August 28, 2021
Honeymoon in Vegas.
November 16, 2020
Get Smart.
Cast:
Steve Carell (Maxwell Smart), Anne Hathaway (Agent 99), Dwayne Johnson (Agent 23), Alan Arkin (The Chief), Terence Stamp (Siegfried), Masi Oka (Bruce), Nate Torrence (Lloyd), Dalip Singh (Dalip), Ken Davitian (Shtarker), Terry Crews (Agent 91), David Koechner (Larabee), James Caan (The President), David S. Lee (Ladislas Krstic), Bill Murray (Agent 13), and Patrick Warburton (Hymie) Directed by Peter Segal (#466 - Nutty Professor II: The Klumps, #826 - Naked Gun 33 1/3: The Final Insult, and #1066: - The Longest Yard (2005))
Review:
If there is anything that the last few years have taught me, it is the value of finding television series from the past to look upon from start to finish and enjoy in all of its values, whether that means comedy or something else. Get Smart (created by Mel Brooks and Buck Henry) ran for five seasons from 1965 to 1970, with Brooks having a desire to create a "crazy, unreal, comic-strip king of thing about something besides a family", alongside the fact that the late 1960s had a boom in spy shows (with programs such as The Man from U.N.C.L.E. and The Avengers). It featured Don Adams as the main star, who was mostly known for his nightclub and television work prior to playing the role that made him an TV icon in Maxwell Smart. Barbara Feldon and Edward Platt co-starred in the show to the benefit of numerous humorous exchanges.
The funny thing is that they already made a film adaptation of Get Smart, with The Nude Bomb (1980, having only Adams). It did not succeed well with anyone. A TV revival film and a short-lived revival series followed in the next few years, both having Adams and Feldon star among others (the revival had Andy Dick as a star - it did not succeed well with anyone). And yet, here we are, having to rely on the director that gave us the worst Naked Gun film. Sure, Peter Segal isn't a terrible director, in the same way that if you cloned ten of him you may end up with one possible movie of theirs that will actually be really interesting to view for laughs. This is not that time. Perhaps it is a coincidence that the film seems tedious by the first 25 minutes, because you could simply use that time to watch one Get Smart episode instead. Sure, the show did have its moments that don't quite age well (there are quite a few stereotypes present at certain episodes), but generally there was plenty to enjoy when it came to the bumbling efficiency portrayed by Adams that went with the clever clear-cut Feldon and the long-suffering Platt. What we have here is a joke of itself, mediocre in every which way with all of its obvious jokes that goes to show how much a modern comedy really can make you question the validity of time itself when it is 110 minutes long. The movie may not have a laugh track like the show, but it sure seems to play way too much for obvious moments way too much, and it manages to be excruciating in its attempt at mixing action and humor, making what was generally a comic spy show into an action spy comedy - for heaven's sake, the Austin Powers series wasn't even this bumbling in its stupidity. Incidentally, both feature at least one joke involving a fat suit - get it, because Max was fat, but now he isn't, truly the bastion of originality when it comes to updating old material to the modern age...if you are 12 years old. But hey, how many directors featured on Movie Night have had four consecutive stinkers featured?
By this point in time, perhaps Carell seemed like the exact choice for a bumbling lead, as he had managed to do well with The Office since its premiere on television in 2005 - at least when the show actually utilized him for worthwhile moments of humor as opposed to dumb gags. Little Miss Sunshine (2006) only furthered that curiosity. Here, he just seems mired in a lame situational role, where gags involving him seem to be easy to call out a few seconds before they actually happen. He seems trapped here, sorely missing that certain brazen charm that Adams had brought to the role that means more than just saying a line from before and hoping it sticks (having him be a bumbling rookie rather than just an established bumbler also doesn't gel). In other words, saying "would you believe..." is only really funny when the right timing comes along with it. The same goes for Hathaway, who only succeeds in making one realize just how Feldon did so well with silky smooth confidence that played really well with Adams on the show. Here, it is liking watching two actors engage in "Baby's First Action Comedy", one where you could almost replace one of them with a wax dummy and probably not notice half the time. She seems to deserve better here, because one doesn't find anything here to really find funny besides the occasional eye glance. It is all cliché with no fiber behind it. Johnson is okay, in the sense that if the film needs something with self-assured charm that he can deliver it, but anything else is too murky for him (the same can be said for anyone really, but I digress). Arkin does lend a laugh or so with an otherwise middle-ground imitation of what was done before, which is also reflected with Stamp (who isn't exactly trying to impersonate Bernie Kopell). Oka and Torrence supposedly are meant to be an amusing duo as side characters, but watching my cat mess around with cords is more amusing to take note of. At least Singh has it easy, since he doesn't talk much. Actually, the one real sticking point I can use to point out the contrast in TV and film is in Koechner, who while seeming like a decent comic presence in other films is sorely the wrong one to make comic antics come across with what the show brought to spies - it wasn't high brow stuff, but it surely had more to do with quirky joy than the pale action tones with sprinkles of jokes present here.
