Song of The South is the most controversial Disney movie ever made. Disney has spent literal decades doing their best to bury the film and act like it never existed (Most of their efforts undone thanks to what is undoubtedly one of the best attractions in any of their parks: Splash Mountain, a log flume ride based loosely/partially on the film.). I am a rare lucky one, having managed to watch the film three times over the years. With the current social situation we find ourselves in (protests, riots, police reform, BLM, etc), I figure now is as good a time as any to attempt to analyze this problematic little film, and see exactly how racist it really is. So, if you're ready, dive into the Briar Patch with me as we explore Walt Disney's Song of The South.
In Song of The South we follow Johnny (Bobby Driscoll), a young boy from a rich family who finds himself transplanted to a southern plantation during Reconstruction times. It would appear that Johnny's mom (Sally, played by Ruth Warrick) and dad (John, played by Eric Rolf) are close to having a falling out, so Sally has moved Johnny and herself to the old plantation Johnny's grandma (Lucile Watson) owns while Jack stays back in Atlanta to continue work as a muckraking journalist. Johnny, distraught over the potential end of his family, attempts to run away only to cross paths with Uncle Remus (James Baskett), a sharecropper who is known for his tales of Brer Rabbit and friends. It doesn't take long before Johnny has become firmly attached to Remus and his tales, finding a comforting form of escape within them. Along for the adventure is Ginny (Luana Patten), the daughter of a poor family, who befriends Johnny.
Let's start with the good. Walt is clearly attempting to weave a message about friendship breaking the bonds of color and class. The story and message could be very sweet and poignant, but it's held back by some obvious reasons we'll get to later. The animated segments (which total 25 minutes) and songs found within them are easily the best, most memorable parts of the film. The animation is gorgeous (such a shame we'll never get a proper blu-ray transfer/clean-up for them), and the characters of Brer Rabbit (Johnny Lee), Brer Fox (James Baskett), and Brer Bear (Nick Stewart) are classic and unforgettable. The biggest shining star of the film is James Baskett as Uncle Remus (Though even he isn't exempt from some of the film's issues). Baskett is downright magnetic, incredibly likable, and very memorable in a classic role. He really is the hero of the story, and honestly feels like a bad-ass a good deal of the time.
Song of The South is set in a heavily fantasized and unrealistic version of the old south, and that, unfortunately, is where it's problems begin. In this fairy tale, African Americans happily choose to stay on as sharecroppers at the plantation where they were formerly slaves...seemingly because they see it as the only home they know. This in and of itself is incredibly sad. Sharecropping is when the owner of said land allows a tenant (in this case freed slaves) to use the land in return for a share of the crops (usually 1/3 or 1/2) that the tenant produces or farms. Sharecroppers often fell victim to manipulated prices from the landowner. Most of the time freed slaves found themselves penniless, and without any real way to support their families. Sharecropping often was the only option they had. So, no, most sharecroppers didn't happily choose to stay on at the plantations. To say otherwise would be false.
Song of The South chooses to portray all of the sharecroppers in the film as happy and content in their current lives. Obviously, this likely wasn't the case. It's hard to believe all of the sharecroppers would stand outside a window and mourn the potential loss of white life, as the film shows later on in the third act. This reinforces the idea that African Americans were pleased as punch to be at the mercy of their white former slave owners, and really did love them. It's possible that they were grateful to have their own land, but likely not as grateful as Song would have you believe. After all, at the end of the day they were still being taken advantage of and manipulated by the white folks that still owned the land.
Remember how earlier I said that the character of Uncle Remus wasn't exempt from the film's numerous issues? In the film, you can't help but get the feeling that Remus' sole purpose is to entertain our young white protagonist. Walt tries to depict a growing friendship between the two, but it comes across as one-sided. The only real reason Johnny is friends with Remus is because Remus entertains him and is the only one giving him the care and attention Johnny so desperately craves (His self-absorbed parents barely spend any time looking after him and are too caught up in their own issues to really even notice him). Remus, as much as I love him, does fall squarely into the trap of the magical negro stereotype. He is in the story to "fix" the numerous issues Johnny (and even his parents) are experiencing as well as dishing out some life-lessons along the way. He has a generally happy demeanor that I imagine many African Americans would likely find offensive (The happy slave/ former slave who is more than happy to serve his masters/former masters trope).
