Showing posts with label Jeffrey Tambor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jeffrey Tambor. Show all posts

August 8, 2024

Radioland Murders.

Review #2241: Radioland Murders.

Cast: 
Brian Benben (Roger Henderson), Mary Stuart Masterson (Penny Henderson), Scott Michael Campbell (Billy Budge), Michael Lerner (Lieutenant Cross), Ned Beatty (General Walt Whalen), Brion James (Bernie King), Stephen Tobolowsky (Max Applewhite), Michael McKean (Rick Rochester), Corbin Bernsen (Dexter Morris), Bobcat Goldthwait (Wild Writer), Anita Morris (Claudette Katzenback), Jeffrey Tambor (Walt Whalen Jr), Larry Miller (Herman Katzenback), Christopher Lloyd (Zoltan), Harvey Korman (Jules Cogley), and Dylan Baker (Detective Jasper) Directed by Mel Smith.

Review: 
Believe it or not, I have had this film very, very, very loosely on the radar for years. Here's a good question for you folks: would you believe that this film had George Lucas as a writer? Among the fifteen films where he has been credited as a writer (story or otherwise), it probably goes without saying this is the most obscure of the group. Lucas thought of the story for the film around the time he had developed American Graffiti, which if one remembers was released in 1973 (Lucas equated the friendship had in the film between the kids and the disc jockey to a phenomenon that Radioland would explore further when it comes to radio infused with fantasy). The co-writers of that film in Gloria Katz and Willard Huyck were asked by Lucas to work on the script for the film, which in the mind of Lucas was meant to be aimed as a homage to films such as Who Done It (the Abbott and Costello film from 1942); strangely enough, if one looks up this film on Wikipedia, it lists two other films involving murders at a radio station. The success of films such as Star Wars (1977) among other things kept Lucas busy, but eventually he came back to the idea of a film based on his interests in old-time radio, once stating that "You can trace radio back to the old storytellers around the fire. It's been lost over the years." By the time of the 1990s, one could utilize computer technology for their films, and this apparently is one that really used it to distinct usage, such as the sights in the exterior of the main building the film takes place to go along with select interior walls to go with a certain shot for the climax. Jeff Reno and Ron Osborn (best known for their work on the TV show Moonlighting) were hired to deliver re-writes to the script, evidently under the request of Universal Pictures. The director was Mel Smith, who had done plenty of work within sketch comedy in his native England prior to directing his first film with The Tall Guy (1989), which Lucas liked. The result was a production that had plenty of rushed work near its ending stages, with Lucas apparently doing some unit work alongside Smith. One description of the film was "cinematic pickup sticks." The film, once budgeted for $10 million that eventually rose to $15 million as a Lucasfilm production for Universal, came and went into theaters to incredibly small audience turnout. Smith directed three further films before his death in 2013 at the age of 60, most notably with Bean (1997).

Why don't we be a little nice for a moment when it comes to a movie now three decades old: there are gags in it that are worth a chuckle (heh, radio will never die...), and it is actually a bit interesting to figure what is an special effect in a movie that one wouldn't expect to need many effects, which make for a curious eye (or what have you) on the chase at times. It looks like a radio production for worthwhile decor. One gets a slight chuckle at seeing George Burns basically play himself for one last film bit (incidentally, Burns, playing a 100-year-old comedian for a bit, would die in 1996 at the age of 100). Now, where were we? You don't usually see it happen, but this is one of those sad, sad, sad times where you can see just where a film is about to die that makes one really understand the meaning of "death by a thousand cuts". I feared it would happen late in the 108-minute runtime but nope, this is a movie that either ropes you in with its barrage of slapstick and zany nature or makes you internally scream for it to shut up and breathe. It tries to be quick in pace with its 1939 setting that tries to make one interested in the workings of its radio trappings and the growing murder mystery...and it really strains credibility once you wonder why it couldn't just have been one or the other instead of this miserable mishmash. See, one really wants to like these people and the strange quirks that come with a soundman being played by the most lucid actor possible in Lloyd or the goofy military-stylings of Beatty...and then one gets to the leads and finds the charm levels are essentially right down the tube. It doesn't seem particularly fair to denigrate Masterson (then known for roles such as Immediate Family [1989]) and Benben (the then star of the HBO sitcom Dream On), because surely, they were at least game to do the gags with quick timing and the routine I'm sure you would expect of a once burning romance. But with Benben and his preening mugging in a role that is meant to be funny in its comedy of circumstance (get it? he happens to be around when murders keep happening? eh?!), you can't craft a winner when essentially stuck in a pit with a plastic spoon when Masterson is essentially left adrift to try and match. The sitcom-level dynamic just comes off as noise bereft of life. Even seeing Lerner there makes one sad because if you're going to see someone play a familiar role, you sure as hell want it to be in something more rewarding (Goldthwait somehow makes his performance in Scrooged seem subtle). Campbell isn't even on the level of a goofy Baker while poor Tobolowsky is merely ordinary until the film remembers it has a mystery to solve. By the time the film lumbers to the end of who did what and why to go with how and where it will go, you are gladder that it has ceased transmission. In trying to capture what one thinks the screwball was all about in the realm of rapid-fire construction, being outclassed by previous throwback attempts like Oscar (1991) is a sad state of mind to be in. With middling interest in characters that don't win one's attention for an overcooked script, one can only find pity within a film that never really had a chance.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.
Next up: Hell, come on down Dutch.

