Showing posts with label Breckin Meyer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Breckin Meyer. Show all posts

August 18, 2021

Rat Race.

Review #1714: Rat Race.

Cast: 
John Cleese (Donald P. Sinclair), Breckin Meyer (Nicholas "Nick" Schaffer), Amy Smart (Tracy Faucet), Cuba Gooding Jr. (Owen Templeton), Seth Green (Duane Cody), Vince Vieluf (Blaine Cody), Lanei Chapman (Merrill Jennings), Whoopi Goldberg (Vera Baker), Jon Lovitz (Randy Pear), Kathy Najimy (Beverly "Bev" Pear), Brody Smith (Jason Pear), Jillian Marie Hubert (Kimberly Pear), Rowan Atkinson (Enrico Pollini), Dave Thomas (Harold Grisham), and Wayne Knight (Zack Mallozzi) Directed by Jerry Zucker (#585 - Top Secret!, #664 - Airplane!, #1274 - First Knight, #1626 - Ghost)

Review: 
Do you remember It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World (1963)? Stanley Kramer wanted to make a epic comedy movie, and he certainly did so with a frantic and diverting movie that stuffed its audience with plenty to try and laugh with, having plenty of comedic talent of the time and folks from yesteryear. Naturally, it inspired a few films that wanted to cash in on making an ensemble comedy involving folks trying to cash on greed and luck. These films included Scavenger Hunt (1979) and Million Dollar Mystery (1987), with the latter even having a sweepstakes to locate money (and yes, a teen won the $1 million contest). Of course, really one film that comes to this film when it comes to star-studded madcap mess movies, the easiest film to correlate with this movie is The Cannonball Run (1981). Neither movie earned much respect from folks who think they know better than audiences, but each has certainly had their own legacy in the decades that have followed each release. I say this for a movie that has turned 20 years old in Rat Race, and I would like to note that I have finally closed the circle with Zucker, in that this is the last feature film to be directed by Jerry Zucker (of course, I have forgotten about Ruthless People (1986), but that was a collaborative effort, so...), and I suppose it makes sense that the last one is a comedy after directing two films meant to be taken seriously (one with chuckles, one with unintentional chuckles, mind you). Of course, he hasn't stopped making things entirely, as he has added producing to his foray, but it is odd to see the last effort of a director best known for his work with his brother David with making spoofs that were, you know, pretty funny.

To make it short, Rat Race is not any of the films I have mentioned. Rat Race is quite disappointing, mostly because it manages to waste one's time in mediocrity, a movie that surely looked better on paper. Sure, one can always make the excuse that a comedy involving greedy folks that behave like cartoon characters doesn't have to have its head 100% straight, but there is really one requirement when it comes to making a silly movie: having consistent gags that land. Of course, it would also have helped to simply not pack so many cast members in there for one to try and follow. For a film that has six distinct groups of folks among 10 adults (and two children, but does that really count?), I find that less than half of them are effective in actually generating laughs. It is the 112 minute equivalent of stepping on a rake, where one brief moment of relief can then be followed by stepping into something that could have been avoided for no pain. The film was written by Andy Breckman. He wrote for a variety of projects such as radio, Saturday Night Live, and a handful of feature films (such as Arthur 2: On the Rocks (1988)), although the most notable creation by Breckman came the year after the release of this film with Monk. So yes, I suppose there is a lesson to be learned here or something. I think the best lesson is that sometimes, you too can cast a whole bunch of famous people who seem like they can be funny and pair them into an experience that never goes above "bare minimum" at any point for more than five minutes at a time, managing to accomplish a movie of dummy characters that do dummy things. 