Onto the animated segments. While, as previously stated, they are easily the standouts of the film, even they are not without their issues (least of which being the dialects that Brer Rabbit, Brer Fox, and Brer Bear speak in). There is some racist imagery featured (including noose's and the obvious Tar Baby), and the tales of Brer Rabbit and company can easily be viewed as a prime example of cultural appropriation (The first message of choosing to stay in the Briar Patch can be viewed as problematic as well. Sure, the Briar Patch is thorny, tough to navigate, and can cause pain to those living within it, but better the evils you know than those you don't. See a relation to African Americans living on plantations? I personally don't interpret it that way, but I know some who do so it's worth pointing out). The original tales of Uncle Remus were written by Joel Chandler Harris, a poor Irish immigrant. When he was denied admittance to the Confederate army due to his age, he wound up on a plantation where he found he related to the slaves there due to their poor background. He overheard them sharing tales of Brer Rabbit and was intrigued. Later, while writing at a newspaper, he created the character of Uncle Remus as a way to share their stories. He never credited any of the slaves, and wound up profiting off black culture. In a way, Disney did the same exact thing by making Song of The South.
The film's theme song (as well as the theme song for Splash Mountain and the unofficial Disney theme parks tune) is Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Dah. Sounds innocent enough, right? Unfortunately, while it is an iconic Disney anthem...the song's origins aren't pretty. The main chorus of "Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Dah, Zip-A-Dee-Ay, My-Oh-My, What a wonderful day. Plenty of Sunshine, Heading my way. Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Dah, Zip-A-Dee-Ay" is a variant of the main chorus of Zip Coon. Zip Coon is a song that mocks both educated African Americans as well as newly emancipated slaves. It's chorus goes: O Zip a duden duden duden zip a duden day, O Zip a duden duden duden duden duden day, O Zip a duden duden duden zip a duden day, Zip a duden duden duden zip a duden day." Zip Coon also went on to inspire the creation of the Zip Coon character that was used in Minstrel shows (Minstrel shows were performances where white actors would wear black face and sing African American songs. ). Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Dah doesn't have the same meaning as Zip Coon, but it's ugly roots still remain.
The animated segments of the film were penned by Bill Peet, George Stallings, and Ralph Wright. The live action portions were directed by Harve Foster, and the animated parts by Wilfred Jackson.
Song of The South was released in 1946 (Gone With The Wind was released in 1939 and suffers from many of the same issues as Song). Walt claimed he fondly remembered the Uncle Remus tales from his youth, and had always wanted to make a movie out of them. He originally had wanted Song of The South to be a fully animated film focusing solely on the adventures of Brer Rabbit and Co.. Later on he decided to make it a mixture of live-action and animation (possibly because he saw how well Gone With The Wind had done financially and with awards.). He hired first time screen-writer Dalton Reymond to penn the live-action portions, Reymond was later joined by Callum Webb and Maurice Rapf. Apparently Reymond was quite a racist and it showed in his drafts of the script. Rapf was concerned about the content of the drafts, and intended to do his best to solve the racism issue (He was also against Walt making the film, which is why Walt hired him. Walt thought if anyone could make Song more sensitive, it was Rapf). Unfortunately, Rapf was taken off the project after 7 weeks due to a personal dispute with Reymond. Afterwards Morton Grant was brought on to further help with the script.
Some might say Walt was naive when it came to making Song of The South, others would say that Walt was a known racist and anti-Semite and those views are reflected in the final product, and still others say he knew the material would have glaring issues and just didn't care. Either way, it's clear Walt did want to share a message about tolerance and friendship (Johnny befriends both a sharecropper and a girl from a poorer family than his despite strong objections from his mother), he just got it across in a very problematic way.
