It has been six years since "Wreck it Ralph" popped into our video consciousness and it's time for a sequel. I am pretty sure I only saw the previous film the one time. It's not that I disliked it, it simply was not my jam and I never felt connected to it the way I have to other Disney films. So this sequel was not something on my radar until a trailer dropped, and even though it looked like it might be fun, I was in no hurry to see it. In fact, I ended up in this screening completely by accident. I'd gone to see "Creed II" in the brief window of time I had available yesterday, and the film failed. I sat in the dark and the movie never started. After I notified the management and they struggled for ten minutes to reboot the equipment, I was offered a pass and an invitation to take in another film. "Ralph Breaks the Internet" was what was starting next so here I am.
After having built a world out of the old arcade games of the past, the makers of this film decided that the thing that made the previous film worthwhile was that creativity which made the arcade games real. So instead of building a story in the world they have already explored, they looked for new territory and of course what is right in front of them is the internet. Take all the ones and zeros and turn them into an imaginary community populated with characters that make all the things we users see on line. Algorithms are personified, pop up ads have a life of their own, and web sites are viewed as corporate entities occupying space much like old school brick and mortar retail stores did. Our heroes go on a quest to find a rare piece of equipment on eBay, but of course the journey is complicated and the main duo has lessons to learn.
John C. Reilly reprises his character voice as the lovable villain of a video game, who really just wants to feel a connection to others. His story was much more complete in the earlier film, in this one he is more of a cog in the clockwork of the narrative. Ralph does get to emote and the character has to grow by the end, but this is not really his journey. Vanellope, voiced by Sarah Silverman is also a character with some story to enhance the proceedings, and maybe she could be seen as the key figure in the film, except I think the story is less about either of these two. The story is really about us, the users of the internet, and how we can trivialize just about anything and make it into something to be consumed.
One of the obstacles the two main characters face is a lack of cash, but on the internet, you can generate money with stupidity if it manages to hit the right sweet spot. Just as an example, the post on this site that has received the most traffic over the eight years I have been doing this project is for the movie "The Deep". I doubt the reason is my keen insight or the widespread affection for the movie. The explanation is simple, I put in a picture from the film that features the best wet t-shirt contest winner ever. Boobs bring in the boobs and "Ralph Breaks the Internet" is primarily about how gullible, distracted and bored we all are with the material that can be found there. The positives are mentioned as well but it is the critique of our behavior on line that makes this a message movie.
If you watch the details of the scenes the characters walk through, you will notice a lot of clever references. Memes that have come and gone still linger in the community. Sly inclusion of Disney characters is both obvious, as with the Disney Princesses, and sometimes more subtle, Mickey hats and castles. You might think this is a movie filled with product placement, but it is our collective memory of products that makes us notice them. Gamers will find things they can relate to, this movie is almost a mirror image of "Ready Player One" in its' use of pre-existing products and images. While there is a scene that involves the "dark web" thank goodness it is not a realistic depiction of what might be found there. My favorite detail involves a Louisiana Licence plate, I'm sure you will find your own favorites somewhere in the film.
So once again, there is incredible world building, a serviceable character story and plenty of humor to carry the film. My reaction to this movie is very much the same as the previous entry, it is entertaining and it will work for families and those who love the setting. I would not turn it off if it comes across my radar in the future, but I can't see much reason to reboot and watch it again. I will be mocked by far more clever films than this in the future, so I'll probably just wait for them.
This is one of those posts that is personal nostalgia rather than a film review, so if you were looking for a detailed evaluation of the film, sorry, not today.
Last night I watched "My Fair Lady" on TCM as they were screening it in honor of it's inclusion on the National Film Registry. I happened to be by myself, a scenario that is likely to be more common than I have any desire for. As almost all film lovers know, much like music or the scent of Grandma's cooking, a film can trigger memories that are vivid and powerful, and that is what hit me last night.
In 1994, shortly after my Mother had passed away and my Father began living with us, "My Fair Lady" was restored and released in a limited number of theaters for a week or so. It might have been Mother's Day weekend that we chose to go and see this, but I definitely remember the experience. My girls were Eight and Six, and we drove across the county of Los Angeles, to Century City (A place my youngest commuted to on a daily basis for the last year) to see this at the Century Plaza Theaters, which were the Fox Studio's Premier Houses located in the Century Towers complex.
