Too Soon: David Tennant's Doctor Who Falls Prey To "The End Of Time, Part Two!"

The Good: Decent backstory for The Master, Good sense of morality, Decent performances
The Bad: Some wonky science, Moments where the Gallifreyans exhibit vast superhuman powers.
The Basics: "The End Of Time Part Two" concluded David Tennant's time as The Doctor with a story that oscillates between epic and ridiculous!


The more television I watch and review, the more I find that it is a true rarity for two-part episodes to be truly balanced. More often than not, the first part - which sets up a great conflict - is noticeably superior to the second part. There are a few exceptions to that rule, but the payoff to the well-established conflict is seldom as good as the set-up. As the tenure of David Tennant as The Doctor came to a close, Russell T. Davis prepared for the Doctor's departure with the two-part episode "The End Of Time." "The End Of Time, Part 1" (reviewed here!) was an erratic set-up episode, which made it very easy for "The End Of Time, Part 2" to become one of the rare exceptions where the second part was superior to the first.

"The End Of Time, Part 1" put a ridiculous number of elements into play: The Master was resurrected with super powers, aliens were working on Earth to salvage a mass medical treatment device, Wilfred Mott was seeing a mysterious woman, and the Ood had foreseen both The Doctor's death and the end of all time. By the end of the first part, all of the biggest conceits had been played as the Time Lords were revealed and the populace of Earth was transformed into The Master.

Opening on Gallifrey, its crystal sphere shattered, on the last day of the Time Lords, the council of Time Lords convenes and fears that The Doctor will end the Time War with the mutual destruction of the Daleks and Time Lords. They determine that The Doctor is on Earth and on Earth, The Doctor is a captive of The Master. But when Wilfred gets a call from Donna, The Master is instantly suspicious; because everyone in the world has been transformed into an incarnation of The Master, he knows there should be no one who would be calling Mott. The Master sends some of his duplicates to confront Donna and when she starts to recall her time with The Doctor, Donna releases a burst of energy that incapacitates her would-be assailants. Aided by the aliens working on Earth and Wilfred, The Doctor and the non-Masters manage to escape to the aliens' ship in orbit.

To find The Master, the Time Lords engineer The Master's madness and send a white point star (a Gallifreyen diamond) to Earth to act as a homing beacon in time and space to him to try to break through the time lock in which they are trapped. When The Master activates the white point star, the charismatic leader of the Time Lords rallies Gallifrey to save the Time Lords. The Doctor, having repaired the alien ship, makes an attack run on The Master's headquarters. The Master attempts to shoot down The Doctor's ship while the Time Lords create a portal into his headquarters. The ensuing conflict puts The Doctor literally in the middle of The Master and the President of the Time Lords with the fate of Earth, Gallifrey and time itself in the balance!

"The End Of Time, Part 2" is notable for fleshing out the backstory of The Master remarkably well. The Master's insanity (at least in Russell T. Davies's tenure) came from his lifelong headache generated by hearing a beating of drums within his head. The source and meaning of that beating is made explicit in "The End Of Time, Part 2" and the whole bootstrap paradox of it is surprisingly well-executed. John Simm plays the craziness and the temporal technobabble well.

Wilfred Mott's character is further deepened in "The End Of Time, Part 2," which makes it all the more tragic how he was not used sufficiently before this point. Mott's history as a soldier is detailed and, on the advice of the mysterious woman, he takes up arms. Mott frames the predicament Earth is in as an "us vs. them" scenario where the life of the Master might have to be sacrificed in order to save the more than six billion people he has transformed. It is a rare thing in Doctor Who for The Doctor to be faced with an opposing philosophical perspective that he is forced to consider and holds weight with his own. Mott makes for an instantly compelling character for having that level of gravitas.

The Doctor is presented in "The End Of Time Part 2" as predictably and wonderfully moral. Forced to take a gun by Mott, the standoff that dominates the critical scene of "The End Of Time, Part 2" is very tense, but holds true to The Doctor's moral core. In that way, there is a refreshing quality to "The End Of Time Part 2;" the purpose of the episode is to create a big ending for The Doctor, but the character's appeal is not mortgaged to make that moment.

