Danny DeVito, Matthew Broderick, Kristin Davis, Kristin Chenoweth. Holiday comedy. Written by Matt Corman & Chris Ord and Don Rhymer. Directed by John Whitesell.
Danny DeVito, Matthew Broderick, Kristin Davis, Kristin Chenoweth. Holiday comedy. Written by Matt Corman & Chris Ord and Don Rhymer. Directed by John Whitesell.
PREVIEW REVIEW: First off, those involved in this film are talented people and I love the opening shot as the camera passes over a snowcapped mountainside to suddenly reveal a peaceful, Christmas-decorated hamlet. It’s like a Hallmark Card. Of course, from the theater trailer, we know things are not going to remain cozy and warm for much longer. At this point, I’m still as excited as a kid on Christmas morn. Then comes the first joke. The mayor of our quaint little setting tells Steve a secret about the police chief being a cross-dresser. Hmmm, that seems like a strange first joke for a film aimed at the family. Suddenly, I’m visualizing parents throughout America’s dimmed movie theaters having to respond to, “Daddy, what’s a cross-dresser?”
A few minutes later, Danny and his wife (played by Danny DiVito and Kristin Chenoweth) are introduced. They are stealing Steve’s paper while introducing themselves. That’s kind of funny. However, Kristin is, shall we say, bursting forth. In most subsequent scenes Ms. Chenoweth is decked out with equally low cleavage apparel that offers up her breasts like two baked squabs. Understand, I have nothing against squabs, I just thought their presentation here was another unusual choice for a family film.
Then sprinkled throughout this yuletide nonsense is the inclusion of several sexual innuendoes topped off by three 15-year-old girls gyrating in abbreviated Santa suits on a public stage as if performing a holiday-themed pole dance. Of course, this is played for laughs, as Steve and Danny view it while hurling sexual entandres, unaware that the three mini-skirted Santa’s helpers are their daughters. Next scene, the men are standing in a Catholic church, washing out their eyes with holy water. For what they’ve just seen, Steve proclaims, “I’m going to hell.”
Well, maybe not hell, but those involved in this production deserve a little time in purgatory.
Besides the sexual humor, which includes jokes about the teenaged girls being promiscuous and seeing the cross-dressing sheriff in bra and thong, there’s the rest of the film’s humor, which occasionally hits the right note, but too often falls flat. And though there is the inclusion of two Christmas carols proclaiming Christ as savior, this positive is lost due to the falseness of every other emotion displayed. But even worse is the fact that this is an unfunny comedy.
The humor of seeing a guy bested at every turn by the frustrating nutcase that has recently moved to town is tricky business. Directed with a heavy hand, which they are here, the vengeance visuals can come across as mean-spirited, more unnerving than funny. The delivery of these sight gags by writer, director and cast tends toward the sadistic (it’s hard to laugh at a guy’s Christmas tree catching fire and nearly burning down the house). This revenge-that-backfires humor has worked for Broderick before (The Cable Guy, Election) and DeVito (well, DeVito is usually the frustrating nutcase), but here every single gag has been done before and with far more sparkle.
I’ve said it a hundred times: no one sets out to make a bad movie. But every time I generously offer up that statement, a film like Deck the Halls comes along to challenge the theory. DeVito does DeVito, which is fine, but he seems to be drifting through each scene with all the profundity of a snowfall that won’t stick. And poor Matthew Broderick summons up the same stodgy characterization he’s used in every film post Ferris Bueller, this one more unfunny and unlikable than any previous incarnation.
As for the ladies, Kristin Davis (The Shaggy Dog) and Kristin Chenoweth (RV) play what amounts to Alice and Trixie. Indeed, Ms. Davis seems to be making a career out of playing the wise but put-upon housewife. And the kids are about as memorable as Rudolph’s fellow reindeer.
Like I said at the top, these are talented people, so we do get a few laughs. But for a comedy to work, every aspect of the filmmaking process must commingle like spices in a freshly baked pumpkin pie. Sadly, the end result of Deck the Halls is half-baked. That’s what we have here – a half-baked Christmas pie. And two squabs.
Distributor: 20th Century Fox
FILM SYNOPSIS: A documentary of the singing group the Dixie Chicks. Co-directed by Barbara Kopple and Cecilia Peck and released by the Weinstein Co. A thrown-away comment spoken at a concert in England about being ashamed that President Bush came from Texas changed the course of a successful female singing group. At first, the offense brought disaster, as fans demanded the Chicks be pulled from radio play. But as the tide of acceptance turned against the President, so did the recovery for a group that claims to be one of the biggest sellers in music history.