Putting all the issues aside, is Song of The South even any good? Is it worth checking out? Unfortunately, as a whole, Song of The South is far from being one of Disney's best films. The main plot and live-action portions are pretty mediocre and dull by Disney standards. Most of the acting (with the exception of James Baskett of course) is sub-par as well. As stated numerous times, the animated segments and the songs found within are the saving grace of this film, but even they are not without their issues. I think The Walt Disney Company would have done better by confronting the multiple issues with the film head-on instead of trying to bury it and act like it never existed. By doing so, they have inadvertently given Song of The South more of a "status" than it otherwise would have had (It doesn't help that one of their greatest attractions of all time is based on the film, though Splash Mountain has far less issues than the film does). This has led to consumers seeking it out through various means online (I imagine most are disappointed with what they find).
In the end, Song of The South is a challenging, controversial film. It paints over it's numerous issues with catchy songs, gorgeous animation, and lovable animated characters. Some might say this is insidious. I have conflicting emotions about Song of The South. I love Brer Rabbit, Brer Fox, Brer Bear and their adventures. I adore the animation and songs (though the score for the live action portions is just plain bad). That said, I can clearly see the numerous problems the film poses and I acknowledge that it all makes for a fairly uncomfortable watch . Ultimately, the best thing that could come out of Song of The South is if it can spark meaningful discussions about race, prejudice, racism, etc...unfortunately, that can only happen if it is seen and analyzed (This is in no way an endorsement of the film). Song of The South remains a fascinating, frustrating, and important piece of Disney history.
1.5 STARS
Saturday, June 27, 2020
Tuesday, June 23, 2020
DOLITTLE DOES LITTLE
Dolittle is a complete, slap-dash, convoluted mess. It's hard to comprehend why RDJ would choose this as his next film after his successful long-term stint as Iron Man/Tony Stark (maybe he just wanted a film where he wouldn't have to try as hard, which is understandable). The film itself feels like it suffered from production troubles. There is an abundance of ADR (never a good sign), tons of modern humor that is painful and unfunny (at one point an octopus says: Snitches get stitches, bro!), and RDJ as Dolittle acts as if he is relapsing (It doesn't help that he consistently looks like a mess). RDJ also speaks in a bad Welsh accent, and mumbles his way through the role (Naturally, this makes it hard to understand what he's saying at times).
There's an interesting undercurrent of grief that could work in a better film, but completely fails to connect here (Dolittle is still grieving over his wife's death and has retreated from society. The few scenes where he is asked to portray the good doc's grief are some of the only times where it feels like RDJ is actually trying) .
RDJ and his wife produced this big-budget flop, but you could never tell from his acting: RDJ feels disconnected from everything and everyone here, and like he couldn't be less interested in the film he is making. His Dolittle is fairly unlikable (He only agrees to save a dying Queen after he finds out that if she dies he loses his posh estate, he seems to be fairly incompetent at adventuring, and gives up easily when the cards are stacked against him). He isn't someone you particularly want to follow.
Rami Malek (as Chichi the Gorilla), Tom Holland (as Jip the Dog), John Cena (as Yoshi the Polar Bear), Octavia Spencer (as Dab-Dab the Duck), Emma Thompson (as Polly the Parrot, she might give the best performance in the film), Craig Robinson (as Kevin the Squirrel), Kumail Nanjiani (as Plimpton the Ostrich), Ralph Fiennes (as Barry the Tiger), Selena Gomez (as Betsy the Giraffe), Marion Cotilliard (as Tutu the fox), Jason Mantzoukas (as James the Dragonfly), Will Arnett (as a jailed rabbit), and Frances De La Tour (as Ginko-Who-Soars the dragon) lend their voices and are all wasted. Antonio Banderas (as Rassouli, king of an island and father to Lilly Dolittle, The Doc's deceased wife), Jim Broadbent (as Lord Thomas Badgley), and Martin Sheen (as Dr. Blair Mudfly, a rival doctor) all pop up as the human antagonists and are wasted as well. Kasia Smutniak appears briefly as Lilly Dolittle, she is pretty and kind but barely leaves an impression.