David Tennant is great as The Doctor in "The End Of Time, Part 2." While there are moments with Timothy Dalton (The President) and John Simm (The Master) that threaten to overshadow on the performance front, Tennant and Bernard Cribbins (Mott) show the most range in the episode. The quiet scenes where The Doctor and Mott simply talk with one another give Tennant and Cribbins the chance to create genuine emotional depth on screen and they are impressive. The two play off one another well and both performers play sadness amazingly well. Tennant's last big scene with Cribbins allows Tennant to channel Christopher Eccleston's final moments as The Doctor and the tie-in is subtle but played out perfectly by Tennant's performance.

"The End Of Time, Part 2" is quite a bit better than the first part, but it is far from flawless. The science of the episode is wonky at best. While I can live with the paradox that created The Master's insanity, the appearance of Gallifrey in orbit around Earth would have absolutely decimated Earth. Similarly, The Master's electrical hands should have made it impossible for The Doctor, Wilfred and the aliens to escape (after all, why wouldn't all of his duplicates be superpowered the way he is?!) and The President's magical gauntlet is not satisfactorily explained in-episode.

Despite that, the montage sequence caps off "The End Of Time, Part 2" is a lot of fun and acts as a wonderful reprise to the way "Journey's End" (reviewed here!) gave each of The Doctor's allies a chance to say good-bye. The climax of the episode is, as one might expect, emotional and David Tennant makes saying goodbye to his incarnation of The Doctor a truly sweet sorrow.

[Knowing that single episodes are an inefficient way to get episodes, it's worth looking into Doctor Who - The Complete Fourth Season on DVD or Blu-Ray, which is also a better economical choice than buying individual episodes. Read my review of the final season of David Tennant as The Doctor here!
Thanks!]

For other big finales, be sure to visit my reviews of:
"What You Leave Behind" - Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
"Gethsemane" - The X-Files
"Episode 29" - Twin Peaks

7/10

For other Doctor Who episode and movie reviews, please visit my Doctor Who Review Index Page!

© 2016 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

"The End Of Time, Part One" Returns The Master Wrong (And So Right!)

The Good: Good performances, Some good character moments, One or two neat twists
The Bad: Special effects are decidedly mixed, Fits poorly with the episode that preceded it, Ridiculous set-up for the return of the villain
The Basics: "The End Of Time, Part 1" sets up the big finale of David Tennant's tenure as The Doctor with mixed results.


In science fiction epics, there is the old, unfortunately accurate, adage that no one truly stays dead. Doctor Who is no exception. As David Tennant's reign as The Doctor wound down, a suitable end needed to be constructed for the character. That end began with the prophecy at the climax of "Planet Of The Dead" (reviewed here!) where The Doctor was told his death was imminent and that death would knock four times. To realize that, the two-part "The End Of Time" presented the story of the end of Tennant's Doctor with the return of The Master. For those keeping score, The Master was killed at the climax of "Last Of The Time Lords" (reviewed here!) by his human wife.

But, in true science fiction form, Doctor Who plays the resurrection conceit in "The End Of Time." Not insulting the viewer with using time travel or some "The Master wasn't really dead" ridiculousness, "The End Of Time" has a straightforward resurrection of The Master. The science behind The Master's return is completely wonky; it has the feel of magic and that, combined with The Ood suddenly being evolved in weird ways while The Doctor mindmelds with them, weakens some of the feeling of reality that usually grounds some of the more fantastic elements of Doctor Who. Saxon's attempt to stop the resurrection with information from "the secret books of Saxon" just seems ridiculous.

Opening with narration that implies that many people on Earth are having bad dreams as part of the end of the world, Wilfred Mott recalls the nightmares that many others have forgotten. He has a flash of The Master laughing and it leaves him unsettled. At a church, Mott is visited by a strange woman who tells him of the Legend Of The Blue Box, who implies that The Doctor is soon to return. The Doctor arrives on the Ood homeworld to visit Ood Sigma and learn about his impending death. There The Doctor realizes that the Ood's evolution has been accelerated and the Ood have been experiencing a collective nightmare, which leads him to believe something is not right in time and space. The Ood show The Doctor Lucy Saxon, imprisoned and alone, and people on Earth who might be interested in The Master.

On Earth, Christmastime 2009, a coven of women loyal to The Master use Lucy's DNA, The Master's ring and their own life forces to bring The Master back. While The Doctor makes his way back to Earth, Wilfred Mott organizes the senior citizens to try to find him. The Master, resurrected hungry, crazy, and with the apparent ability to fly, starts to kill people to try to gain power. Elsewhere, the wealthy Joshua Naismith activates a strange, alien machine. After an intimate conversation with Wilfred Mott, The Doctor tracks down The Master, who incapacitates him before he is captured by Naismith's forces. Naismith has resurrected The Master for his daughter, but soon finds he is unable to control the crazy Master.