My wife and I delighted in how much the kids liked the movie, and as always, they wanted to dance under the screen while the credits rolled. I'd been sick with grief for several months, the circumstances of my Mom's passing and my Father's condition were putting me into a depressed state. This wonderful experience lifted my spirits and it was a turning point in my attitude for the rest of the year. As a family gift, I sprang for a Deluxe Box Laser Disc Release of the film, which was a beautiful Christmas reminder of the joy we'd experienced a few months earlier.
Last night's accidental viewing of the film stirred a desire to look at the elements that were included in the box set, and I thought I would share a few pictures.
This is what the box looks like. While there is no beautiful artwork to illustrate the film, the photo choices were grand, especially the focus on the gorgeous black and white number that Audrey Hepburn wore at the Ascot Race scene.
As usual with great packaging, the extras here were special, they included a book about the film, a CD of the Soundtrack, and a 70mm film frame from the movie that came from an original print. These were all carefully stored in a fitted section located under the three discs that contained the movie and a number of extras.
Also included was a portfolio of costume designs for many of the women's gowns in the film. On the left you can see the two memorable outfits that Eliza wore at Ascot and at the Ball.
There is a program book included that details information about the film, the restoration and the history of the film. Somewhere in my collection, there is also a poster for this release, which was available to those who purchased this set, it is basically the same design as the cover of the box.
As I was watching this, I had some wistful moments and feared I might descend into another bout of grief, but as I thought more and more of our visit to a special film, and the pleasure I had from sharing it with two enthusiastic little girls and my wife who also found the whole experience delightful, I stopped tearing up and instead bathed in the warm glow of a family moment which helped me through despair twenty-four years ago. Last night, it worked a little more magic and instead of sadness, I feel uplifted today. One step at a time, but this was a good step to take.
Frankly I'm not a big fan of Will Farrell. After the first five years of listening to him scream, I lost any sense that it was humorous. "Elf" came out right about the time I started feeling like this was too much. It did manage to channel that maniacal loud voice into something that was a little bit more charming and I remember having a pretty solid reaction to the film. Flash forward 15 years and I went to see it for a second time, this was also a regular theatrical screening, in acknowledgement of the Anniversary. I still enjoyed it, but there were moments that I wanted to look away.
The movie starts and ends with Bob Newhart so it has that going for it. I've always been a fan. It also features a supporting role from Mary Steenburgen, whom I've had a crush on since I first saw her in "Goin" South" in 1978. Finally, it also features Zooey Deschanel, right before she became America's Manic Pixie Dream Girl of choice. She was much more subdued and she has a sweet, slightly flat singing voice that worked perfectly for what she was doing in this movie.
The parts that turned me off are mostly related to eating. The Coke chugging and belch are just annoying but the spaghetti with maple syrup was a bit too far and subsequently, the stakes get raised with added candy, chocolate and then hand shoveling it into one's maw. Definitely not funny and more disgusting than some gore I've seen in a horror film. Just the thought of the gum scene makes my stomach turn. One other thing that did not work for me was Peter Dinklage going all Hulk Hogan on Buddy. Another scene that just misses for me entirely.
What does work however are Buddy'd antics in the mailroom, his rocket like arm in the snowball fight and the decorating he does. The Toy section at Gimbals was lovely, as was his Dad's apartment after Buddy works it over. The relationship with James Caan feels like there is a scene missing but the emotional payoff at the end still worked for me. All of the cast singing "Here Comes Santa Claus" was just what I could use to help lift my Christmas spirits.
One other scene that works but will probably draw flack from the SJW out there. Buddy is so enamored of Jovie singing that he wanders into the ladies locker room. Not only is that a violation of her safe space, but the song she is singing and he joins in on is now notoriously labeled an ode to date rape. Sorry my friends, the song was perfect and the scene was really a sweet moment of innocence that was awkward because of society's way of viewing the intrusion, rather than the guileless affection that Buddy is showing. Over all a mixed experience for me, but I was glad to be out of the house for a couple of hours and it is a Christmas movie, so that helps.