The directing by Stephen Gaghan is unfocused and sloppy, and the script penned by Dan Gregor, Doug Mand, and Stephen Gaghan is just awful and unfunny. RDJ has built up enough good will over the past ten years or so that the decision to produce and star in this film shouldn't completely tank him (luckily). While I certainly do not like this film, I still very much love RDJ and hope he makes better decisions in the future.
In the end, Dolittle is a film that means well and will certainly entertain the very young, but will likely leave everyone else longing for a better movie (Easily the best part is the pretty animated intro). Tony Stark died for our sins, he deserves better than Dolittle.
1 STAR
There's an interesting undercurrent of grief that could work in a better film, but completely fails to connect here (Dolittle is still grieving over his wife's death and has retreated from society. The few scenes where he is asked to portray the good doc's grief are some of the only times where it feels like RDJ is actually trying) .
RDJ and his wife produced this big-budget flop, but you could never tell from his acting: RDJ feels disconnected from everything and everyone here, and like he couldn't be less interested in the film he is making. His Dolittle is fairly unlikable (He only agrees to save a dying Queen after he finds out that if she dies he loses his posh estate, he seems to be fairly incompetent at adventuring, and gives up easily when the cards are stacked against him). He isn't someone you particularly want to follow.
Rami Malek (as Chichi the Gorilla), Tom Holland (as Jip the Dog), John Cena (as Yoshi the Polar Bear), Octavia Spencer (as Dab-Dab the Duck), Emma Thompson (as Polly the Parrot, she might give the best performance in the film), Craig Robinson (as Kevin the Squirrel), Kumail Nanjiani (as Plimpton the Ostrich), Ralph Fiennes (as Barry the Tiger), Selena Gomez (as Betsy the Giraffe), Marion Cotilliard (as Tutu the fox), Jason Mantzoukas (as James the Dragonfly), Will Arnett (as a jailed rabbit), and Frances De La Tour (as Ginko-Who-Soars the dragon) lend their voices and are all wasted. Antonio Banderas (as Rassouli, king of an island and father to Lilly Dolittle, The Doc's deceased wife), Jim Broadbent (as Lord Thomas Badgley), and Martin Sheen (as Dr. Blair Mudfly, a rival doctor) all pop up as the human antagonists and are wasted as well. Kasia Smutniak appears briefly as Lilly Dolittle, she is pretty and kind but barely leaves an impression.
The directing by Stephen Gaghan is unfocused and sloppy, and the script penned by Dan Gregor, Doug Mand, and Stephen Gaghan is just awful and unfunny. RDJ has built up enough good will over the past ten years or so that the decision to produce and star in this film shouldn't completely tank him (luckily). While I certainly do not like this film, I still very much love RDJ and hope he makes better decisions in the future.
In the end, Dolittle is a film that means well and will certainly entertain the very young, but will likely leave everyone else longing for a better movie (Easily the best part is the pretty animated intro). Tony Stark died for our sins, he deserves better than Dolittle.
1 STAR
JUMANJI: THE NEXT LEVEL
The first sequel, Welcome To The Jungle, got lucky and was actually a surprisingly great, fun time. Unfortunately, the decision to go back for more is a risky move that doesn't pay off. The Next Level is entertaining, but the plot of the film, and the why and how our leads from the first film get back into the game is contrived as hell.
This three-quel desperately wants to be more than its predecessor while still reminding audiences why they might have enjoyed Welcome To The jungle (via some painful and bad call backs) .The villain this time around feels like an after-thought, and has less screen time and less to do than Van Pelt in Jungle. The humor here feels more forced and doesn't work as often as the humor in Welcome To The Jungle did, and this film makes an attempt at some serious themes that it can't pull off. To put it simple: It bites off more than it can chew.
The actors here are all more than game for the material they are handed, and all do fine jobs in their respective roles (Indeed, seeing the gang back together is the main reason to see this film). The Next Level certainly isn't terrible, but it also ain't great and is nowhere near as good as Jungle was. It also doesn't help that The Next Level appears to hint at what could be a far better sequel in the thirteenth hour.