"The End Of Time" makes Wilfred Mott into a full-fledged assistant to The Doctor in such a way that the viewer almost instantly feels they were robbed of The Doctor's next great Companion. That Mott and/or one of the Ood were not given the chance to be proper Companions for The Doctor and that he went through a period without any Companions is somewhat disappointing. "The End Of Time, Part 1" illustrates some of what could have been by showing how cool Mott and the Ood would have been as Companions. Wilfred oscillates between fun and horrified in "The End Of Time, Part 1," which makes him more interesting than some of the Companions were initially.

John Simm bursts right back into the role of The Master. Simm plays The Master as undeniably crazy and he is unsettling to watch, from his first scenes laughing to him beating the trash can at a construction site. The Master, in "The End Of Time, Part 1" is not a subtle being and Simm plays him as dangerous and insane quite well. The Master, in being resurrected, now has superpowers - he has lightning hands reminiscent of Emperor Palpatine. The sudden conceits surrounding The Master - his powers and his resurrection - make the episode feel like it is relying on something supernatural instead of scientific.

The superlative scene of "The End Of Time, Part 1" is not the big battle scene, but rather an emotional scene between The Doctor and Mott. The scene makes an oblique reference to the climax of "The Waters Of Mars" (reviewed here!), where The Doctor made a tragic mistake. The emotion of his epiphany and the tragedy of those events is muted by The Doctor's ridiculous time spent off between that episode and this one. The ridiculous entrance of The Doctor on the planet of the Ood does not pick up directly where that loss left off and so The Doctor breaking down with Mott is somewhat refreshing to see, even if it feels somewhat contrived getting him back to that point.

"The End Of Time, Part 1" marks the return of Donna Noble as well. Donna buys Wilfred a copy of Joshua Naismith's for Christmas, not quite knowing why. The idea that Donna still has some connection to The Doctor and The Ood is good and presented fairly subtly within the episode.

The special effect of The Master phasing is pretty cool. Unfortunately, his monstrous ability is balanced by some of the most fake looking skeletons ever seen on television.

Ultimately, "The End Of Time, Part 1" is a mediocre set-up episode that packs in a lot and has potential, but to play off all the conceits moves far too often into the ridiculous.

For other works with Timothy Dalton, please check out my reviews of:
The Tourist
Toy Story 3
Looney Tunes: Back In Action
License To Kill
The Living Daylights
The Lion In Winter

[Knowing that single episodes are an inefficient way to get episodes, it's worth looking into Doctor Who - The Complete Fourth Season on DVD or Blu-Ray, which is also a better economical choice than buying individual episodes. Read my review of the final season of David Tennant as The Doctor here!
Thanks!]

4/10

For other Doctor Who episode and movie reviews, please visit my Doctor Who Review Index Page!

© 2016 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

The Worst Of The Bond Films? License To Kill Gets My Vote!

The Good: Dares to push the character relationships farther . . .
The Bad: Terrible direction/editing, Horrible acting, Painfully dull plot, Ridiculous characters
The Basics: License To Kill is a James Bond film that goes nowhere . . . poorly.


As I near the end of my reviews of the James Bond film franchise, (Tomorrow Never Dies is now the only one I have not yet seen!), it is funny what excites me about the franchise now. At the outset of License To Kill, I suddenly found myself irrationally excited by seeing Everett McGill (from Twin Peaks, reviewed here!), Anthony Zerbe (from Star Trek: Insurrection, reviewed here!) and Benicio Del Toro! For a franchise that has done so much, that License Of Kill lacked a strong plot hook (as opposed to performers who I recognized from other works), it was unsurprising to me that it underperformed at the box office.

Unfortunately, given how straightforward and surprisingly linear License Of Kill is, the excitement for the film pretty much begins and ends with the performers in it. Sadly, the initial excitement of performers who appeared in License To Kill quickly dissipated based on the performances they gave. License To Kill is one of the most straightforward and least exciting Bond movies. License To Kill is hinged almost entirely on the premise that James Bond would risk everything for his occasional CIA ally and counterpart, Felix Leiter.