LAMBracket: Best Christmas Movie – Play-Off #7: From December 1st until Christmas Eve, here on the LAMB, we’ll be determining what is the BEST Christmas movie of all time. We’ve asked you all which films are the main contenders, and …
If you are not considering The Muppet Christmas Carol as your choice for the best Christmas movie of all time, you must not have seen the film. Not only is it a great Christmas film, it is in many ways, the greatest telling of one of the most important Christmas themed stories of all time. Charles Dickens’ story has been filmed more than two dozen times, with distinguished Shakespearean actors and American Television Thespians. None of them can hold a candle to this version which succeeds because of two fantastic features. First, look at the title, “Muppets”. I have heard that there are people who do not appreciate The Muppets, I don’t want to know who those people are. The off kilter humor, the manic and deadpan delivery in the same scene, the plethora of weird characters are all things that make even the most mundane material watchable. Kermit the Frog is perfectly cast as Bob Cratchitt. Miss Piggy is surprisingly subdued as his wife and the mother of Tiny Tim. Meanwhile, subverting the proceedings by drawing attention to the narrative explicitly, Gonzo and Rizzo Rat are a Greek Chorus representing Dickens himself. You can’t beat that for creative story structure on this particular tale.
Muppets alone would be enough to elevate this to the status of Christmas classic, but there’s one other secret weapon here that should overwhelm any other objections, Michael Caine. In most versions of the story, Scrooge is ancient and closer to the end of life. Caine is closer to middle age, which means his arc of redemption will span the life of the Cratchit family more. Caine plays crotchety without being particularly old.We can accept that he has an old man disposition with a younger man’s vigor. He also sings. Maybe not the dulcet baritone that would be featured in a stage version of the story, but he has a “talk-singing” style that works perfectly for the amusing Paul Williams penned songs.
“Oh, Scroogey loves his money ’cause he thinks it gives him power,
If he became a flavor you can bet he would be sour “
It was 40 years ago this month that I trooped down to the Chinese Theater in Hollywood with my band of friends and my girl, to see this comic book movie. More than a decade before the launch of "Batman", the D.C. Universe started with their most iconic hero. This was a highly anticipated film and we knew before we even saw it that there was going to be a sequel. This was the beginning of a comic book franchise that ends up setting a high standard with the opening two films and then trailed off with subsequent efforts. Regardless of how you feel about the revived D.C. films, the first two Christopher Reeve Superman films stand the test of time.
Unlike forty years ago, this trip to the theater was solo and on a Monday night of all times. The Fathom Event included an opening cartoon from Max Fleischer Studios, featuring an animated version of the Man of Steel. This efficient ten minute adventure looks like it was the template for the TV series to come. It certainly had all the tropes we expected including the opening narration. As it turns out it is available on YouTube so if you want to see it, gaze below.
With the appetizer out of the way, we are ready to begin our adventure. I have never made a secret of the fact that I am a nostalgia fan. Classic movies are one of my passions and one of the reasons is the period setting. "Superman" opens not with a pre-title adventure sequence like a James Bond film, but rather a simple curtain in black and white, being pulled open to reveal a movie screen, just like they used to do. The picture scrolls up like an old newsreel to the narration of a child reading the opening of what might be a comic book. Our viewpoint sweeps past a neoclassical skyscraper housing the Daily Planet, with a rotating globe on it's peak. We zoom out into space and we finally see color, and the John Williams Theme that may be one of the greatest movie themes ever. It is synced with titles that were hugely innovative at the time.
You can read about the titles and look at them at the above link.
Most of you I'm sure have seen the film, so this is not really intended as a full review. I just want to highlight a few of the pleasures of this 40 year old treasure. The whole sequence on Krypton is imaginative and futuristic in the way movies have always been. The budget and effects are certainly bigger than the serials of the past, but the aesthetic is very much the same. The sentencing of the three Kryptonian criminals serves as an Easter egg for the second film and we get to the earth story with just enough background to see how Kal-El ends up with his powers. Glen Ford is only in two scenes but he is terrific in both of them. The Norman Rockwell Kansas grounds our strange visitor from another world, and his adopted father gives him the values that will guide him with as much influence as his biological father's teachings will in the Fortress of Solitude section.
