially a dead medium, it's worth looking into Buffy The Vampire Slayer - The Complete Third Season on DVD, which is also a better economical choice than buying the VHS. Read my review of the graduation season here!
or the complete series is available here!
Thanks!]

"Graduation Day, Part 1" - 9.5/10
"Graduation Day, Part 2" - 10/10
VHS - 8.5/10

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

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

| | |

The Predictability Of "Enemies" Lessens The Edge Of "Earshot" For Buffy The Vampire Slayer.

The Good: Stories, Moments of character, Moments of acting.
The Bad: Times when the plot overwhelms character and acting aspects
The Basics: Despite how predictable and poorly-acted "Enemies" is, "Earshot" makes those who are not fans of Buffy The Vampire Slayer notice.


Buffy The Vampire Slayer is one of those television series' that when it was on, it seemed to be quite popular and powerful in the world of science fiction/fantasy fandom, but once it was off the air, it seems to have fallen hard in the collective unconsciousness. Conversely, it seems like certain seasons of Buffy are almost idealized while others are just forgotten. In fact, many fans of the show that I meet at conventions seem to hold the third season of Buffy The Vampire Slayer in such high regard that it is almost surprising to learn that they continued watching the series after that. While a perfect season of television is not necessarily made up of absolutely perfect episodes, it still has to hit the mark with consistent greatness.

With "Earshot," Buffy The Vampire Slayer fans who argue on behalf of the third season have quite the compelling case to make. Sadly, they often neglect "Enemies," which appears on a single tape with the superior episode. "Enemies" is overrated and in some ways a "necessary evil" plot that needed to be made, but could have been pulled off much better. Instead of being clever and compelling, "Enemies" simply advances the plot of the third season . . . ridiculously.

In fact, the only reason this VHS is ultimately recommended by me is that "Earshot" is just that good; it is so good it ought to be seen.

In "Enemies," Faith's transition to the Dark Side as the new henchman for the Mayor is complete and that pits Buffy and Faith on opposite sides of the Sunnydale law. While Faith is wooed by the Mayor, who takes on a rather fatherly role in her life, Buffy and her comrades try to figure out how to stop the Ascension from occurring. Faith is given her latest assignment by the Mayor, which is to separate Buffy and Angel and to bring Angel over to their side. To make the Mayor's plan work, Faith robs Angel of his soul and sets him to tormenting Buffy.

In "Earshot," Buffy starts by taking out a demon that she does not recognize, in the process getting some of its blood on her. Soon, though, she develops a side effect to the fluid; the ability to hear the thoughts of her peers. Sadly, the ability soon becomes a curse as she hears the thoughts of everyone around her all of the time, leaving her disoriented and in tremendous pain. As Giles and the gang work to cure her of her ailment, she overhears one of her peers planning a shooting spree.

That both of these episodes are put on a single tape is almost an insult to fans and collectors. "Enemies" is a remarkably standard and bland plot. Villain works to overcome the heroes and tries to drive a wedge between the two most powerful heroes. Oh, wow. That's not new and while the viewer can understand Joss Whedon and the Buffy team going there in order to keep the overall arc of the series realistic (obviously one of Buffy's strengths is her relationship with Angel and to weaken that bond would certainly, quite reasonably, fracture the power of the heroine), fans of genre works want something better than how this is executed. On the plot front, "Enemies" is predictable, droll and possibly one of the least original or clever episodes the series ever produced.

Furthermore, it falls down completely on the character and especially the acting fronts. As written, the lines are not terrible, though it is disappointing to see a character who is characterized as so streetsmart as Faith treated like an imbecile who has never seen "Defeat The New Villain Plot #2" on television. Faith is treated as remarkably naive in "Enemies" and it is more than unfortunate, it seriously undermines the credibility of her character. It is astonishing how little credit the writers gave her for her character's intelligence in this episode. Before this, Faith might be reckless, in "Enemies," she is just stupid.