Opening with James Bond preparing to act as Best Man at Felix Leiter’s wedding, the CIA Agent gets sidetracked with assisting with a DEA bust. They capture drug lord Franz Sanchez and manage to make it to Leiter’s wedding on time. Sanchez successfully bribes a DEA agent to orchestrate his escape. The drug lord then captures Felix and has a shark bite off his leg! Bond allies with Leiter’s partner, Sharkey, until M arrives and tells Bond to leave Key West. Revoking Bond’s credentials and license to kill, James Bond strikes out on his own to avenge Leiter and stop Sanchez.

Bond rescues Leiter’s last contact who knew about Sanchez’s operation, Pam Bouvier. Together, Bond and Bouvier travel to Isthmus City, where Bond hunts Sanchez. Bond uses the millions of dollars that he stole from Sanchez during his escape to pay Bouvier to get him to Isthmus City and open a line of credit at the bank Sanchez owns. Q comes to Bond’s aid with tech that he uses to stop a transaction that would unite Sanchez’s operation with an Asian syndicate.

License To Kill is riddled with problems, not the least of which is how Felix Leiter and Bond are treated as best friends in the film. Bond is recast throughout the franchise and the implication has been that James Bond is an alias – as are M, Q, and Moneypenny. By the same logic of recasting, Felix Leiter is also an alias, used by the CIA. License To Kill seems to want to defy the idea that Bond is an alias, by referencing that Bond was once married. It can be blown off as this particular Bond’s backstory, but the implication is more for the idea that this Leitner was with the old Bond when his wife was killed and that they are the same person.

The kicker in License To Kill is that Bond is monolithic and dull (more from the writing than Timothy Dalton’s performance) and Carey Lowell’s Pam Bouvier – while she might be played as over-the-top in a few scenes – is far more interesting. Bouvier holds her own with Bond, not simply succumbing to his charm . . . which is good because Bond is less-than-charming in License To Kill.

License To Kill is notable, as well, for the terrible direction and editing by John Glen. Glen makes some terrible cuts (like a person who is thrown out of a plane and barely falls before the shot cuts to something else) and uses some remarkably stiff takes. The stunts are so obviously choreographed that they look entirely unreal and the chases and shooting scenes are so poorly put together that frequently people aren’t even aiming in the right direction to make the shots they do.

Timothy Dalton is fine playing Bond as shaken, but it is not the highlight of his career. In fact, all the notable actors who appeared in License To Kill that I liked give mediocre, at best, performances. License To Kill is just all-around bad and a disappointment for both James Bond fans and anyone who likes quality cinema.

For other works with Robert Davi, please visit my reviews of:
The Expendables 3
“Simon’s Choice” - VR.5

1/10

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

© 2015 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Back When There Was A U.S.S.R., James Bond Was Smarter In The Living Daylights!

The Good: Timothy Dalton’s performance, Most of the realism, Decent plot and villain
The Bad: Still utilizes a number of tired spy thriller conceits, Supporting actress problems.
The Basics: One of the better James Bond films, The Living Daylights finds Bond chasing down Soviet agents who are working with a ruthless arms dealer whose profit motive sets him against both the British and Soviets.


As excitement grows over the casting announcement for SPECTRE, the latest installment in the James Bond film franchise, I find myself catching up on the last few James Bond films I had not yet seen and reviewed. I’ve made it to the Dalton years and after watching The Living Daylights, I’m somewhat surprised that Dalton only got two films as James Bond! Dalton’s acting is enough to recommend The Living Daylights; after a stale formula of James Bond spy films, Dalton and writers Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson reinvigorate the franchise with a more realistic spy thriller than some of the other Bond films.

What makes The Living Daylights worth watching is the way it delightfully mixes the realistic and smart with the utterly ridiculous and over-the-top spy thriller conceits. Timothy Dalton’s James Bond enters a new room and looks around to make sure the building is clear; during the usual high-speed chase, he has his sidekick Bond girl looking at a map to give him information on where they are going. Sure, Bond’s Aston-Martin turns into a vehicle so complex that it rivals the Batmobile, but for much of The Living Daylights realism for the villains, heroes, and equipment dominate.

The 00 Section is tapped to infiltrate a radar station as part of a “test” of British security. The game turns very real when one of the agents starts using live rounds and James Bond has to do all he can to stop the corrupted “agent.” Managing to save civilian lives and dispatch the villain, Bond goes to Czechoslovakia where he is tasked with dispatching KGB snipers who are protecting a defector that will help cripple the Soviet Union. Smuggled out through the Trans-Siberian Pipeline, General Koskov’s extraction seems to go well, until the KGB sends a ruthless assassin to the safe house Koskov is moved to and they retake the defector. Condemned for not killing a Soviet sniper during the initial extraction, Bond is ordered to terminate General Pushkin, who is believed to be responsible for disrupting the test and retaking Koskov.

