“It's just, you know. You're just funny, it's... funny, the way you tell the story and everything.”
Welcome, it’s been a while. We’ve been pretty busy here at CGS working and shooting and writing. I’ve been quite deeply (and unusually) involved in a number of writing projects that I’m hoping to bring to fruition at some point in the near future. I’ve just finished a script for a short film called “Boiling Point” that, if all goes to plan, will be the first ever CGS production. There will be more news on that soon.
note from CGM: This man is still a dick
Max has been holding up the fort with some cracking reviews on some of the summer blockbusters I didn’t get a chance to see. I particularly liked his review of Transformers 2 (2009). HUGE FUCKING ROBOTS indeed. I agree with him about Michael Bay. The man is a god when it comes to action but his understanding of characters and their portrayal leaves much to be desired. His films featuring experienced actors are, in general, quite good.
Bad Boys (1995) and Bad Boys 2 (2003) are the perfect example of this.
Will Smith is, as we should all know by now, a good actor. I won’t hear anything bad said about him unless you’re talking about his music. His acting career has been pretty outstanding. I used to find Fresh Prince hilarious. Sure he does the family movies where some stars would mail it in and collect that dough. But are you really going to try and tell me that Independence Day (1996), Men in Black (1997) and I, Robot (2004) featured an uninterested and bored Smith? No way. And as to whether he can really hold it up on the big screen? I ask you to watch I am Legend (2007) and The Pursuit of Happiness (2006). Neither of them are brilliant movies but both feature big Willy on top form. He’s really the only reason to watch either of them. The man is a star and always seems ready and willing to give it his all.
Martin Lawrence is a star in his own right, just not on the global scale of Will Smith. He doesn’t have the stripes that Will has when it comes to big screen either. Blue Streak (1999) and Life (1999) are the only ones I can think of off the bat that I’d recommend. He is very good at what he does though, and in general that’s to be funny, which makes sense with his background in comedy and stand up. Which is why he was perfect for Bad Boys, you need an angry, neurotic black man you write Lawrence a cheque.
I love both these movies. Smith and Lawrence bring their A game with some brilliant chemistry and some hardcore attitude. Michael Bay really brings it with some of the set pieces. The final fight in the sequel is pretty goddamn explosive. They’re an almost perfect mix of comedy and action that really throws back (though not very far) to the 80’s and Lethal Weapon (1987) with the buddy cop vibe. I’d highly recommend them.
Look at Bays resume and it’s clear that not only has he been incredibly lucky to land a franchise that would make money even if Uwe Boll was in charge, but that he’s also been fortunate to have worked with some experienced actors. With The Rock (1996) he had Sean Connery and Nicolas Cage. Armageddon (1998) placed him with Bruce Willis, Billy Bob Thornton and Steve Buscemi. Both of those movies are really quite good. But as with Bad Boys I just imagine that all of the actors on set just waved Bay off when he came over to do a read through in a kind of “Don’t worry Michael, you go set up the dynamite, we got the script covered!” way.
Now look at some of the other films where he’s had a mostly young cast that might need a little more guidance than some of the more experienced veterans mentioned above. Pearl Harbour (2001) had Ben Affleck, Josh Hartnett and Kate Beckinsale as the lead roles and that film was pretty lame. The Island (2005) did have a veteran Ewan McGregor as the lead but featured an unusually bland (and still young) Scarlett Johansson. The story wasn’t brilliant but I felt that film in particular would have been a lot better with just a bit more time spent tweaking the performances, especially in a film that leans so heavily on them.
And of course there’s Transformers (2007) and Transformers 2 (2009), the second of which I have yet to see. Trusted sources inform me it’s more of the same (only louder), and to me that’s okay. I understand that this film is about the robots and the explosions with little emotional content. I’m cool with that and it’s probably the reason I hated Terminator IV (2009) because I was promised so much more. My main problem with the Transformers franchise has been the mishandling of the talent. I get that in a film about robots you want to see robots, but adding in that human side and really building on the threat of the Decepticons, not only to the Autobots but to the entire world, would have really taken this film from popcorn movie to something with a little substance.
These are made for a keen fan base that laps it up and are by no means Michael Bay’s best attempts at directing. And once again, with a young cast of Shia LaBeouf and Megan Fox, the acting is left behind in place of a lot of explosions and shouting.
Megan Fox, as an exact polar opposite of Will Smith; can’t act. I hope that’s something we all agree on. She is pretty hot, and oozes sex appeal but has very little acting ability. She’s little more than a studio construct right now. She’s a guaranteed go to player when it comes to attracting a young horny male audience to the cinema.