June 7, 2016

City Slickers.


Review #808: City Slickers.

Cast
Billy Crystal (Mitch Robbins), Daniel Stern (Phil Berquist), Bruno Kirby (Ed Furillo), Patricia Wettig (Barbara Robbins), Helen Slater (Bonnie Rayburn), Jack Palance (Curly Washburn), Noble Willingham (Clay Stone), Tracey Walter (Cookie), Jeffrey Tambor (Lou), Josh Mostel (Barry Shalowitz), David Paymer (Ira Shalowitz), Bill Henderson (Dr. Ben Jessup), Phill Lewis (Dr. Steve Jessup), Kyle Secor (Jeff), Dean Hallo (T.R.) Directed by Ron Underwood.

Review
On the 25th Anniversary of this movie's release, I decided that it would be a good idea to make a review for it and ultimately it turned out to be a great idea. City Slickers is not just a well-made comedy, it is also a movie with layers of drama that manages to give it enough weight to make for a truly entertaining film. The main trio (Crystal, Stern, Kirby) have good chemistry with each other, managing to share some good moments of screen together; one of my favorites is when they are talking about their best (and worst) days, mainly because we get a glimpse at what made them feel their happiest (along with their lowest), as they are trying to capture that spirit again. The movie never feels contrived in either its comedy or its drama, always managing to keep a balance. Naturally, the supporting cast is also a key highlight, with Palance standing out easily, with his first scene having him rope a character to a fence, complete with that chiseled look of his He plays the role with simply and effectively, without any ounce of fakery, and he certainly works well with Crystal, particularly when trying to deliver a calf. He doesn't have all too much screen time, but he is certainly memorable enough and excellent to the core, and his performance managed to snag an Oscar. There is a certain appeal to what these characters are going through, with them trying to use a dude ranch (disguised as a mythic kind of fantasy) to solve their problems, as weird as it may seem. You get to feel for these characters, while also having a laugh at the lines and gags that make up an enjoyable movie. I'd recommend seeing it, one for the jokes, and one for the other elements that give it much needed weight.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

May 12, 2013

Movie Night: Muppets from Space.


Review #377: Muppets from Space.

Cast
Dave Goelz (The Great Gonzo, Dr. Bunsen Honeydew, Waldorf, The Bird Man, The Swedish Chef and Zoot), Steve Whitmire (Kermit the Frog, Rizzo the Rat, Beaker and Bean Bunny), Frank Oz (Miss Piggy, Fozzie Bear, Animal and Sam the Eagle), Bill Barretta (Pepe the King Prawn, Bobo the Bear as Agent Rentro, Johnny Fiama, Bubba the Rat and Rowlf the Dog), Jerry Nelson (Robin the Frog, Statler, Uber-Gonzo and Floyd Pepper), Jeffrey Tambor (K. Edgar Singer), and Andie MacDowell (Shelley Snipes) Directed by Tim Hill (#308 - Alvin and the Chipmunks)

Review
It figures that I review a Muppets film, and what better than on Mothers' Day? I know, I could've have picked something else. But I don't care at this point. But hey, can I trust a film directed by someone who would later on make an unspeakable sell out with chipmunks? Eh...sort of. The Muppets themselves are interesting and they do have some good lines that do make me chuckle. The Muppets are more interesting than the human characters, maybe because they have more intelligence than the actual humans, which makes me groan. The effects work alright, and the story flows well in a relatively typical run time of 88 minutes, which at this point, isn't that surprising, but oh well. At least this gives me another opportunity to watch Frank Oz and his voicework, which is welcome. The film is alright for the most part, flowing decently, and this in a way is a underrated gem.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

December 6, 2012

Movie Night: How the Grinch Stole Christmas.