Tailing the cello playing would-be assassin Kara Milovy leads Bond to realize that Koskov’s extraction was only a ruse. Pushkin, in the meantime, moves to cancel a sizable order of next generation weapons from the psychopathic Brad Whitaker, a West Point drop-out who is now a weapon’s dealer. With Kara’s unwitting help, Bond learns about Koskov and discovers that he is exceptionally wealthy (which, as a Soviet General, he should not be) and has given Milovy fabulous gifts like a Stratavarius. The cello connects Koskov to Whitaker and puts Bond on course for Whitaker’s villa in Tangiers and a showdown between the intelligence operative and the mercenary.

The Living Daylights is one of the Bond movies that is not short on charm. While the relationships Bond finds himself in – a casual fling with a brat in the teaser and a weirdly forced encounter on a Ferris wheel with Kara (she’s still enamored with Koskov at the time!) – seem particularly passionless and forced, much of the rest of the film is a triumph of reality over spy fantasy. Bond leaps into an amusement park with a gun drawn and is met by a family whose screams and running in the opposite direction are a welcome splash of cold water on the franchise.

In a similar fashion, Bond’s encounter with General Pushkin is a wealth of realism that sets The Living Daylights apart from other Bond films. Pushkin is able to signal his bodyguard because he has tech similar to Bond’s; he talks his way out of death the way Bond does and his loyalty to his military and government puts him at odds with Koskov’s corruption and Whitaker’s organization. After shooting Pushkin, Bond shoots out the spotlight that would expose him, which is equally sensible.

While Dalton and John Rhys-Davies (who plays Pushkin) are phenomenal, Maryam d’Abo’s performance as Kara Milovy is somewhat unimpressive. Similarly, Andreas Wisniewski’s Necros is presented as monolithic and dull. Jeroen Krabbe and Joe Don Baker hold their own as the film’s villains. Krabbe is charismatic enough to play a character who has a longstanding relationship with James Bond and is able to dupe him with the strength of his lies and the force of his personality. He’s a good adversary and he has more character than Joe Bon Baker’s Whitaker.

Ultimately, the performance issues from the supplementary players are not enough to seriously detract from the quality of Timothy Dalton’s performance and the superior writing for the plot and characterization of the villains (James Bond’s somewhat obvious devotion to duty having been well-established and unwavering even here). That makes The Living Daylights one of the Bond films that remains worth watching!

For other works with Timothy Dalton, please check out my reviews of:
The Tourist
Toy Story 3
Looney Tunes: Back In Action
The Lion In Winter

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.
| | |

A Play For The Big Screen: The Lion In Winter Leads To Another Razor Decision.

The Good: Great acting, Interesting characters
The Bad: Plot sacrificed for mood, Disturbing nature of the characters, Theatrical nature
The Basics: Despite mostly fine acting, a preponderance of despicable characters and lack of use of the film medium make The Lion In Winter a close call.


I happen to be a big fan of various media (books, television, music) and I think one of the things I enjoy about each medium is the strengths of it. I like how books use language to turn my mind over and over, allowing me to develop images and to learn, I like how great music resonates through my ears and into my bones and makes me feel. And I love how movies may make use of the visual medium to tell a story. Probably the reason I am not a fan of more old movies is because they are visually limited and present plays on film. I love theater, but theater is theater, movies are movies. The Lion In Winter is one of those old movies that illustrates well the problematic aspect of old films simply translating a play into a motion picture.

During the reign of Henry II, Christmastime comes to England and Henry and his estranged wife Eleanor are reunited for holiday festivities. Throughout the evening, their children, Geoffrey, Richard and John vie for political control of the country by scheming with one another and alone for their father's love and blessing. Henry has handpicked the loathsome youngest son, John, while Richard is blessed by Eleanor.

The Lion In Winter is that simple to describe because it does not have a lot in the way of plot. Not much happens. The movie is more about the machinations of royalty than about anything that actually happens. As a result, the intrigues are talked about in great depth, but the location is singularly defined as a castle in England on a single day and night. There is a lot to talk about, for these are cunning people, but little to see.