The only thing worse than the treatment of Faith's character in "Enemies" is the acting. Eliza Dushku plays along as Faith just fine, the problem is who she is acting opposite. Anyone who has seen Buffy The Vampire Slayer before will know the ending by the acting of Sarah Michelle Gellar and David Boreanaz. Boreanaz gives a terrible performance that gives away the supposed surprise of the episode to anyone who has ever seen Boreanaz act as Angelus on prior episodes. He is bland as the soulless Angelus in this episode and it informs the end in one of the earliest scenes.

But Sarah Michelle Gellar's performance is unforgivably bad in "Enemies." Her performance is dull and lacks any sense of subtlety, nuance or even genuine emotion. Instead, the episode illustrates how stiff she can be. This makes both Buffy a weaker character and Faith dumb for not recognizing how Buffy is trying to swindle her.

In contrast, "Earshot" is a truly wonderful episode of Buffy The Vampire Slayer. Years ago, I was doing a convention and I had the opportunity to meet James Marsters (who plays Spike on Buffy). While getting his autograph, he was especially talkative and when I told him I had never seen an episode of Buffy The Vampire Slayer (which was true at the time) he began to give me a lecture on why I should be watching it. He cited the show's audaciousness and specifically referenced "Enemies" as being groundbreaking and more daring than anything on television at the time. While some of that is hyperbole, Marsters was right; "Earshot" is intelligent and surprising, everything that Buffy The Vampire Slayer could be consistently good at . . . if it were consistent.

As far as the storyline goes, "Earshot" is an intriguing combination of the obvious science fiction conceit (the mind reading plot) and intelligent social commentary (the student shooter plot). When Jonathan takes to the clocktower, the series becomes darker and a commentary on the state of our times and the struggles of those growing up in today's world. The episode was delayed in its airing because of the Columbine shooting and on VHS it is refreshing to see it restored.

Moreover, "Earshot" becomes something smarter than one might expect from Buffy The Vampire Slayer because it surprises the viewer with the ultimate resolution. Instead of being exactly what one might expect of a drama with a teenager with a gun, it becomes something that is surprising and in the final moments, it reminds the viewer that television can still be audacious and realistic while making commentary on the problems we suffer in the United States in this age.

What makes the episode work is the character of Jonathan and the acting of Sarah Michelle Gellar and Danny Strong. Jonathan is a recurring character in Buffy The Vampire Slayer who is essentially a geek and a loser who tries to get noticed in Sunnydale. He is almost universally mocked and he is even lower on the school's ladder of popularity than Xander. In "Earshot," it becomes utterly believable that he would get a gun and potentially menace the school. But even better is how his loser character ultimately defines him and in the final moments he reinforces the integrity of the concept of his character.

In large part, "Earshot" works in its resolution because Danny Strong is a consistent actor who makes the improbable believable. Strong is usually goofy as Jonathan and in "Earshot" he plays the character as quiet and disturbing. Strong infuses a quiet and very desperate quality into his performance of Jonathan in this episode and it is masterful.

But it is Sarah Michelle Gellar who carries "Earshot." She is funny as Buffy realizes her new power and Gellar has the ability to play giddy well, something she is not usually able to do. As the character is imposed upon by her gift more and more, Gellar makes her more desperate and harmed. She develops the ability to play Buffy as sleepless and deeply hurt. She is wonderful and her performance is dark. She is exceptional and her performance makes the idea of "Earshot" seem new.

On the balance, this VHS is a tough sell. "Earshot" is as brilliant as "Enemies" is droll and this makes it hard to recommend. Ultimately, I fell toward recommending it because the message of "Earshot" is too smart to neglect.

[Knowing that VHS is essentially a dead medium, it's worth looking into Buffy The Vampire Slayer - The Complete Third Season on DVD, which is also a better economical choice than buying the VHS. Read my review of the graduation season here!
or the complete series is available here!
Thanks!]

"Enemies" - 4/10
"Earshot" - 6.5/10
VHS - 5/10

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

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

| | |