Shia on the other hand, is someone who I think will only get better as he gets older and moves on to more interesting projects and characters. He’s already pretty experienced and these Transformer movies could have been a chance for him to really lead a franchise (like Will Smith in Men in Black). But no, again it would seem that Bay had his crew divided into two camps, the actor’s one side and the explosive experts on the other.
Shia’s been excellent in a lot of supporting roles so he’ll bounce back and Megan Fox is guaranteed a career for as long as she’s willing to show some skin. Even though after this franchise, neither of them probably needs to work again but we all love attention so the show will go on.
Bay, will of course, continue making action movies that don’t claim to be anything more than a giant lightshow. Every once in a while a studio will realise he needs a strong cast of actors who know their role and can work individually and hand him a bunch, resulting in a good movie. It is how the industry works and it’s a shame. The man is paid to direct, and it’s like he ignores the system to get to a final product quicker.
“It'll be a cold day in hell when Harry Flugelman lets an actor tell *him* what to do!”
This brings me back to the original reason I sat down and started writing this entry. The other summer movie I had the pleasure of checking in the cinema recently was The Hangover (2009) and it has me internally conflicted. I enjoyed it and thought it was pretty funny. I don’t agree with the unnecessary hype that the film has had handed to it.
It’s not the best comedy of recent times, it’s merely another in a long line of good comedy films to come out this decade. I laughed harder and more frequently while watching both Superbad (2007) and Anchorman (2004) to name a few.
The Hangover is interesting in that most of the stuff that most comedies would kill to show happens before we pick up the story, and what we’re left with is the resulting incidents and confrontations that happen in the day following. That in itself makes it worth watching. It doesn’t follow the usual teen comedy rules of grossing out your audience because it’s not really a teen comedy at all.
This is very clear when you examine the characters. Max is correct; Zach Galifianakis excels in his role of Alan and easily controls the films two or three biggest laughs. Yet I felt the character was out of place in this movie. It’s almost like Alan would have fared better had he been written into Anchorman or a more surreal comedy. He’s a large, bearded, single eccentric man in a film where the other three main characters are family men realising that they aren’t as capable of a heavy night out as they used to be.
I’m a huge fan of Ed Helms and his work as (a different) Andy in The Office television series (US version) and he continues to show his comedic talents here. His character Stu is in a relationship with a completely overbearing and bitchy girlfriend and while he’s away in Vegas he marries a stripper. By the end of the movie he has dumped his girlfriend and organised a date with the stripper so as to ensure a real future with her.
Bradley Cooper is pretty good as Phil, who on first viewing would appear to be the playboy womaniser of the group (he just has that look) is actually the most timid, being involved in hardly any of the really crazy things that happen during the night we only see in pictures and video. The ending also reveals another part of the characters life that had remained unseen that completely changes the way you view his character.
And then there is Dough, played by Justin Bartha, the man getting married and the reason they end up in Vegas.
At the end they all toast to a new future and Alan would appear to be the odd man out. Even the comedy he produces is different. Everyone in this movie relies on realistic reactions to incredible things. Alan as a character speaks at inopportune and awkward times, mostly with one liners or a funny sentence. It’s not really a big deal but I mention it merely as another reason this isn’t perfect.
It’s a funny film. Watch it, as there probably won’t be another film as funny for another year or so but it’s not the best comedy ever.
Anyway, again I digress, as I’m not writing this to trounce all over the fun you could be having with this movie. I’m just bored with this hype train that seems to get everybody on board. It’s insulting my inner artist.
So anyway
I said that I didn’t think it was the funniest movie ever to a friend, to which he replied “what is?” Good question, and one that’s a lot more complicated than it may at first seem. I mean there are comedy movies that carry hardly a giggle, and then there are movies like those that the Coen brothers make that are hilarious in their own right, without every pretending to be a comedy (Check at the bottom for a link). I couldn’t even think of a movie I could rank rightly as the funniest movie I have ever seen because, simply, there’s been a few over the years.
It really depends on what mood I’m in and my taste at the time. Genres have become so muddled and convoluted that no movie is just one genre. Most films have some/all of the clear signs of a comedy smoothly woven into the stories narrative. Like I said earlier, the Bad Boys franchise is an action one, but it’s funny as hell.
As is Miller’s Crossing (1990), the Coen brothers brilliant crime thriller that shines through with some hilarious moments. None of them are the funniest movie ever.
I’m a big Will Ferrell fan and Anchorman was a stroke of genius in my opinion. I know a lot of people don’t like him but I really rate his character acting, and he does his job well. His comedies are always quite highly rated in my books and I absolutely loved Stranger than Fiction (2006), another film that was very funny in its own right. The problem with Ferrell is that I understand his comedy doesn’t appeal to everyone, and because of that I can’t say any of his movies are the funniest of all time.