In fact, that works greatly to the film's detriment. Take, for example, a pivotal scene wherein all three sons end up in Richard's room. Richard and Henry talk - when Henry arrives - and he tries to convince the king that he is a worthy successor. As the conversation shifts and Richard exposes his brothers and he finds himself being exposed, there is an inorganic quality to the scene, much like what happens in a poor theatrical production. That is to say that the characters stop moving around the room with any sense or purpose or natural movement and instead stay still, as one does in a play when one hopes to keep the audiences' eyes on a single person and their attention on that person's monologue. People failing to move in normal, realistic ways, is always a problem.

Furthermore, some of the acting seems tenuous. Anthony Hopkins has a strange, reserved quality about him in the scenes he shares with Peter O'Toole. This comes across as less of a character flaw and more an acting inconsistency. Hopkins, as well as John Castle, seem quite deferential in the presence of O'Toole, a flaw they do not seem to possess with any other actor in the piece.

The real problem with the piece is there is not a single likable character in the bunch. Henry is having an affair and keeps his wife locked up in a distant castle, Eleanor is a ruthless extortionist, John is an annoying whelp, and Geoffrey uses his lack of parental love to justify conniving against everyone for power. This seems to be a study in characters of flaws, without any truly redeeming traits to any of them.

While it is perfectly possible to do a film wherein all of the characters have negative traits or are flat out evil (the brilliant criminal-laden mystery The Usual Suspects comes immediately to mind), there must be at least one character that the viewer is rooting for, someone we are interested in and are invested emotionally in. The Lion In Winter offers not a single empathetic character, making it very difficult to care. Indeed, with all of the plotting and scheming, this movie comes across as a two hour chess match where none of the players grab our hearts or our attention.

On the other hand, a real plus of The Lion In Winter is the acting. Peter O'Toole is amazing as Henry II (Peter O'Toole). His performance is loud and boisterous through much of the movie, which give Katharine Hepburn a lot to play off as Eleanor. Indeed, Hepburn masterfully contrasts O'Toole's forceful performance with a quieter, more sinister portrayal of Eleanor that works well. John Castle does an excellent job portraying Geoffrey as conflicted through his body language, while Anthony Hopkins uses subtle eye movement and very minor facial ticks to keep Richard a reserved, masked character.

Nigel Terry, who plays John, is the real winner of this movie. There is not a single scene in The Lion In Winter where John is present that the viewer does not completely hate him. While he is Henry's preference, he is whiny, annoying, petty and in every way a spoiled child. Terry plays him masterfully, infusing every line with a pathetic whimper and a disgusting air of loathsome sniveling. Terry, being nothing like that, proves himself to be a great actor through the performance.

Ultimately, the quality of the acting is not enough to save this movie, though it does come close. This was one of my few razor decisions, choices that could truly have gone either way. Being labeled a "classic" is not enough to push me over the edge. In the end, I could not recommend a film with such a lack of empathizable characters and had the look and feel like a theatrical play caught on film. For a better historical story of intrigue and passion, try Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet. If you like senseless plotting and conniving, though, maybe you should give this film a chance.

For other classic dramas, please be sure to visit my reviews of:
The Best Years Of Our Life
Hamlet
How Green Was My Valley

5/10

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

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

Who Framed Roger Rabbit? Gets An Ugly Stepsister With Looney Tunes: Back In Action.

The Good: Moments of humor/social commentary, Generally charming
The Bad: Predictable, Light on character, Obvious plot, Often painfully self-referential.
The Basics: Funny in a few parts, Looney Tunes: Back In Action is more frequently a painful collection of Warner Bros. references that fall flat as a film.


Perhaps it is the sheer number of great films I have seen lately, but mediocre movies suffer even more under my pen than they did before. Still, my wife has gotten quite sick of being "subjected" to Best Picture winners and to maintain a happy household, I've let her choose movies to alternate with my Best Picture winners. The latest new-to-me flick she wanted to watch was Looney Tunes: Back In Action.

For those who might not have heard of the film, Looney Tunes: Back In Action was a blend of live action settings and actors and animated characters. Hardly seamlessly blended, Looney Tunes: Back In Action is based on the premise that Looney Tunes characters like Daffy Duck and Bugs Bunny are real, but are actors. As such, real-life characters walk around interacting with animated characters and the animated characters, puppets and humans are treated with equal respect and sense of reality.