When Christopher Reeve finally emerges as the adult version of Superman, we get our first taste of flight in these movies. One of the advance tag lines was "You will believe a man can fly!", well I did, and it was thrilling. The long action sequence where Clark turns into Superman, saves Lois and the President as well as a neighborhood cat is just nicely paced fun. The real treat starts however an hour into the film, when Gene Hackman shows up and proceeds to steal every bit of every scene he is in. Hackman walks off with the movie in an out sized portrayal of Lex Luthor. The fact that he is surrounded by a band of idiots adds some comedy fun without diminishing the threat that the villain presents.
The special effects in the climax are dated and modern audiences might laugh a bit, but if you are in the grip of the movie you will hardly notice those little things. The models, rear projection and practical effects work just fine at giving Superman a task that makes some demands on his abilities. Forget how implausible the reversal of time is and just enjoy the moments when Lois looks at Superman when she has been rescued and doesn't even know it. This is another thread that leads us to the sequel. At the end of the credits, we are promised Superman II next year, boy do I hope that Fathom follows up on that forty year old promise.
When I first saw the trailer and concept for this movie, I was tempted to refer to it as "Driving Mr. Daisy". There are some parallels to the Oscar winning film of 1989, but the superficial comparisons stop pretty quickly. Although the racial component is certainly a key component in the film, "Green Book" explores the relationship between the main characters in a much more diverse manner. Viggo Mortensen plays a man on the fringes of society in the urban jungle of New York circa 1962, but in many ways he represents the whole country at a moment in time when the world might change. Mahershala Ali is more mainstream in the City, but even there he is a lonely figure, who is an imperfect vessel for a message of change, but one that he has decided to deliver.
The movie is a polemic waiting to happen but it steps back from being a political film at it's core and instead focuses on the tentative friendship between the two men of such different backgrounds. There is plenty of culture clash involved but it is not just the racial disparity of the Southern U.S. at this time. Both men are guilty of stereotyping and potentially violating the rules of the broader culture. As they negotiate around their differences, we see a more allegorical description of the U.S. and it's racial issues. These comparisons are more subtle than you might have imagined but they can be pretty effective.
While both actors are at the top of their game, it is Mortensen who has the meatier role and the greatest opportunity to make an impression. His Italian-NY accent seems to have been home grown rather than artificially induced. His physique is not a result of make-up and fat suit but rather real heft and weariness. Tony Lip may be a bit of a galoot but he is not a dumb galoot. His story arc requires him to alter in minor ways over the course of the film. He has a couple of moments of epiphany, but those have more to do with his assessment of Doctor Don Shirley than any self recognition or awareness. Tony's attitude toward black Americans is uniformed rather than malicious. The effect however can be just as devastating and that's why it was so important for average Americans to see what they were doing to themselves and their fellow citizens. Mortensen expresses much of that dawning awareness with his eyes and face. Although Tony is hired muscle, he needs to learn to contain that power to appropriate circumstances.
The script is very amusing despite being weighed down by potentially solemn subject matter. Credited as the screenwriter along with director Peter Farrelly and actor Brain Hayes Currie, is Nick Vallelonga, the son of the real Tony Lip. He pieced together this story from multiple interviews with his father and the real Don Shirley. Certainly there has been some liberty taken in making the story more charming, but that is a result of a conscious decision to make the film entertaining as well as important. My particular favorite touch concerns the letters that Tony writes home to his wife Dolores. The prompting he gets from Shirley makes the notes both romantic and funny. They also provide one more way for us to discover that a reasonably intelligent man can change himself in subtle ways to be better.
This is a crowd pleasing film which does not seem to be getting the traction with audiences that it deserves. Maybe there has not been enough praise from critics, or maybe the audience just thinks they have seen it all before. I hope that this small outpost of opinion can influence a few of you to take a trip to your local theater and see a film that will give you hope without condescending to you.