There are basically two highlights: Cleese, who seems to revel in a role full of momentary eccentricity (i.e. rich people being weird) that lets him have fun without trouble. Lovitz is the second best thing, if only because he revels in the smarmy circumstances that bring everyone together for money the best - he gets stuck in the weirdest scenarios but actually lands them for chuckles, such as stealing a Nazi car or inadvertently doing a salute to WWII veterans. He seems craven enough to make it work for actual interest, while Najimy does okay when paired with Lovitz. Honestly, the others can be ranked like this in terms of mediocrity-to-less fun: Green/Vieluf, Meyer, Goldberg/Chapman, Smart, Atkinson, and Gooding Jr. Trust me, having Meyer as your attempt at a straight man is a wobbly sign already (Smart might have been a better choice, but hey, I guess flying a helicopter dangerously is meant to play for c-r-a-z-y laughs). Green and Vieluf aren't consistent, but at least one can see where things were meant to be funny. You would think an actor who won an Academy Award for essentially comic relief would be just fine here, but Gooding seems quite lost here, as if he is being befuddled by lame scenario-making that goes from something typical (i.e. losing clothing) to painful (suffering the indignity of a group of Lucille Ball impersonators). Goldberg (oh hey, that previous sentence applies here too) and Chapman don't get that much to do besides an interminable cameo involving Kathy Bates and a stupid squirrel, while Atkinson might as well just sleepwalk through his role with how bland it is. Watching a bunch of folks you probably aren't meant to like plunder depths for money is a boring idea, point blank. The ending is especially insulting, because if you are making a comedy about folks willing to go the extra mile in racing for $2 million by any greedy means necessary, you better have a conclusion that seems amusing enough to make it all fit together. Having all of them crash into a Smash Mouth concert for food donations is not that. It is a lazy ending, a bare minimum ending that might as well be equivalent to having the characters all go to a soup kitchen after a heist on Christmas. Again, not to steal from the well of citing better movies, but Mad World managed to see all the characters get their just desserts in a hospital bed that made a good punchline without seeming like a cheat. Playing "All Star" helps no one. Going around and giving money to a concert to the horror of a rich guy isn't really as funny as it could be, and it is probably because the movie has plodded around for too long with being as bare minimum as possible to where it doesn't matter. Two decades later, the only thing one learns from this film is that some movies should just stay on paper. Or perhaps one should just stick with the classics, really.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.


October 12, 2018

Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare.


Review #1144: Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare.

Cast: 
Robert Englund (Freddy Krueger), Lisa Zane (Maggie Burroughs/Katherine Krueger), Lezlie Deane (Tracy), Shon Greenblatt (John Doe), Breckin Meyer (Spencer Lewis), Ricky Dean Logan (Carlos), Yaphet Kotto (Doc), Tobe Sexton (Teenage Freddy Krueger), Cassandra Rachel Freil (Young Maggie/Katherine), and Lindsey Fields (Loretta Krueger) Directed by Rachel Talalay.

Review: 
With such a ridiculous title like this, what do you expect? The sixth (and intended to be final) film in the franchise, Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare sinks to improbably new lows in terms of execution and ridiculousness, where Freddy Krueger has turned into a cartoon character for the amusement of an audience that have seen better days and clearly have seen better films. After all, Freddy even had his own day proclaimed for him, done so by Mayor Tom Bradley for the city of Los Angeles on the day before the film's release on September 13, 1991. Sometimes you just have to admire the audacity of a film in how ridiculous it can get without being scary, and this is done within the first five minutes of the film, featuring such "bold" moments as a title card telling us about how Freddy (in the not-too distant future of ten years since the last film) has apparently eliminated all of the children and teenagers from Springwood, which I guess means he has evolved into some sort of super-villain, although that doesn't help the fact that the actual body-count is just as low as the previous film, lingering more on mediocre exposition and even more mediocre characters. But the cherry on top is Englund on a broomstick mimicking the Wicked Witch of the West while taunting someone about how they'll get them and their little soul too. It doesn't get much better from there, but at least there are cameos to keep the audience surprised (or something), from Mr. and Mrs. Tom Arnold to Johnny Depp to even Alice Cooper. I found myself wondering which sixth installment in a horror franchise was worse, this one or Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers - both are needlessly incompetent with trying to deliver slasher scares, since they both look like films given re-workings even after filming stopped - but I at least could have a laugh with this one.

The cast doesn't exactly help make the film any better either. Sure, Englund is game to spew out one-liners and do stuff equivalent to a cartoon character, but it's sad to see how the series progressed so ridiculously for something that also tries to show some of the character's origins (at least the parts that weren't said in the other films, anyway). It just seems more like it demystifies the nature of who this guy is, unless you're big on having details about someone who likes to haunt people in their dreams. Zane is the lone highlight from the other members of the cast, having some actual screen presence and being interesting to follow around with. Greenbatt can't really elevate his role with no name to anything other than bare minimum characterization. The trio of Deane-Meyer-Logan to go along with the others as the new batch of kids with a characteristic to exploit later on, just like the previous film. Kotto is fine, but he doesn't have much time on screen. It's amusing to poke at when the film wants to be like a cartoon, but the film is never scary. Whether you like the idea of the backstory scenes or not, the "dream demons" are not executed well at all - it looks too silly with its resemblance to worms to really be anything haunting. Talalay wrote the film while Michael De Luca was credited for doing the screenplay, but the film never really goes anywhere too special that isn't either done for a cheap laugh or a cheap thrill in its 89 minute run-time. The effects and slashing sequences don't really help give the movie too much life either. The last portion of the film was shot in 3-D, complete with one of the characters putting on 3-D glasses, and I do wonder how the effect looked in theaters for 1991, but it doesn't really do anything for me as a way to end the film, especially the resolution for Freddy, which combines taking elements from the climax of the first film along with an "innovative" way to take him out - putting a pipe bomb on him while impaired on a steel beam, ending with a ridiculous effect when he explodes, complete with a title drop. On the whole, this is a ridiculous installment that serves as the low point for A Nightmare on Elm Street, failing at being fine horror slasher entertainment by how it executes itself with its style and story that makes this a silly one to get through.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