There were quite a few silly scenarios present in the show, why don't we recall some of them: One involved protecting a prince that needs to stay fat to still be prince, and there were countless ones involving smuggling (such as through dolls, circuses, and parrots). Here, writers Tom J. Astle and Matt Ember have merely caught a shell of what was done before, winking too much at itself with attempts at humor while its obvious attempts at capturing action feel flat. Would you believe...that there was an intent to make a sequel? Would you believe...that Carell wrote his own script for it? Would you believe...nobody really had interest to do a sequel? The answer to all these questions is a yes, with my condescension landing especially hard on the latter question, because this was a tiresome sit to really do. One could be generous when it comes to its attempt of comedy and action, but in the end it all comes down to preference with adaptation and the overall success rate of actually making a worthwhile successor to what was done before. In this case, there is no ray of hope in the proverbial sunshine to be found here, with a film that is a mundane malfunctioning modern-day mediocrity in of itself. You might say they missed it by that much - in this case, by a mile.
Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.
May 31, 2017
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs.

Review #940: Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs.
Cast:
Bill Hader (Flint Lockwood), Anna Faris (Sam Sparks), James Caan (Tim Lockwood), Neil Patrick Harris (Steve the Monkey), Bruce Campbell (Mayor Shelbourne), Andy Samberg (Brent McHale), Mr. T (Officer Earl Devereaux), Bobb'e J. Thompson (Calvin "Cal" Devereaux), Benjamin Bratt (Manny), and Al Roker (Patrick Patrickson) Directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller (#540 - The Lego Movie and #568 - 21 Jump Street)
Review:
The last time that I had reviewed an animated movie was back in December (with Beauty and the Beast - #891), so it is welcome to review a film that is from a different animation studio - Sony Pictures Animation. This is based off the children's book of the same name, which I remember reading quite fondly when I was a child; obviously the movie takes liberties with the source material (with the food falling from the sky being from a machine being one example), but can it manage to pull off delicious entertainment (pardon the pun)? To put it lightly, it works just fine. Hader and Faris shine just fine as leads, having a fair amount of chemistry while also being fairly interesting in their own ways; Hader's character treads on familiar grounds, but he manages to give the character enough likability and charm, especially when on screen with Faris' character, who is equally engaging to watch. The father-son dynamic between Hader and Caan goes around the same lines that you'd expect from these kind of movies, though at least it isn't broadly annoying. Campbell does a fine job at showing the gluttony of the de facto antagonist of the movie (unless you count an abundance of food as an adversary); the supporting cast is pretty likable, with Harris, Samberg and Mr. T being capable highlights. The highlight of the film is the animation, which is bright and colorful but it fits for the movie; seeing burgers come out of the sky while the sky becomes a shade of purple is quite nice to look at (alongside other shots of fun foods, like ice cream). It isn't a movie without much emotional punch, but there is enough entertainment and moments of charm and food (so much food) within its 90 minute run-time to make a capable movie. Is it something to the caliber up something like Up (#288, released months before this film)? Not quite, but not everything needs to be that kind of gem; sometimes the best thing to watch (or eat) is a nice tasty digestible burger (or movie). Bottom line, this is a capable little film worth at least checking out.
Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.
December 20, 2014
Movie Night: Elf.

Review #677: Elf.
Cast
Will Ferrell (Buddy Hobbs), James Caan (Walter Hobbs), Zooey Deschanel (Jovie), Mary Steenburgen (Emily Hobbs), Daniel Tay (Michael Hobbs), Ed Asner (Santa Claus), Bob Newhart (Papa Elf), Faizon Love (Gimbel's manager), and Peter Dinklage (Miles Finch) Directed by Jon Favreau (#135 - Iron Man and #334 - Iron Man 2)
Review
I admit, this movie probably should've been covered earlier in our four year run. The fact that this is the anniversary day only magnifies minor missteps and also films I should've covered. But hey, now I can cross this one off my own little list (I'm sure your lists are much more reasonable than mine). I admit, Buddy could be an annoying character with the wrong actor. But Ferrell manages to give off a lot of energy and makes the movie a lot more fun, especially when around Caan, who is just an array of sunshine. If it was a cold star, anyway. The cast is charming, especially Newhart, who is fun to watch, even when weighted down by Ferrell...literally. The movie has some cheer and charm to it, and I think my favorite scene is when Buddy decorates Gimbel's at night. There is something funny about making snowflakes and a Lego Empire State Building (with a train!) all in one night. That, and Peter Dinklage attacking Buddy. I was surprised that Jon Favreau directed this film, but everybody has their duck in a chicken coop (Or something like that). The movie does a good deal of Christmas cheer to it while also being enjoyable. And because of this movie, I now know who (or what) a Zooey is, so I guess that's something. Very nice voice. The movie is quirky enough and manageable enough to be a classic, so I'd say to go watch it. And then get a big tree.
Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.
April 21, 2012
Movie Night: Rollerball.
Cast
James Caan (Jonathan E.), John Houseman (Mr. Bartholomew), Maud Adams (Ella), John Beck (Moonpie), Moses Gunn (Cletus), Ralph Richardson (Librarian), Pamela Hensley (Mackie), and Barbara Trentham (Daphne) Directed by Norman Jewison.
Review
The film is a departure from other classic sci-fi films, as its theme is not of robots, aliens, or war, but violence. But that only makes the film better as we get some decent acting from Caan, and probably the standout of the film, the rollerball scenes. They still look great to this day, with this film being the first to credit stuntmen in the credits, showing the hard work it has done for a film that while not being great (It feels slow at times), it leaves an impression on you, unlike the remake, which just...No.
Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.