In the same vein are the Mel Brooks type comedies (of which I’m secretly quite a big fan). I still remember pissing myself the first time I saw Blazing Saddles (1974). That film is really quite brilliant and Cleavon Little and Gene Wilder are hilarious. I like it for its mix of comedy. It has the gross out moments like when everyone is farting around a campfire but then balances that with clever humour, such as when Little as Bart pretends to take himself hostage to get away from a town of white racists at the beginning. Hilarious.
Three Amigos! (1986) is very similar. There are brilliant performances from Steve Martin and Chevy Chase in this tale of mistaken identity. But once again, I just can’t place my reputation on saying these are the funniest films ever.
I guess this just proves we (I say we, I mean I) should think more carefully before I speak. The funniest film ever is a relative thing, and so even if I knew myself I’d still have others to justify it to.
I do know who my favourite comedian is. I’m a big fan of the usual suspects like Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Richard Pryor, Steve Martin, Bill Bailey, Sacha Baron Cohen, and Frankie Boyle and so on. And I mean really, that list could go on forever. There’s few stand up routines I can’t sit through.
My favourite of them all would have to be Dave Chappelle. I don’t know what it is but his comedy just gets me. It’s brilliant on so many levels. His sesame street sketch from Killing ‘em softly (2000) is truly great. The whole of that show is actually. It’s the same with The Chappelle Show which is a bit risky but still features some great material.
And then there’s Half Baked (1998), which is in my opinion as near perfect as you’re going to get from a stoner movie. I’ve seen a lot of them, including the Cheech and Chong films all the way down to the basement stoner films like Evil Bong (2006), and Half Baked is way up there.
So anyways, I’ve rambled without giving you any real reviews. Unfortunate. I’ll ask instead for people to get back to me about their opinion on what is the funniest film ever. I’ll try and keep searching while viewing and see if I can find an answer.
As to reviews, I have nothing really new for you this time, so I’ll point you over to an excellent review of one of my favourite films by a good friend of ours over at sirensoflondon. It’s a really eloquently and well thought out review that makes me a little bit ashamed of when I write entries like this. Check it out and I’ll catch you soon.
Cheerio.
CGJ
Welcome, it’s been a while. We’ve been pretty busy here at CGS working and shooting and writing. I’ve been quite deeply (and unusually) involved in a number of writing projects that I’m hoping to bring to fruition at some point in the near future. I’ve just finished a script for a short film called “Boiling Point” that, if all goes to plan, will be the first ever CGS production. There will be more news on that soon.
note from CGM: This man is still a dick
Max has been holding up the fort with some cracking reviews on some of the summer blockbusters I didn’t get a chance to see. I particularly liked his review of Transformers 2 (2009). HUGE FUCKING ROBOTS indeed. I agree with him about Michael Bay. The man is a god when it comes to action but his understanding of characters and their portrayal leaves much to be desired. His films featuring experienced actors are, in general, quite good.
Bad Boys (1995) and Bad Boys 2 (2003) are the perfect example of this.
Will Smith is, as we should all know by now, a good actor. I won’t hear anything bad said about him unless you’re talking about his music. His acting career has been pretty outstanding. I used to find Fresh Prince hilarious. Sure he does the family movies where some stars would mail it in and collect that dough. But are you really going to try and tell me that Independence Day (1996), Men in Black (1997) and I, Robot (2004) featured an uninterested and bored Smith? No way. And as to whether he can really hold it up on the big screen? I ask you to watch I am Legend (2007) and The Pursuit of Happiness (2006). Neither of them are brilliant movies but both feature big Willy on top form. He’s really the only reason to watch either of them. The man is a star and always seems ready and willing to give it his all.
Martin Lawrence is a star in his own right, just not on the global scale of Will Smith. He doesn’t have the stripes that Will has when it comes to big screen either. Blue Streak (1999) and Life (1999) are the only ones I can think of off the bat that I’d recommend. He is very good at what he does though, and in general that’s to be funny, which makes sense with his background in comedy and stand up. Which is why he was perfect for Bad Boys, you need an angry, neurotic black man you write Lawrence a cheque.
I love both these movies. Smith and Lawrence bring their A game with some brilliant chemistry and some hardcore attitude. Michael Bay really brings it with some of the set pieces. The final fight in the sequel is pretty goddamn explosive. They’re an almost perfect mix of comedy and action that really throws back (though not very far) to the 80’s and Lethal Weapon (1987) with the buddy cop vibe. I’d highly recommend them.
