Why Did I Get Married Too?

Review #2512: Why Did I Get Married Too?

Cast: 

Tyler Perry (Terry Brock), Janet Jackson (Patricia Agnew), Jill Scott (Sheila Jackson), Sharon Leal (Dianne Brock), Tasha Smith (Angela Williams), Richard T. Jones (Mike), Malik Yoba (Gavin Agnew), Lamman Rucker (Troy Jackson), Michael Jai White (Marcus Williams), with Louis Gossett Jr (Porter Jones), and Cicely Tyson (Ola Jones) Directed by Tyler Perry (#872 - A Madea Christmas, #1979 - Why Did I Get Married?)

Review: 

Admittedly, Why Did I Get Married? (2007) was perhaps destined to make money. I called it a movie that "attempts at doing pop psychology with melodrama on the level of a soap opera or an off-kilter religious movie" (ironically, Perry took out a chunk of the church scenes from adapting his play into a film). You may or may not remember how the last film: four couples went on a week-long retreat in the mountains that saw the inevitable reveal of secrets that come with, well, people, I guess. It was chock full of surprises that came as such: secret VD, blame games over who couldn't protect their son from dying, bank account draining, would-be choking out moments and believe it or not, a divorce. Now the difference is they go on a week-long trip to the Bahamas for another retreat that reunites all the folks you saw the first time around. As is usually the case, Perry wrote and produced the film, which was basically as big a hit as the original movie was with audiences. Apparently, there are rumblings of a third of these movies (Why Did I Get Married Again, but, lol, Netflix) possibly coming in the near future. 

Technically, this is a worthwhile movie, if you like stuff that really is a bunch of hokum. It retains that strange achievement of being overblown in its melodrama for 121 minutes that manages to be ridiculous and yet too hollow to actually say anything about marriage that couldn't be boiled down to a Hallmark card. It strains to be funny when its melodrama is already ridiculous enough and it never really achieves any sort of meaningful drama, particularly since it is once again a movie where Perry and Jackson are basically overshadowed by White and Smith again. Consider this for a moment - what sounds more interesting: a couple that finds about "emotional cheating" (next you'll be telling me they were...writing messages in a bottle!), a messy divorce where a psychologist isn't so perfect, seething jealousy from the new guy in the married group, or the crazed paranoia of someone who believe their husband is cheating to where they track their resting heart rate. There is just something so insane about Smith and White interact with each other that could be thought of as irresistible in a way that seems far more in sync with what audiences think about marriages than whatever twaddle Perry & Leal are trying to pull. Some might say that Jackson pulls in the most interesting performance, but the bar is, what, still Poetic Justice (1993)? The only character that maybe goes through the idea of what might be an interesting story is with Jones in the realm of understanding what it means to be divorced...of course the actual story with his character is, no I'm not joking, his sudden diagnosis of cancer (yea, the character in the middle of the film is just...going to chemotherapy). Scott and Rucker just seem lost in the shuffle and in general the movie doesn't seem to know what to do with itself.  You might remember that there was progress to all of these characters in the first film, but it basically seems like we are watching caricatures (or perhaps a template for the subsequent TV spinoff) that do not have much to say this time around. As a whole, it may be more absurd in its melodrama, but it feels less accomplished than the previous film.* In general, it just seems like a wasted venture unless one is into the Perry pulpit, which I suppose isn't up my alley this time around. But so it goes.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night - Song of the day

*Nobody can go 0-for-4 in "good" movies, right? The Married films were on a DVD four-pack with I Can Do Bad All by Myself and Madea's Witness Protection, so we will see how that goes someday.

Sounder.

Review #1972: Sounder.

Cast: 

Cicely Tyson (Rebecca Morgan), Paul Winfield (Nathan Lee Morgan), Kevin Hooks (David Lee Morgan), Carmen Matthews (Mrs. Rita Boatwright), Taj Mahal (Ike Phillips), James Best (Sheriff Charlie Young), Eric Hooks (Earl Morgan), Yvonne Jarrell (Josie Mae Morgan), Janet MacLachlan (Camille Johnson), Sylvia "Kuumba" Williams (Harriet), Ted Airhart (Mr. Perkins), Richard Durham (Perkins' Foreman), and Jerry Leggio (Prison Guard) Directed by Martin Ritt (#1411 - Hud)

Review: 

There were many types of films released in the 1970s that dealt with Black folks besides "blaxploitation" (which to be clear, had plenty of good films), ones that seemed to be a breadth of fresh air for making a quality family film for the whole audience. Given the notice of films such as Gordon Parks' The Learning Tree (1969), it shouldn't be too surprising to see features such as this one, which is an adaptation of the 1969 young adult novel of the same name that was written by William H. Armstrong. He had been inspired by an account told around the kitchen table by his family as a youth along with the story of Argus, a dog in Homer's Odyssey that awaited its master after twenty years (so yes, the title of the movie and book refers to a dog, but the movie is the only one that gives every character a name). Lonnie Elder III, an actor and playwright best known for his play Ceremonies in Dark Old Men (produced by the Negro Ensemble Company in 1969; by coincidence, one of the co-founders of the Company was Robert Hooks, father of Kevin Hooks) wrote the screenplay for the film, the first of four screenplays he did in screenwriting (which included the obscure Part 2, Sounder in 1976); he wanted to keep the film accurate in historical context without going off on "any present-day fantasies." Elder III became the first African American man to be nominated for an Academy Award for screenwriting, while this film became the first to have two African Americans nominated for Academy Awards with Tyson and Winfield. Made on a budget slightly under $2 million, the film was shot in St. Helena Parish and East Feliciana Perish in Louisiana. 