We are taking a slightly different journey this week with MIWETS
(Yeah, not a great acronym). I would not really say the films I am going
to focus on are guilty pleasures but many film fans might turn their
noses up at such crassly commercial projects. One film exploits a TV
show comic book legacy and the other one comes from one of the most
resented genres among movie fans, the romantic comedy. I think each film
actually has some merits that could be discussed in a passionate way
because I have seen some hate for these films online. Neither film is
essential, seminal or serious in any way. The two movies have one thing
in common that moved me to pair them like this. Each one is a version of
a nearly extinct form of film making, the original film musical.
It
is true that we occasionally get a musical in an animated movie, or
that a stage musical is adapted for the big screen. Those are rare
enough however that even Disney cannot be counted upon for regular
versions of this form. In the 1980's, music videos were basically
inserted into movies to make them musicals, think "Flashdance" or
"Footloose". They worked well enough to bring in the music but audiences
not used to actors breaking out in song would probably not go for a
modern version of fifties style musicals. The safe bet has been to put
stage musicals on the screen. The two films I am focusing on here try to
varying degrees to use the format of "An American in Paris" or "A Star
is Born". They take an original story that includes music and then adapt
it to movie form. Both use a backstage perspective, so the songs are
connected to public performances, and not just singing as the characters
walk down the street. It is for the music and particularly the songs
that I have included them in this series.
The
first film of today's double feature is "Josie and the Pussycats" from
2001. Roger Ebert put it this way: "Josie and the Pussycats are not
dumber than the Spice Girls,
but they're as dumb as the Spice Girls, which is dumb enough." He gave
the movie a half star. While I have always appreciated Ebert as a film
critic, I have not always agreed with him and this is one of those
times. At this point in his life I think he had finally disconnected
from the audience relationship that had made his work with Gene Siskel
so effective, and he simply spouted off on something he did not get. In
his review he even gets picky about the term subliminal versus subaural,
and he got that wrong also. Subliminal refers to consciousness which is
the correct way in which it is used in the film, subaural is below the
ear, and means nothing in this context.
The film is a cute
girl-empowering satire on marketing. It is not about how a band is put
together or even how it might become successful, it is about how that
band might then be exploited to sell other stuff. Is the movie subtle?
Hell no, it is obvious and goes for very big jokes, most of them visual.
It is clear that the brands in the movie are being marketed in product
placement as a way of mocking that placement. Lots of other films or
Television shows would be viewed as cutting edge for the type of humor
that is attempted here and for trying to reach the audience that the
film is trying to appeal to. I can accept that others may not like the
humor or that the story is a bit obvious but I am defiant in my belief
that the music in this film is worthy and that's why I want people to
see the movie.
I love a good title song, but a song that is part
of the story and is integrated into the themes is the type of song I
think makes a movie work as a musical experience. "Josie and the
Pussycats" has at least three great songs that make the story
memorable. Ebert wrote "The music is pretty bad. That's surprising,
since Kenneth "Babyface" Edmonds is one of the producers, and knows his
way around music. Maybe it's supposed to sound like brainless pre-teen
fodder, but it's not good enough at being bad to be funny, and stops
merely at the bad stage." It's silly to get into a debate with a dead
man but come on, just saying it without explaining it is the worst
appeal to authority there is. Ebert was not a music authority, and to be
fair, neither am I but I'm willing to at least explain my position. To
start let's take "Pretend to be Nice":
This
song has a very appealing guitar lick, a fun chorus and a wicked hook
that keeps pulling us in. Yes it is pop, but listen to the refrain
"pretend to be nice" when sung by the lead in a mock low key sexy voice.
There is real sarcasm there. It fits in as an example of the kind of
song a girl band might be expected to play. It is smarter than any Spice
Girls song and I think that undermined the belief that this movie was
about bad music, it was about mocking bad music by taking it's form and
subverting it.
Example Number Two is "three small words". This is
an up tempo power pop song that gives the Pussycats the perfect
opportunity to insert a performance based music video into the film.
Look and listen:
Anyone who doesn't appreciate that song just doesn't understand that Heath Ledger is the new Matt Damon.