Look at Bays resume and it’s clear that not only has he been incredibly lucky to land a franchise that would make money even if Uwe Boll was in charge, but that he’s also been fortunate to have worked with some experienced actors. With The Rock (1996) he had Sean Connery and Nicolas Cage. Armageddon (1998) placed him with Bruce Willis, Billy Bob Thornton and Steve Buscemi. Both of those movies are really quite good. But as with Bad Boys I just imagine that all of the actors on set just waved Bay off when he came over to do a read through in a kind of “Don’t worry Michael, you go set up the dynamite, we got the script covered!” way.
Now look at some of the other films where he’s had a mostly young cast that might need a little more guidance than some of the more experienced veterans mentioned above. Pearl Harbour (2001) had Ben Affleck, Josh Hartnett and Kate Beckinsale as the lead roles and that film was pretty lame. The Island (2005) did have a veteran Ewan McGregor as the lead but featured an unusually bland (and still young) Scarlett Johansson. The story wasn’t brilliant but I felt that film in particular would have been a lot better with just a bit more time spent tweaking the performances, especially in a film that leans so heavily on them.
And of course there’s Transformers (2007) and Transformers 2 (2009), the second of which I have yet to see. Trusted sources inform me it’s more of the same (only louder), and to me that’s okay. I understand that this film is about the robots and the explosions with little emotional content. I’m cool with that and it’s probably the reason I hated Terminator IV (2009) because I was promised so much more. My main problem with the Transformers franchise has been the mishandling of the talent. I get that in a film about robots you want to see robots, but adding in that human side and really building on the threat of the Decepticons, not only to the Autobots but to the entire world, would have really taken this film from popcorn movie to something with a little substance.
These are made for a keen fan base that laps it up and are by no means Michael Bay’s best attempts at directing. And once again, with a young cast of Shia LaBeouf and Megan Fox, the acting is left behind in place of a lot of explosions and shouting.
Megan Fox, as an exact polar opposite of Will Smith; can’t act. I hope that’s something we all agree on. She is pretty hot, and oozes sex appeal but has very little acting ability. She’s little more than a studio construct right now. She’s a guaranteed go to player when it comes to attracting a young horny male audience to the cinema.
Shia on the other hand, is someone who I think will only get better as he gets older and moves on to more interesting projects and characters. He’s already pretty experienced and these Transformer movies could have been a chance for him to really lead a franchise (like Will Smith in Men in Black). But no, again it would seem that Bay had his crew divided into two camps, the actor’s one side and the explosive experts on the other.
Shia’s been excellent in a lot of supporting roles so he’ll bounce back and Megan Fox is guaranteed a career for as long as she’s willing to show some skin. Even though after this franchise, neither of them probably needs to work again but we all love attention so the show will go on.
Bay, will of course, continue making action movies that don’t claim to be anything more than a giant lightshow. Every once in a while a studio will realise he needs a strong cast of actors who know their role and can work individually and hand him a bunch, resulting in a good movie. It is how the industry works and it’s a shame. The man is paid to direct, and it’s like he ignores the system to get to a final product quicker.
“It'll be a cold day in hell when Harry Flugelman lets an actor tell *him* what to do!”
This brings me back to the original reason I sat down and started writing this entry. The other summer movie I had the pleasure of checking in the cinema recently was The Hangover (2009) and it has me internally conflicted. I enjoyed it and thought it was pretty funny. I don’t agree with the unnecessary hype that the film has had handed to it.
It’s not the best comedy of recent times, it’s merely another in a long line of good comedy films to come out this decade. I laughed harder and more frequently while watching both Superbad (2007) and Anchorman (2004) to name a few.
The Hangover is interesting in that most of the stuff that most comedies would kill to show happens before we pick up the story, and what we’re left with is the resulting incidents and confrontations that happen in the day following. That in itself makes it worth watching. It doesn’t follow the usual teen comedy rules of grossing out your audience because it’s not really a teen comedy at all.
This is very clear when you examine the characters. Max is correct; Zach Galifianakis excels in his role of Alan and easily controls the films two or three biggest laughs. Yet I felt the character was out of place in this movie. It’s almost like Alan would have fared better had he been written into Anchorman or a more surreal comedy. He’s a large, bearded, single eccentric man in a film where the other three main characters are family men realising that they aren’t as capable of a heavy night out as they used to be.
I’m a huge fan of Ed Helms and his work as (a different) Andy in The Office television series (US version) and he continues to show his comedic talents here. His character Stu is in a relationship with a completely overbearing and bitchy girlfriend and while he’s away in Vegas he marries a stripper. By the end of the movie he has dumped his girlfriend and organised a date with the stripper so as to ensure a real future with her.