This latest outing for what appears to be shaping up to be a Jumanji franchise is an unnecessary and unneeded sequel (especially when Jungle seemed designed to be a self-contained film considering how that one ended) that isn't all that memorable, but still manages to entertain for the most part.
3 STARS
This three-quel desperately wants to be more than its predecessor while still reminding audiences why they might have enjoyed Welcome To The jungle (via some painful and bad call backs) .The villain this time around feels like an after-thought, and has less screen time and less to do than Van Pelt in Jungle. The humor here feels more forced and doesn't work as often as the humor in Welcome To The Jungle did, and this film makes an attempt at some serious themes that it can't pull off. To put it simple: It bites off more than it can chew.
The actors here are all more than game for the material they are handed, and all do fine jobs in their respective roles (Indeed, seeing the gang back together is the main reason to see this film). The Next Level certainly isn't terrible, but it also ain't great and is nowhere near as good as Jungle was. It also doesn't help that The Next Level appears to hint at what could be a far better sequel in the thirteenth hour.
This latest outing for what appears to be shaping up to be a Jumanji franchise is an unnecessary and unneeded sequel (especially when Jungle seemed designed to be a self-contained film considering how that one ended) that isn't all that memorable, but still manages to entertain for the most part.
3 STARS
SCOOB! SHOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER
Scooby Doo, where are you? No seriously, where are you?
Let's start with the positives. Frank Welker as Scooby, Zac Efron as Fred, Amanda Seyfried as Daphne, Ken Jeong as Dyno-mutt, Billy West as Muttley (who doesn't appear until the third act, and ain't in the film much), and Jason Isaacs as Dick Dastardly are all pretty good. The first 15 minutes sets up a nice tone (that the film then completely abandons). There are lots of references to the original Scooby Doo show (including a great recreation of the classic intro). There's also a nice attempt at keeping the theme of the film about friendship (it doesn't really work though, we'll get to why in a few).
As for the ok: Will Forte and Gina Rodriguez are fine as Shaggy and Velma, but their voices don't really match the characters. There is a clear attempt to nab an all-star cast for the film, but a veteran voice cast likely would have served the film better.
Now, onto the bad. Let's start with the plot. Scooby is revealed to be the last descendant of Alexander The Great's dog. Dick Dastardly plans on using him to open the gates of the underwold (Scoob is essentially the chosen one here) so he can steal the treasure within, unaware that the three-headed dog Cerberus is inside too. Brian, the Blue Falcon's son who has inherited the title but is conceited and bad at his job, tags along for the ride. So...yeah, far from a Sooby Doo plot. There is a lot of shoot-shoot bang-bang in the film (far too much for my tastes, and far too much for a Scooby film).
Scoob is also clearly committed to creating a Hannah-Barbara cinematic universe. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but all the chaos, violence, and bombast make this outing feel like far less of a Scooby film than it should. It also doesn't help that a good potion of the film deals with Shaggy and Scooby butting heads and potentially growing apart, as well as their desire to prove themselves (Themes that were covered in the two live-action Scooby movies). These plotlines annoyed fans then, what made WB think they wouldn't now?
The Mystery Inc. gang, along with Dyno-Mutt, Dastardly, and Muttley are all fairly true to their characters, but the movie they've been crammed into isn't all that good. This is a film that is trying way too hard. If it's not the "epic" story, then it's the piles and piles of pop culture references (some work, most don't. I'm looking at you distracting and unneeded Simon Cowell cameo).
In the end, Scoob is not a bad film. The animation is well done, and the voice cast is mostly fine...it just would have been better if the people behind the scenes were more focused on staying true to the tone and spirit of the original cartoons. Scoob is sure to please young ones, but for older fans of the beloved talking dog and his stoner friend...there's not much here. Scoob is a cute film, and not much else.