PREVIEW REVIEW: Just can’t get enough Bush bashing? Then here’s another documentary from the left-wing of Tinseltown you may enjoy. Though Natalie Maines has every right to vent her frustration with the political world, the documentary showcases the songstress’s anger, egotistical temperament and unforgiving spirit. Successful, rich and somewhat attractive, the over-the-MTV-hill singer radiates hostility for Toby Keith, President Bush, Texas radio stations and fans who are no longer fans.
The intimate back-scene documentary manages to paint a positive image of the singer for some, while showing others an unrepentant woman who seems fueled by anger. What I found most revealing was the fact that Ms. Maines, with her artist-gone-wild attitude, displays a crudity one would associate more with rocker Tommy Lee. Her language and bitter demeanor are those of what was once referred to by the NASCAR crowd as “trailer trash.” Of course, her f-word punctuated communication skills are now considered attributes for liberated female pop stars.
Distributor: The Weinstein Co.
Anthony Hopkins, Demi Moore, Sharon Stone, Lindsay Lohan, Elijah Wood, William H. Macy, Helen Hunt, Christian Slater, Heather Graham, Laurence Fishburne, Freddy Rodriguez, Nick Cannon, Emilio Estevez, Martin Sheen, Shia LaBeouf, and ever other Democrat in Tinseltown (we’re talking big cast). Biography. Written & directed by Emilio Estevez.
Bobby revisits the night Robert F. Kennedy was gunned down at the Ambassador Hotel in 1968. With an incredible ensemble cast portraying fictionalized characters from a cross-section of America, the film follows 22 individuals who are all at the hotel for different purposes but share the common thread of anticipating Kennedy’s arrival at the primary election night party, which would change their lives forever. This historic night is set against the backdrop of the cultural issues gripping the country at the time, including racism, sexual inequality and class differences.
One of the best films of the year, Bobby is downright profound. Though some conservatives may have feared that this was just a tribute to a member of the Democratic party, such is not the case. Kind of a Grand Hotel built around the ideals of R.F.K.’s bid for his party’s presidential candidacy, the story(ies) concern(s) the lives of famous and non, each character caught up in a revolutionary era of change. As for the salute to the Democratic party, keep in mind it was a very different party, with a much different agenda back in the ‘60s. John F. Kennedy once said, “Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.” That’s not exactly the motto of either party nowadays. In the film, Robert is heard gently rebuking people in our nation for not helping their fellow Americans. He saw great need here, with many people struggling with poverty and ignorance. Today, both parties seem more determined to help other countries before caring for their own citizenry.
There is a scene with Laurence Fishburne as a chef in the hotel restaurant that is one of the best written and revealing I can remember ever viewing on film. I won’t give it away, but it has to do with how prejudice can be defeated in our country. Very moving. While Mr. Fishburne is only a member of an ensemble, it being a small part at that, his performance is filled with dignity, strength and wisdom. The part is both well written and acted with a subtlety only a great actor can generate.
A word must also be said about the film’s writer/director, Emilio Estevez. I hope his past association with a group of actors known as the Brat Pack won’t stick in the minds of those who vote for awards. Here are some descriptions that come to mind when assessing his work here: exuberant, erudite, with a passionate visual and narrative drive. He has done a job filled with heart, a heart obviously pounding with a desire that justice and goodness be restored to the political scene.
A few years back I was able to visit the Lincoln Memorial in D.C. On a Saturday night, 11:45 p.m., I stood alone, looking up at Mr. Lincoln. I remember thinking as I descended those steps, “How could a politician stand before this memorial and not be moved to do his best?” Evidently, many of them don’t go there. The film in its subtle way reminds us that while we once had the likes of Adams, Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan in the main office, now we seem to vote for the lesser of two evils.
Distributor: MGM
Heath Ledger. Written & directed by Neil Armfield. Drama.
From Australia comes this powerful, hard to view portrait of a couple who quickly slide into the nightmarish world of cocaine use. Several dynamic performances bring home the film’s message – drugs destroy the soul.
Man, this was difficult to view. Along with the R-rated content of graphic sex and continual use of obscene language, we see two beautiful young people degenerate into creatures whose only ambition is the next fix. They will lie, use, steal and threaten both strangers and loved ones in her to get that high.