The
ultimate example of the musical bliss of "Josie and the Pussycats"
however is not provided by the title group. Instead the greatest example
of musical subversion is done by the Boy Band that the Pussycats are
being used to replace in the movie. I think Ebert must have missed the
lyrics or have been totally unfamiliar with the Backstreet Boys or
*NSYNC. "DuJour", provides the moment of musical genius early on in the
film and if you listen to the song you will know how to listen to the
songs in the rest of the movie. Here is the final nail in the coffin of
the naysayers for this film:
"just cuz i slip in back doors,
well, that doesn't make me, hey!"
That
just summarizes the whole music scene of the early 2000s. Maybe it
isn't something everyone should see, but it certainly isn't something
that everyone should reject. I may come back and defend the story,
actors and whole film in another place, but for now the focus is on the
music and it works the way it is supposed to in the film.
After a
brief intermission, it is time to move on to the second film in this
musical extravaganza.
"Music and Lyrics" from 2007, is a much more
conventional film. It is a romantic comedy that features music and both
embraces and mocks the taste of popular culture. It features two of the
most appealing stars of the last twenty years, Hugh Grant and Drew
Barrymore, who between them have as many romcoms under their belts as
anyone this side of Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan. This movie was moderately
successful at the box office and has almost certainly a bigger audience
than the first movie and it also has some great music designed
explicitly for the purpose of the story.
The setting of the love
story here involves the accidental meeting of two people who have
complementary artistic skills but conflicting social skills. No one will
be surprised by the development of the love story, it has the usual
cute meet, slow romance, complication and then satisfying resolution. So
it is all formula, but it is a formula that works because of the extra
ingredients that get ladled on top. To begin with, Grant plays a semi
washed up pop star from the 1980s. If you can imagine Duran Duran and
Wham having children, the result would probably be the fictional band
"Pop". Here in the title sequence of" Music and Lyrics" is the video
for their biggest imagined hit:
This
is a pretty perfect spoof of 80s pop video. The little sideways booty
snap would fit into almost any George Michael video of those times. The
song is a lightweight confection that illustrates the weightlessness of
music from that period. Even though it has no heft to it, there is still
significance to it. People are moved by music and while we may not
appreciate someone else's taste in songs, to that person the song
matters. That is shown in a couple of ways in this film. First through
the hysterical behavior of middle aged women reliving their wild teen
years at nostalgia performances by Grant's character Alex Fletcher. Yet
we also see that the music can be inspirational to the next generation
when Cora Corman, a Britney Spears knock off hires Alex to pen a new
tune for her because she was a fan of the video.
A short clip of
her current music video tells us all we need to know about how deep she
is:
The
creative process is something that is hard to visualize on screen.
Painters in films get montages of images swirling as they put their
imagination on the canvas. Writers are usually depicted as reflecting on
their "inner eye" and recalling the story they want to tell. In a
romantic comedy about writing a pop song we get a nice sequence showing
how a last minute demo track comes together as the two co-writers race
against a deadline. Here is how it is envisioned in the film:
What
you see is not a complete version of the song but the romantic comedy
version of the creative process. It works at building character and also
shows us how the two miss matched lovers are going to come together. I
think it is a very effective sequence and it has the advantage of having
something to do with the story. Later in the movie we will get a more
complete version of the song that will help cement our happy ending and
irritate all those who hate Romantic Comedies in the first place, but as
a song, this piece of music works as it is intended.
There is one
other link between these films. Many of the songs share a common
composer; Adam Schlesinger. He is the genius behind the song that made
"That Thing You Do" one of my "Perfect Films". Probably best known for
leading his band "Fountains of Wayne" onto the charts with "Stacy's
Mom", Schlesinger has contributed to a number of songs in films and his
work makes both of today's movies something I want everyone to see. The
songs are not simply pop music inserted into the closing credits, but
they are integral parts of the movies that they come from. That seems
like a better standard for a movie music award than how big the pop star
is that wrote it. If you can think of some songs from movies that
drive the story, explain the characters or enliven the pace of the film,
please share them. MIWETS is all about sharing the love.
Richard
Kirkham is a lifelong movie enthusiast from Southern California. While
embracing all genres of film making, he is especially moved to write
about and share his memories of movies from his formative years, the
glorious 1970s. His personal blog, featuring current film reviews as
well as his Summers of the 1970s movie project, can be found at Kirkham A Movie A Day.