January 4, 2015

Movie Night: Garfield: The Movie.


Review #689: Garfield: The Movie.

Cast
Bill Murray (Garfield), Breckin Meyer (Jon Arbuckle), Jennifer Love Hewitt (Dr. Liz Wilson), Stephen Tobolowsky (Happy Chapman), Nick Cannon (Louis), and Alan Cumming (Persnikitty) Directed by Peter Hewitt (#022 - Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey and #287 - The Borrowers)

Review
A movie based off a long running comic strip? What could go wrong? And...nothing really goes wrong, but nothing goes right either.  Garfield the comic strip is a best a mild read better suited for a Sunday read when nothing good is on but you're out of books (someone who is out of books to read? What is this, 1995?) Turning it into a movie may not be the best use of resources, and the movie proves just that. The main reason that the movie falls short is that it doesn't have much to offer and manages to be just as breeze worthy like the comic. Murray is not a bad Garfield, but when your main voice actor is only in this because he thought the movie was written by a Coen brother and confused them with Joel Cohen, that's saying something beneath the surface. The rest of the characters are more or less forgettable, with Meyer and Hewitt's characters being more standard "lovey-dovy" cliche than actual full fledged people. Actually, their characterization is more 2-D than 3-D, so props for making them comic-like? And our villain? The only notable thing he does is that he intends to use a shock collar on Odie. I realize that sounds weird to list that, but other than that, he is standard stuff, though at least Tobolowsky tries his best to make him sound interesting. The movie could be better for younger audiences, though it wears itself out after a while. Overall, the movie isn't inherently terrible, it's just not anything special. It can't even qualify as a terrible movie, it just reigns as a middle of the road movie. I'd stick to the comic...or reading the parody web comic Garfield Minus Garfield.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

July 3, 2013

Movie Night: Herbie: Fully Loaded.


Review #411: Herbie: Fully Loaded.

Cast
Lindsay Lohan (Maggie Peyton), Justin Long (Kevin), Matt Dillon (Trip Murphy), Michael Keaton (Ray Peyton, Sr), Breckin Meyer (Ray Peyton, Jr), Cheryl Hines (Sally), Jimmi Simpson (Crash), and Jill Ritchie (Charisma) Directed by Angela Robinson.

Review
I had put this film on the back burner for a while, trying to find some sort of reason to watch it, or an excuse not to watch it. And then I couldn't find a excuse not to watch it, so to get it out of my head and to also pass the time (or waste, which ever word you per fer), I decided to watch and review it. And...it's exactly what I thought it would be despite my childhood memories of it. I watched this occasionally years before I reviewed films, and the film had a quirky quality to it, but as I realize years later, this is a film that will probably connect with younger audiences, but it won't really connect with older (and sometimes but not always wiser) audiences. Lohan (who I last reviewed in #204 - Freaky Friday) isn't bad, though I do wonder how Justin Long keeps popping up here (Planet 51, Galaxy Quest, DodgeBall: A True Underdog Story, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Live Free or Die Hard), Dillon seems to ham it up playing the "villain", while Michael Keaton reminds me that even former Batmans need work. But in some ways, this film isn't helped or hurt by acting, it manages to be hurt by the level of absurdity, which I assume pleases the younger crowd. But my main questions throughout all of the film were this: Is Herbie...possessed? (And in that case would we need a car exorcist?) Is he alive? Does he eat? And why does it seem that he is a sentient being? Does he really need a driver at all? Why did he fall so far from fame? We do see a montage in the beginning, but it doesn't exactly explain why, it just shows us the earlier films were probably better than this. This is a mediocre film that tries hard to please some, and it that sense it works, but it'll baffle others.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.