Throughout my career as a film reviewer I have maintained a --- of not telling you to go to a movie or stay away from it. I believe my opinion, the story’s synopsis and the content description should aid readers in the decision whether or not to support a film. Since this is such an important support matter, I will offer up the following advice. (First, read the content.)
I once heard that that the first use of (cocaine or heroin, I can’t remember which) is the greatest high you’ll ever experience. And that people will spend the rest of their lives seeking that same high from that drug and never quite achieving it. Perhaps that is propaganda. But seeing and hearing of countless lives destroyed by such addition would indicate that there is truth to that platitude. Parents can talk to their kids until they are blue in the face, the resulting promise “I won’t do drugs” being forsaken sometimes in the same day. A picture is worth a thousand words. And if I thought that this film might keep some teen from that first time experiment, I’d say take them to it. If I had a teenager, I’d take him or her to this film. It just might scare the temptation out of them. You know I don’t want kids being subjected to profane language and graphic sexuality in movies. But if this depiction would aid in their resistance to the peer pressure of drug use, then I think this exception would be worth it.
Today’s audiences are willing to accept graphic portrayals of a self-destructive lifestyle with content that beats up the viewer as much as the actor. Here are two gut wrenching films that deal with addiction, but lack the objectionable language and detailed sexual situations.
Days Of Wine and Roses. A drunk marries and their lives descend into alcoholism, with one later finding sobriety. Writing, directing and acting (Jack Lemmon, Lee Remick) all extraordinary, with poignant ending.
The Man with the Golden Arm. Frank Sinatra plays a convincing junkie and we sense the dark hole a drug addict lives in. It is a horrifying examination of addiction.
Distributor: Dendy Films
Cast: Daniel Craig, Judi Dench. Action adventure. Written by Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, Paul Haggis. Directed by Martin Campbell.
The twenty-first James Bond film has a new 007 (Daniel Craig) in the first story written by Ian Fleming. Touted as the most original Bond ever, it tells how Mr. Bond got his job.
James Bond’s first “007” mission leads him to Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen), banker to the world’s terrorists. In order to stop him and bring down the terrorist network, Bond must beat Le Chiffre in a high-stakes poker game at Casino Royale. Bond is initially annoyed when a beautiful British Treasury official, Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) is assigned to deliver his stake for the game and watch over the government's money. But as Bond and Vesper survive a series of lethal attacks by Le Chiffre and his henchmen, a mutual attraction develops.
This film is a good example of why I hate giving pluses and minuses when it comes to the merits of a film. While I can objectively praise a film for its technical and artistic merits, some may feel that my honest opinion of those achievements is an endorsement. Come on, folks, it’s James Bond; I’m not going to attempt to promote James Bond. Though he’s fictional, he is brutal, a womanizer and a paid assassin with a penchant for cynical bon mots after a kill. What’s more, there’s usually some sexual imagery that I as a Christian can’t be sending you to. Though it’s okay in the secular world to have casual sex, basically using another person for their body, we as followers of Christ aren’t supposed to be doing that. So, my positive view of the production’s quality should not be misinterpreted as promotion. That said, this Bond is the best Bond ever.
The debonair and dangerous British secret agent is now played by Daniel Craig. From his previous roles and the fact that he’s blonde with blue eyes, I assumed he was the wrong choice to follow Mr. Brosnan. Once again, class, “Never assume.”
Mr. Craig fits the role to a tee. He’s buff and manly in appearance and able to portray brutal and witty like no one since Mr. Connery. Along with this satisfying casting, the script is a perfect blend of character defining, interesting plot, eye popping stunts, and incredible locales. And while it is still loaded with death-defying situations, there’s another ingredient usually eliminated from the filmed versions of Fleming’s novels – and that’s story and character development. I consider this Casino Royale to be the best Bond adventure since Goldfinger.
Well produced, well photographed and with lively pacing, the production is simply the perfect movie cocktail. Though suspension of disbelief is still needed by audience members, at least there are no invisible cars (Die Another Day). Even the score works. At one point, I thought, where’s the 007 theme? Then it hit me: “They’re reintroducing us to the character. I’ll bet they’re saving the theme for the end.” Sure enough, before that last shot fades, the big band blasts Bond’s musical entry, sending us all out to our own Astin Martins and exciting adventures on the way back to the suburbs.
I admit, my review is pretty tempting, isn’t it? Well, read the content, and then decide if you should heed the +4 or the -2.
Distributor: Columbia Pictures
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)