2.5 STARS
Let's start with the positives. Frank Welker as Scooby, Zac Efron as Fred, Amanda Seyfried as Daphne, Ken Jeong as Dyno-mutt, Billy West as Muttley (who doesn't appear until the third act, and ain't in the film much), and Jason Isaacs as Dick Dastardly are all pretty good. The first 15 minutes sets up a nice tone (that the film then completely abandons). There are lots of references to the original Scooby Doo show (including a great recreation of the classic intro). There's also a nice attempt at keeping the theme of the film about friendship (it doesn't really work though, we'll get to why in a few).
As for the ok: Will Forte and Gina Rodriguez are fine as Shaggy and Velma, but their voices don't really match the characters. There is a clear attempt to nab an all-star cast for the film, but a veteran voice cast likely would have served the film better.
Now, onto the bad. Let's start with the plot. Scooby is revealed to be the last descendant of Alexander The Great's dog. Dick Dastardly plans on using him to open the gates of the underwold (Scoob is essentially the chosen one here) so he can steal the treasure within, unaware that the three-headed dog Cerberus is inside too. Brian, the Blue Falcon's son who has inherited the title but is conceited and bad at his job, tags along for the ride. So...yeah, far from a Sooby Doo plot. There is a lot of shoot-shoot bang-bang in the film (far too much for my tastes, and far too much for a Scooby film).
Scoob is also clearly committed to creating a Hannah-Barbara cinematic universe. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but all the chaos, violence, and bombast make this outing feel like far less of a Scooby film than it should. It also doesn't help that a good potion of the film deals with Shaggy and Scooby butting heads and potentially growing apart, as well as their desire to prove themselves (Themes that were covered in the two live-action Scooby movies). These plotlines annoyed fans then, what made WB think they wouldn't now?
The Mystery Inc. gang, along with Dyno-Mutt, Dastardly, and Muttley are all fairly true to their characters, but the movie they've been crammed into isn't all that good. This is a film that is trying way too hard. If it's not the "epic" story, then it's the piles and piles of pop culture references (some work, most don't. I'm looking at you distracting and unneeded Simon Cowell cameo).
In the end, Scoob is not a bad film. The animation is well done, and the voice cast is mostly fine...it just would have been better if the people behind the scenes were more focused on staying true to the tone and spirit of the original cartoons. Scoob is sure to please young ones, but for older fans of the beloved talking dog and his stoner friend...there's not much here. Scoob is a cute film, and not much else.
2.5 STARS
SMALLS ENJOYS A COLD ONE WITH STRANGE BREW
In Strange Brew, lovable Canadian goofball brothers and beer enthusiasts Doug and Bob Mackenzie (Dave Thomas and Rick Moranis, respectively) get a cozy new gig working at their favorite brewing company. Unbenownst to them, the company (run by a villainous Mx Von Sydow) is planning on injecting a mind-control substance into its beer supply so they can control the populace. Along with the help of an ex-hockey player (Angus McInnus) and the daughter of the recently deceased ex-head of the brewing company (Lynne Griffin), Bob and Doug will have to find a way to thwart the company's evil plan.
Strange Brew is written and directed by Rick Moranis and Dave Thomas. They work exceptionally well as the lead duo in the film. As far as directing and writing, they prove to be surprisingly competent as well. The plot is also surprisingly more complex than you would expect it to be (it also involves a next door psychiatric hospital that is involved with the brewing company).
The beating heart of the flick is Bob and Doug and the deep friendship they share. They are well-meaning, kind, and dimwitted. It feels like you are watching a couple of friends during the film, and the proceedings have a laid back, fun feel to them. They both have expert comedic timing and work off of each other very well. You buy them as friends and brothers. This was Rick Mornais' first film role, and he proves he has serious comedic chops (as does Dave Thomas).
Strange Brew is a simple, fun, and exceedingly wacky/silly (and very funny) movie. There's nothing really deep going on here. Don't expect any messages here. The aim is to show audiences a good time, and the film succeeds in its simple goal. Strange Brew may just be one of my personal favorite comedies. Put simply: It's a great, memorable film, eh?
4 STARS
Strange Brew is written and directed by Rick Moranis and Dave Thomas. They work exceptionally well as the lead duo in the film. As far as directing and writing, they prove to be surprisingly competent as well. The plot is also surprisingly more complex than you would expect it to be (it also involves a next door psychiatric hospital that is involved with the brewing company).
