The Fine Line Between Clever and Stupid

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Movie 158: Fever Pitch

Fever Pitch (2005) by the Farrelly Brothers

starring Drew Barrymore and Jimmy Fallon

In a nutshell: There's a reason why Jimmy Fallon hasn't been given any more lead roles

Quick synopsis: The only obstacle to a relationship between a businesswoman and a teacher is his obsession with the Red Sox

Content:

Every formulaic romantic comedy has a gimmick these days. In Little Black Book, it was Carly Simon. In 27 Dresses, it was bridesmaid dresses. And in Fever Pitch, it is my beloved Red Sox. Seeing my Red Sox reduced to this type of gimmick was painful. I really expected more from the Farrelly Brothers, native New Englanders who actually have a reasonable amount of street cred in the Boston sports community thanks to cameos by the likes of Cam Neely and Troy Brown in their films. (Despite his complete lack of acting ability, I will never forget Neely as Sea Bass in Dumb & Dumber). If they had wanted to create a movie that would find a home on the shelves of Sox fans everywhere for decades to come, they should have made a movie that was a love letter to the Red Sox with a romance integrated in. Instead, they did it backwards. They made an incredibly generic romantic comedy and forced the Red Sox into it as the plot device that moves the story forward. But it could have been any type of obsession in their place which is why I really didn't connect at all.

My feelings can be summed up in one scene. Drew accompanies Jimmy to opening day and promptly proceeds to ask the nearby painfully motley crew of fans what the curse of the Bambino is. What happens next turned me off quicker than Nicole Ritchie would. The fans take turns recounting each of the horror stories that befell the Sox through the years (until '04 of course). As soon as one finishes their turn, another jumps annoyingly to take their turn. It almost felt like these people had rehearsed their parts in the tale. Even worse, they do not speak in enough detail for the non-fan to have any clue what they are talking about, but they manage to alienate Sox fans as well, making them feel like they are being patronized. Personally I felt like the filmmakers were just trying to prove themselves to the fans by listing off the history as if they are shouting "Look! we really are big fans! We swear! See? We know about Dent and Buckner and Little..." It drove me nuts. In fact, the way I felt about this scene is representative of my feelings on the movie as a whole: Too esoteric for non-fans, but trying too hard to appeal to actual Sox fans.

On top of the formulaicness (word?) and the annoying script, I also disliked Drew and Jimmy. Jimmy is just a little too awkward to be a leading man. He tries to be funny with his voices and his playfulness, but he isn't. Some of his jokes fall painfully short of their marks. I guess it's no different than his SNL stint. Drew, meanwhile, is doing her schtick that has endeared her to fans for years, talking out the side of her mouth (although I actually liked when Jimmy made fun of her for it) and being a strong woman with a career. Sorry, Drew, but I didn't buy you as a successful businesswoman and I don't care for your entire act as the loveable, modest, and cute-to-a-fault leading lady, although I do have to admit it is well suited to crappy romantic comedies. And I'm not attracted to her whatsoever.

At times, the movie took me for a ride through Hollywood romance cliche hell. The group of Drew's friends were the worst. All stereotyped beyond belief, they meet at the gym and discuss guy things as they work out. Whatever.

Last thing that genuinely pissed me off was the product placement. The idea behind product placement is NOT to make it obvious. But in addition to about 348 Macs appearing throughout the movie, there is one of the most blatant plugs I can remember in a movie. When the kids are touring her office at the beginning of the film, she says something like "oh, here's an example of a project I am working on" as we cut to a shot of her computer screen with a nice, big Marquis Jet logo. They don't even make an effort to work it into the story, they just kind of cut to it in the middle of a scene. Almost felt like a commercial break.

Well, I did give the movie a mixed rating, so that must mean there was something good, right? I liked some of the supporting characters, like that gay guy from Sex and the City. I liked that Lenny Clarke was the uncle. I liked Jimmy's apartment, covered in interesting Sox stuff. I really liked the title cards, done in Red Sox font. The story is at least coherent (as opposed to my next review). And most importantly, I like the theme of coming to the realization that an obsession with something that cannot love you back can be a waste of time. I can relate to this theme, coming to a similar realization about sports. But that doesn't mean they are a complete waste of time either. you just have to find a happy medium, and I think I've reached that point in my own life. I have a feeling that this subject is tackled in a much more sophisticated and interesting manner in the source material, Nick Hornby's book of the same name, but is was done well enough to provoke some thought in the film.

It rubbed a lot of people (myself included) the wrong way, when Jimmy and Drew were in the middle of the actual celebration on the field, recording for the movie, as the Sox won it all in '04. But I think this was mostly only after everyone realized that the movie wasn't very good. If that momentous occasion had been integrated into a movie that seemed more about the Red Sox and less about using the Red Sox, then It could have been something very special.