Bradley Cooper is pretty good as Phil, who on first viewing would appear to be the playboy womaniser of the group (he just has that look) is actually the most timid, being involved in hardly any of the really crazy things that happen during the night we only see in pictures and video. The ending also reveals another part of the characters life that had remained unseen that completely changes the way you view his character.
And then there is Dough, played by Justin Bartha, the man getting married and the reason they end up in Vegas.
At the end they all toast to a new future and Alan would appear to be the odd man out. Even the comedy he produces is different. Everyone in this movie relies on realistic reactions to incredible things. Alan as a character speaks at inopportune and awkward times, mostly with one liners or a funny sentence. It’s not really a big deal but I mention it merely as another reason this isn’t perfect.
It’s a funny film. Watch it, as there probably won’t be another film as funny for another year or so but it’s not the best comedy ever.
Anyway, again I digress, as I’m not writing this to trounce all over the fun you could be having with this movie. I’m just bored with this hype train that seems to get everybody on board. It’s insulting my inner artist.
So anyway
I said that I didn’t think it was the funniest movie ever to a friend, to which he replied “what is?” Good question, and one that’s a lot more complicated than it may at first seem. I mean there are comedy movies that carry hardly a giggle, and then there are movies like those that the Coen brothers make that are hilarious in their own right, without every pretending to be a comedy (Check at the bottom for a link). I couldn’t even think of a movie I could rank rightly as the funniest movie I have ever seen because, simply, there’s been a few over the years.
It really depends on what mood I’m in and my taste at the time. Genres have become so muddled and convoluted that no movie is just one genre. Most films have some/all of the clear signs of a comedy smoothly woven into the stories narrative. Like I said earlier, the Bad Boys franchise is an action one, but it’s funny as hell.
As is Miller’s Crossing (1990), the Coen brothers brilliant crime thriller that shines through with some hilarious moments. None of them are the funniest movie ever.
I’m a big Will Ferrell fan and Anchorman was a stroke of genius in my opinion. I know a lot of people don’t like him but I really rate his character acting, and he does his job well. His comedies are always quite highly rated in my books and I absolutely loved Stranger than Fiction (2006), another film that was very funny in its own right. The problem with Ferrell is that I understand his comedy doesn’t appeal to everyone, and because of that I can’t say any of his movies are the funniest of all time.
In the same vein are the Mel Brooks type comedies (of which I’m secretly quite a big fan). I still remember pissing myself the first time I saw Blazing Saddles (1974). That film is really quite brilliant and Cleavon Little and Gene Wilder are hilarious. I like it for its mix of comedy. It has the gross out moments like when everyone is farting around a campfire but then balances that with clever humour, such as when Little as Bart pretends to take himself hostage to get away from a town of white racists at the beginning. Hilarious.
Three Amigos! (1986) is very similar. There are brilliant performances from Steve Martin and Chevy Chase in this tale of mistaken identity. But once again, I just can’t place my reputation on saying these are the funniest films ever.
I guess this just proves we (I say we, I mean I) should think more carefully before I speak. The funniest film ever is a relative thing, and so even if I knew myself I’d still have others to justify it to.
I do know who my favourite comedian is. I’m a big fan of the usual suspects like Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Richard Pryor, Steve Martin, Bill Bailey, Sacha Baron Cohen, and Frankie Boyle and so on. And I mean really, that list could go on forever. There’s few stand up routines I can’t sit through.
My favourite of them all would have to be Dave Chappelle. I don’t know what it is but his comedy just gets me. It’s brilliant on so many levels. His sesame street sketch from Killing ‘em softly (2000) is truly great. The whole of that show is actually. It’s the same with The Chappelle Show which is a bit risky but still features some great material.
And then there’s Half Baked (1998), which is in my opinion as near perfect as you’re going to get from a stoner movie. I’ve seen a lot of them, including the Cheech and Chong films all the way down to the basement stoner films like Evil Bong (2006), and Half Baked is way up there.
So anyways, I’ve rambled without giving you any real reviews. Unfortunate. I’ll ask instead for people to get back to me about their opinion on what is the funniest film ever. I’ll try and keep searching while viewing and see if I can find an answer.
As to reviews, I have nothing really new for you this time, so I’ll point you over to an excellent review of one of my favourite films by a good friend of ours over at sirensoflondon. It’s a really eloquently and well thought out review that makes me a little bit ashamed of when I write entries like this. Check it out and I’ll catch you soon.
Cheerio.
CGJ
0 comments:
Post a Comment