Review #301: How the Grinch Stole Christmas.

Cast
Jim Carrey (The Grinch), Taylor Momsen (Cindy Lou Who), Frank Welker (Max), Jeffrey Tambor (Augustus May Who), Christine Baranski (Martha May Whovier), Bill Irwin (Lou Lou Who), Molly Shannon (Betty Lou Who), Clint Howard (Whobris), Mindy Sterling (Clarnella), and Anthony Hopkins (Narrator) Directed by Ron Howard.

Review
In my review of The Cat in the Hat (#210), I mentioned the How The Grinch Stole Christmas film in one line of the rhyme (don't ask) Even the Grinch has a better film. 91 reviews later, the being known as irony has come, and so here I am reviewing this. Does it live up to the so called rhyme? It certainly is better The Cat in the Hat, but this can't escape the reaches of the thing known as criticism. To be fair, Jim Carrey (Who is very familiar here: Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, The Mask, Batman Forever, Mr. Popper's Penguins) does a show stealing job, even if sometimes he is a bit grating on the ears. The rest of the aspects varies severly. There are some decent performances by the supporting cast (Let's face it, in any Carrey film (That I've reviewed), he pretty much overshadows the entire cast), but there are some...oddities. Let me get this out of the way, but I loved the 1966 animated special and the 1957 book (By Theodore Geisel [Also known as Dr. Seuss]), but this isn't really in terms of...love. The makeup, while admirable for the effort, isn't really necessary. I do wonder if there is a Doctor in Whoville though. And then there's the main problem that in a way is connected with the other Seuss film adaptation. It's that the characters are radically changed from their original inception. While in the special the Whos were not really characterized other then just citizens who loved the spirit of Christmas, I could at least get their motivation and admire it. Here, the Whos are just...mean spirited. And that even extends to the Grinch's origin (Due to the Who's. Oh hey, that rhymed. But I don't have time.), which feels souless. Perhaps it was meant to be that way, instead of the Who's being happy with what they had, make them the opposite to try and make an interesting story. Then I realize that violates the spirit and soul of Dr. Seuss and his books. The last 20 or so minutes do attempt to be more like the book, but that doesn't help as much. In the end, while their is some sort of dialouge with a bit of comedy, it is hampered by a flawed script that doesn't capture much of the book of the lesson at all. But I will indulge you in a rhyme once again.

The Grinch is indeed better then the Cat,
But it really isn't much better then that.
Jim Carrey does a decent job,
But this still might make you sob.
Not in a good way,
But in a head shaking foray.
The spirit of the book is messed with,
It will give you an absolute fit.
Go watch the special instead,
You won't have the feeling of dread.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

September 9, 2012

Movie Night: The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie.



Review #242: The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie.

Cast
Tom Kenny (SpongeBob SquarePants), Bill Fagerbakke (Patrick Star), Clancy Brown (Mr. Krabs), Rodger Bumpass (Squidward Tentacles), Mr. Lawrence (Sheldon J. Plankton), Alec Baldwin (Dennis), Scarlett Johansson (Princess Mindy), and Jeffrey Tambor (King Neptune) Directed by Stephen Hillenburg.

Review
Oh dear, here we are. Based off the popular series created in 1999 by Stephen Hillenberg, this film apparently was intended to be the series finale. Intended being the main word. This film might seem like one of those annoying things that could destroy minds and make you question why this was made, but is it really? Yes and no. The animation is alright, with some good acting here and there. And...the plot does feel like a finale, which feels like closure....until you realize the show would later be renewed and continue on for more....adventures if you want to call it that. And that brings up a little flaw for me, if Plankton steals the formula (which he does), and yet loses it anyway, why didn't he just memorize it down and make his own Krabby Patties again after eventually escaping from his incarceration? While the film is at least a little funny in its approach, it'll be one of those love or hate films. I find it...Less then evil. Countdown to 250: 10, 9, 8...

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.