There is a clear sense of dignity and struggle that is shown throughout a mostly unsentimental 105-minute feature that is pretty good at the goals set out by its filmmakers (Ritt, who had directed a flop in his previous film adaptation in The Great White Hope (1970), took a massive pay cut to do this film). It manages to exceed comparisons one might have to other period dramas (such as the aforementioned Tree feature) that earns its emotional highs without strain. Whether favoring rural living or the big city, the movie works well for everyone without selling itself short in a tale of survival. Tyson was only cast for a lead role rather than a supporting role when Ritt erased his doubts of her being "too pretty" when she convinced him of her talent. She had acted in a variety of supporting roles in plays, film and television since the late 1950s after moving from acting from her first job as a fashion model (one would not suspect Tyson was fifteen years older than Winfield). She provides dignified presence in all the ways that matter in expression, one that leads the film along in eloquence you would see for a family film without artifice. Winfield had a handful of television roles and minor roles since the 1960s, but the Dallas native got his most notable moment with this film, one that shows him in warm strength that proves quite striking when seen before and after his key action in theft that doesn't erase our curiosity for him. Hooks provides the eyes of what we see for a good chunk of the film as the lead child actor of the film, which he handles quite well. when it comes to the expression of love for a pet, the love of reading or in general the love for striving for better things. It is a movie that we feel the heat and beauty of in its setting of the mid 1930s that isn't beholden to dull moments or artifice, such as when Tyson's character diffuses how the family minus Winfield will do what is needed to sharecrop. The scene where Hooks' character sees a school with all Black students and hears about the writings of W.E.B. DuBois is also an important highlight when it comes to the final decision set out by the main three involving the importance of using one's time for decision-making rather than letting things stay as they are. No matter what taste one has for films (action, suspense, you get the idea), the movie works for each side of the moviegoer, as evidenced by its staying power a half-century later. Ultimately, Sounder is a worthwhile period film of conviction and entertainment from top to bottom that shows worthwhile perspective of a Black Americans that shows compassion on its sleeve without blatantly requesting your pity.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Next up: Gordon's War.

Carib Gold.

Review #1799: Carib Gold.

Cast:  

Ethel Waters (Mom), Coley Wallace (Ryan), Peter Dawson (Neely), Cecil Cunningham (Barb), William T. Hill (Cap), George Renna (Bartender), Cicely Tyson (Dottie), Diana Sands (Bar Girl), Richard Ward (Lechock), Ruth Sawyer (Baby), Henry Hayward (Willie), and Geoffrey Holder (Voo Doo Dancer) Directed by Harold Young (#511 - The Three Caballeros)

Review: 

Admittedly, this film might have slipped through the cracks in any other time of day, partly because it is quite obscure. In fact, it was believed to have been lost for decades, since it was a B-movie that had a limited release (playing to segregated audiences in Key West, Florida). The screenplay and story were done by Charles Gossett and D. Lyle Kretsinger, their first and only screenplay; it was the last film directed by Harold Young, a system director if there ever was one (of course, he did direct the live-action sequences of The Three Caballeros, but still). It was shot independently by the Splendora Corporation. But there is something to discover in the curiosity of an integrated cast that features the film debut of four actors: Diana Sands, Cicely Tyson, Diana Sands, Richard Ward and Geoffrey Holder (the latter two had previous experience in television). Ethel Waters is likely the most notable name among the experienced cast, if only because she was a notable presence among Broadway and concerts for jazz and swing to go with acting roles for numerous decades. Of course, Tyson would have a lengthy career of seven decades in film and television, while the detective-turned-actor in Ward had two decades of film/TV roles with his distinct voice, and Holder was just as distinct. Wallace was more known for his amateur boxing career than as an actor, as this was his second of six overall roles (half of them had him play Joe Louis).

Well, there isn't exactly much to grapple with this movie, to be honest. It barely makes the best of its hour, since the story could really be told in probably less than half the time, one mostly shot at the Miami Seaquarium (recently built in 1955, one of the oldest oceanariums still running) and Key West, Florida. All that happens in the film is a mild expedition for gold, a title song done by Waters, one "action scene", a brief chase, voodoo, and a brief confrontation. At least one can't say the film is exploitative, if only because there is barely anything to really exploit in a film that seems lacking in suspense. Even the title song seems more like an obligation than anything. You would think a movie about sunken treasure and greed would be something else, but it is telegraphed very, very, very easily, with one-note folks everywhere you go. Tyson is the character with a mysterious disease, while Ward has an obvious chip on the shoulder, while others are just "there" (Dawson in particular). Heck, the voodoo part seems unnecessary, since it really seems like the chase segment comes to a close by sheer coincidence of the fact that town seems really small to begin with. I suppose the message of the film is something about greed...or fate? Hell, I love that there is a brief scene after the one fight sequence where two characters debate if one should stay inside (having beaten up the villain)...right before an off-screen arrest. Depth is one thing the film has exactly zero of, unless one counts sea action, but it amuses me that you can sometimes see fish swim right by the camera. Honestly, if the film hadn't languished in obscurity to the point of being thought to be lost, it might have just slipped by the radar with nary an objection, because it is really, really average. If you need an hour to kill with a few curious young presences, one could probably do better or worse, so take that for what it is worth.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: The Learning Tree.