The Warner Brothers are looking to make a new film with Bugs Bunny and have brought in Kate, a network efficiency expert. Kate decides that the old formula with Bugs and Daffy fighting one another is not going to work and she fires Daffy Duck. Daffy is taken off the Warner Bros. lot by D.J. Drake, the son of action star Damien Drake. Despondent, Daffy accompanies the also-fired D.J. back to his home and once there, they learn that Damien has been kidnaped by the Acme Corporation. Acme is after the Blue Monkey Diamond and they are convinced D.J. has the tools to recover it for them.

Unfortunately for Kate, the new movie with Bugs Bunny is testing poorly and the Warner Brothers give her the weekend to get Daffy back. Kate and Bugs head out to Las Vegas to try to get the duck and former security guard back. But once reunited, the quartet works to save Damien, recover the Blue Monkey Diamond and thwart the machinations of the CEO of the Acme Corporation!

Looney Tunes: Back In Action has its moments, but they are few and far between for my tastes. Moreover, the movie oscillates problematically between being a ridiculous slapstick film and a social commentary. The commentary tends to explore how vacuous Hollywood is and how it markets and focus-group creates its works. So, for example, one of the amusing moments involves Kate, D.J., Bugs and Daffy wandering through a desert and encountering an oasis . . . WalMart. On the way in and out, Kate and D.J. reference the appearance of the WalMart in the film and how they keep saying the name of the store. While this is true and actually funny, it does not truly fit the same film where the villain is monolithically maniacally evil, down to his ridiculous over-the-top laugh.

As well, the blending of the live-action, puppets, and humans is not inherently problematic, but the execution in this particular movie is sloppy. At some moments, Daffy Duck appears as a three-dimensional animated character and at others, he is clearly two-dimensional. The lack of consistency in how the animated characters are presented is irksome at best. While the movie is no doubt intended for children, the attention to detail is lacking and adult audiences are likely to be disappointed sitting through it. Still, the movie attempts to make overtures to adults with the commentary on Hollywood.

Similarly, the scenes with the Chairman of Acme have dialogue that explores corporate greed and corruption, but they are broken up with the character devolving into evil laughter. Children as also less-likely to get the barrage of references from other Warner Brothers properties. In addition to Batman and animated Warner Bros. films, Looney Tunes: Back In Action has direct spoofs of Scooby-Doo and Doctor Who. The allusions are often not at all subtle, but many of them take a broad knowledge of Warner Bros. properties.

Looney Tunes: Back In Action seems like it would have been the death of the careers of everyone who was involved in it, but I suppose that so few people saw it that it cannot drag them down. I was particularly delighted to see Robert Picardo in the boardroom scenes, but that's just the geek in me. Steve Martin shows a particularly droll side of his talents as the Chairman of Acme and how Warner Bros. got Timothy Dalton to spoof himself so much is a mystery to me. Martin in particular shows an almost singular neglect of his well-developed talents as the Chairman; he is almost as off as he was in The Pink Panther.

But the live-action portions of Looney Tunes: Back In Action tend to hinge upon the acting talents of Brendan Fraser and Jenna Elfman. Fraser seems perfectly comfortable with acting opposite the virtual characters, but more often than not, Elfman is caught looking in the wrong directions and holding virtual objects awkwardly. This is a mix of poor acting and poor animating as some of the problems could have been animated around to actually make her look like she was more comfortable with them. This is not filled with any stellar performances.

As well, the movie is absent any real character development. The problems are simple problems with simple, formulaic resolutions and when there are surprises, they are hardly monumental or character-enriching either for the characters in the movie or for the audience. As a result, much of Looney Tunes: Back In Action seems like a string of random jokes about Warner Bros. owned properties and the self-referential schtick wears thin quickly.

On DVD, Looney Tunes Back In Action features multiple featurettes. They include stunts and a behind-the-scenes featurette. As well, there are deleted scenes - which are generally funny or charming - and the film's theatrical trailer. There is no commentary track, but truly this is not a movie that needs one.

All in all, this is a comedy that seems to want to be ambitious and smart, but sells out to the kid audience to provide obvious slapstick jokes. As a result, it holds together poorly and is not worth even a single viewing, despite having moments of humor.

For other works with Brendan Fraser, please check out my reviews of:
Furry Vengeance
G.I. Joe: The Rise Of Cobra
Crash
Gods And Monsters

2.5/10

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

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




| | |