The most honest moment in the movie? The closing credits which were played over a montage of the victory parade without Jimmy and Drew anywhere to be seen. Instead we watched real fans react to their heroes float by on the duck boats. Watching these thousands of people delirious with joy stirred up stronger emotions in me than any of the other crap strewn about in Fever Pitch.

Rolling rankings:

1. Good Will Hunting (#156)

2. In Bruges(#153)

3. The Hangover (#157)

4. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (#155)

5. Up (#149)

6. I.O.U.S.A. (#150)

7. Burn After Reading (#152)

8. The Da Vinci Code (#151)

9. 21 (#154)

10. Fever Pitch (#158)

key:

masterpiece

excellent

good

mixed bag

more bad than good

garbage

Monday, July 20, 2009

Movie 157: The Hangover

The Hangover (2009) by Todd Phillips

starring Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms and Zack Galifianakis

In a nutshell: Well done, Mr. Phillips. Funniest movie I've seen this year

Quick synopsis: Four guys head to Vegas for a bachelor party. Only three wake up in the hotel room the next morning, along with a baby, a chicken, a tiger and no memory of what happened.

Content: From the director that brought you Road Trip, Old School, Starsky & Hutch and School for Scoudrels (although he'd probably like you to forget those last two) comes The Hangover, a welcome return to form. I liked Road Trip, although its been years since I've seen it and I'm sure my sense of humor is different than it was during my freshman year of college. I had a blast with Old School and look back on seeing it in a packed theater in Ithaca, New York as one of my fondest theater experiences. However, upon subsequent viewings, I have found Old School to be a little uneven. The first hour is is as funny as anything, but it devolves into silliness in order to resolve its conflict. And in Old School, I really don't care about the plot. The movie holds my attention because Will Ferrell and Vince Vaughn crack me up, and when time must be spent to wrap up the story I lose interest. This is fine, though. Old School is a comedy, and it's funny. Therefore, it succeeds. Some of my all-time favorite comedies have pointless stories, like Caddyshack and Animal House.

But The Hangover does Old School one better because, not only was I laughing my ass off, but I cared about the story! The comedy in The Hangover is every bit as good as Old School, thanks to some excellent casting. As he did for Old School, Phillips found actors that were born to play their respective roles. I'm talking about Ed Helms of the Daily Show and The Office, Bradley Cooper of Wedding Crashers and mediocre romantic comedies, and Zack Galifianakis who steals the show. I don't know where this guy came from, but he plays one hell of a weirdo. Why? Because I think he is a weirdo. Check out his shorts, Between Two Ferns on youtube. The chemistry between these three guys keeps the movie running in high gear throughout. And I think the absence of any huge stars worked very much in their favor. A Ferrell, Sandler or Vaughan would only have gotten in the way. Fresh faces are good.

So why did the story hold my attention even when the comedy was taking a breather? Because it was a great mystery. So what if it was already done in Dude, Where's My Car? It's done WAY better in The Hangover. In case you are uninformed, The Hangover is about 4 guys who go to Vegas for a bachelor party. In the morning, they wake up in a trashed room and the groom-to-be is missing. To make matters worse, no one has any memory of what happened. There are some clues strewn around, and it's fun following the trail and trying to figure out what happened to Doug (who is played by Justin Bartha whom I really liked from National Treasure).

Despite my gushing, The Hangover has some holes. Not every joke lands, but enough do. But there were two specific characters that annoyed me. The first is the legendary Mike Tyson. He can't act one lick and I think I would have rather seen a comedic takeoff on him played by someone funny, than the man himself since he is so incapable. The only good reason for him being in there is for the surprise when he shows up....but they spoiled that in the commercials anyway, so there was really no point.

The second is the Asian guy. He was trying too hard to be funny in a movie where everyone else feels natural (even Zack). I've been on the fence about this guy from his performances in Knocked Up and Role Models, but he completely lost me in this one.

I had mixed feelings about the scene that referenced Rain Man. Everything else in the movie went so well together. It was not bad, but it felt out of place. It felt like it was from a spoof movie, which The Hangover isn't.

The marketing for The Hangover really sucked. It stripped away any sense of uniqueness and made it look like any other crappy raunchy comedy. As I mentioned before, it spoiled the Tyson thing and also lead me to believe that there was going to be an annoying baby wearing sunglasses around the whole time. I was expecting the baby to be an omnipresent annoying gimmick like the baby in Meet the Fockers. Thankfully the marketing was misleading and the baby is gone halfway through the film. Thank goodness I caught wind of the positive word-of-mouth because otherwise I don't think I would have sought this movie out by choice. Come on Warner Brothers, you have enough money, hire a competent marketer for those rare times when you actually have a good film to promote.

Oh and make sure you stay for the closing credits. It was the perfect way to complement the story and I can't even remember the last time that a movie ended on such a hilarious note.