The beating heart of the flick is Bob and Doug and the deep friendship they share. They are well-meaning, kind, and dimwitted. It feels like you are watching a couple of friends during the film, and the proceedings have a laid back, fun feel to them. They both have expert comedic timing and work off of each other very well. You buy them as friends and brothers. This was Rick Mornais' first film role, and he proves he has serious comedic chops (as does Dave Thomas).
Strange Brew is a simple, fun, and exceedingly wacky/silly (and very funny) movie. There's nothing really deep going on here. Don't expect any messages here. The aim is to show audiences a good time, and the film succeeds in its simple goal. Strange Brew may just be one of my personal favorite comedies. Put simply: It's a great, memorable film, eh?
4 STARS
MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE ISN'T MASTERFUL, BUT IT IS FUN!
FULL DISCLOSURE: The film being discussed today was directed by Gary Goddard, who was accused of sexual misconduct by 8 men. I in no way condone or endorse this kind of behavior.
The creative mind behind Jurassic Park: The Ride, Terminator 2 3-D: Battle Across Time, and The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man ride brings us an incredibly silly, cheesy, and dated action-comedy spectacle.
In Masters of The Universe, He-Man (Dolph Lungren) and his ragtag group of freedom fighters are battling the evil Skeletor (Frank Langella) and his army in their homeland of Eternia. When He-Man and his team are outmatched, they are forced to escape through a portal to Earth (California, to be specific). Stranded in a foreign world, they are tasked with protecting the Cosmic Key, which has the ability to open a portal to anywhere in the Universe. With Skeletor hot on their trail, the final battle for mastery of the entire universe begins.
Gary Goddard directs, and his proclivity for all things theme parks shows. A good deal of the film feels like you are watching a live-action stunt show in a theme park, with all the good, the bad, and the silly a show like that entails. The effects aren't necessarily bad, but a good deal are definitely quite dated. The fight scenes are fun, but do feel fake (in fact, I'd be lying if I didn't say I was reminded of Poseidon's Fury during some portions of the film).
California and Eternia feel surprisingly empty, as there are barely any extras to be found in the film (With the budget of $22 mill, you'd think the filmmakers could afford more than a few extras). It's certainly odd. By far the worst thing about Masters of The Universe is the decision to set almost all of the film in California. The setting just doesn't really add any excitement to the film. In fact, it's a fairly bland and dull location, despite the film featuring more than it's fair share of action/fight scenes. I could see how having He-Man and crew interacting with aspects of Earth society may have sounded like a clever idea at the time, but it just doesn't work in execution. The film likely would have been better if the whole thing had just stuck to the setting of Eternia.
Dolph Lundgren is passable as He-Man. He can't really act, but he certainly looks the role. Frank Langella is fine as Skeletor, and does a suitably over-the-top performance. Billy Barty plays the role of Gwildor, a good-natured dwarf who invented the Cosmic Key and reluctantly joins He-Man's team. His character is pretty much what you would expect him to be: Annoying yet entertaining.
A young Courtney Cox plays Earth girl Julia, who is preparing to move to New Jersey while still grieving over the death of her parents years prior. Her boyfriend Kevin (Robert Duncan McNeil, who is likable and decent) and her come into possession of The Cosmic Key and team up with He-Man and crew. She does a good job with what the script gives her to do. James Tolkan (best known for his role as Principal Strickland in the Back To The Future trilogy. SLACKER!) plays Hugh Lubic, a dumb and angry detective who is roped into the proceedings.
In the end, Masters of The Universe is not a terrible film, but it's also not really all that good either. The direction from Gary Goddard is decent, and the script by David Odell is pure 80s silliness. Masters of The Universe is entertainingly bad, and either you love that kind of thing or you don't. Myself? I had a lot of fun with the film and would gladly recommend it to lovers of good-bad films.
3 STARS
3 STARS
WATERWORLD DOESN'T FLOAT
Waterworld cost $175 M to produce ($235 M in total if you count marketing and distribution), and only raked in $88 M in The US and $176 M overseas. While a flop and generally disliked by most, the bare basic plot isn't bad. An Earth where melting ice caps (global warming?) has resulted in all land mass sinking below the ocean, with survivors living on the water on sailboats, watercraft, or makeshift floating colonies is actually a very interesting, creative set-up that has potential. The Rube Goldberg-esque way the contraptions work in Waterworld is fun, and the Floating Atoll set piece is quite impressive and holds the best scenes in the entire film.
Dennis Hopper is clearly having a lot of fun as Deacon, and he is entertaining, though his villain isn't as menacing or threatening as he should be...He is cool and likable enough, though. Kevin Costner plays our "hero", The Mariner, who is a completely unlikable asshole who finally begins to soften somewhere in the third act (He's a dick for around 70 % of the film). Jeanne Triplehorn and Tina Majorino are fine as our heroine and her "adopted" kid, respectively. It's not fun to watch The Mariner continually abuse them throughout the first two acts plus of the film.
Waterworld is not helped by the extensive production troubles it ran into behind the scenes. Kevin Reynolds (the director) and Kevin Costner clashed behind the scenes, leading to Reynolds quitting the project after filming (due also in part to creative differences with the producers and Universal) and Costner taking over directing duties during post. Besides throwing out certain scenes, Costner also hired James Newton Howard to re-score the film. There were last minute script re-writes (by Joss Whedon) as well. The film is disjointed, and doesn't always feel like it flows. Events happen with little to no explanation (like Deacon's ambush later on in the film), and the editing is chaotic, fast, frenetic, and confusing.
Waterworld is a film that, by all means, should be a lot of fun. It's got a creative, interesting premise and work was clearly put into the action scenes...unfortunately, it's sunk by it's numerous production troubles and Kevin Costner's massive ego.
2 STARS
EDIT: I am happy to say that the fan cut (dubbed the Ulysses Cut) is significantly better. It doesn't necessarily fix all the film's problems, but it does flesh out the character of The Mariner (Kevin Costner) and, to a minor degree, the world the film is set in. This cut is 3 hours long (It restores 40 minutes of the film. The Ulysses Cut finally turns Waterworld into the epic it so desperately deserved to be. 3 STARS
Dennis Hopper is clearly having a lot of fun as Deacon, and he is entertaining, though his villain isn't as menacing or threatening as he should be...He is cool and likable enough, though. Kevin Costner plays our "hero", The Mariner, who is a completely unlikable asshole who finally begins to soften somewhere in the third act (He's a dick for around 70 % of the film). Jeanne Triplehorn and Tina Majorino are fine as our heroine and her "adopted" kid, respectively. It's not fun to watch The Mariner continually abuse them throughout the first two acts plus of the film.
Waterworld is not helped by the extensive production troubles it ran into behind the scenes. Kevin Reynolds (the director) and Kevin Costner clashed behind the scenes, leading to Reynolds quitting the project after filming (due also in part to creative differences with the producers and Universal) and Costner taking over directing duties during post. Besides throwing out certain scenes, Costner also hired James Newton Howard to re-score the film. There were last minute script re-writes (by Joss Whedon) as well. The film is disjointed, and doesn't always feel like it flows. Events happen with little to no explanation (like Deacon's ambush later on in the film), and the editing is chaotic, fast, frenetic, and confusing.
Waterworld is a film that, by all means, should be a lot of fun. It's got a creative, interesting premise and work was clearly put into the action scenes...unfortunately, it's sunk by it's numerous production troubles and Kevin Costner's massive ego.
2 STARS
EDIT: I am happy to say that the fan cut (dubbed the Ulysses Cut) is significantly better. It doesn't necessarily fix all the film's problems, but it does flesh out the character of The Mariner (Kevin Costner) and, to a minor degree, the world the film is set in. This cut is 3 hours long (It restores 40 minutes of the film. The Ulysses Cut finally turns Waterworld into the epic it so desperately deserved to be. 3 STARS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)