Showing posts with label Sarah Jessica Parker. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sarah Jessica Parker. Show all posts

December 20, 2023

Mars Attacks!

Review #2160: Mars Attacks!

Cast: 
Jack Nicholson (US President James Dale & Art Land), Glenn Close (First Lady Marsha Dale), Annette Bening (Barbara Land), Pierce Brosnan (Professor Donald Kessler), Danny DeVito (Rude Gambler), Martin Short (Press Secretary Jerry Ross), Sarah Jessica Parker (Nathalie Lake), Michael J. Fox (Jason Stone), Rod Steiger (General Decker), Tom Jones (Himself), Lukas Haas (Richie Norris), Natalie Portman (Taffy Dale), Jim Brown (Byron Williams), Lisa Marie (Martian Girl), Sylvia Sidney (Grandma Florence Norris), Paul Winfield (General Casey), Pam Grier (Louise Williams), Jack Black (Billy-Glenn Norris), Janice Rivera (Cindy), Ray J (Cedric Williams), Brandon Hammond (Neville Williams), Joe Don Baker (Glenn Norris), and O-Lan Jones (Sue-Ann Norris) Directed by Tim Burton (#040 - Batman [1989], #107 - Beetlejuice, #132 - Alice in Wonderland, #196 - Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, #262 - Corpse Bride, #316 - Batman Returns, #969Planet of the Apes [2001], #1257Pee-wee's Big Adventure, #1295Sleepy Hollow, and #1615 - Edward Scissorhands)

Review: 
“I wanted to do something fun with a bunch of Martians with big brains. Basically, make a modern version of Plan 9 From Outer Space or The War of the Worlds.”

Yes, there were two big-budget films about alien saucers coming onto Earth in 1996. Take one guess which ended up as the big audience hit. Of course, the basis for the film was a Topps trading card series of the same name which had a mix of gore and other such content that come with cards that made their debut in 1962 around the Cuban Missile Crisis that gave a couple of kids a curious glance and outcry from parents that led to the culling of production not long after. Alex Cox actually proposed doing a film in the 1980s but couldn't get past the scriptwriting approval stage. In 1993, Jonathan Gems approached Tim Burton about the idea of doing a film based on a Topps card property in "Attack!": Mars and Dinosaurs. Jurassic Park (1993) kind of influenced going away from the latter, to put it mildly. As such, when it came to the screenplay, it was done with a vast array of characters and situations involved, which included that opening sequence of burning cows. As noted by a handful of folks, the spaceship designs were inspired by the film Earth vs. the Flying Saucers (1956). Attempts to do stop-motion for the aliens were rejected due to costs, but the CG from Industrial Light & Music was stylized to have a cheap look on purpose. One other film used for inspiration by Burton and Gems was The Towering Inferno (1974), with them relating how they had watched the film a year prior while stoned. Gems was let go from the project by Warner Bros. (because they wanted Gems to take out that opening sequence) in favor of Larry Karaszewski and Scott Alexander (who had written Ed Wood (1994) for Burton) and then he was put back in a year later. Burton also wrote the screenplay but did not request credit. 

The film (Burton's seventh as a feature director) was made on a budget of $80 million with a good deal more spent on promotion. The film barely met the budget back, while Independence Day, released five months earlier, was the audience favorite when it comes to setting a trend for blockbusters in a sense. I don't think you need me to say which has aged particularly better, because Mars Attacks! is the superior film in every sense of the word Both films do an attempt at effects extravaganza-making in the manner of Irwin Allen, but this is the one that has the most fun along with not insulting one's intelligence. It is a star-studded delight that comes and goes as a pretty good pastiche of the 1950s B-flicks that doesn't insult them or turn into a puddle worse than the material. This time, it isn't big authority or heroic figures that deal with saving the day but instead the ones you don't really see coming. It kind of frustrates me, how could people of 1996 ignore the fun of this? Nicholson apparently took on the film because he enjoyed working with Burton on Batman so much. Weirdly enough, he makes the Peter Sellars of what might as well be the Dr. Strangelove of alien invasion films, because he plays two different roles. He gets to play a towering force of centrist weirdos and a swaggering puddle of sleaze (complete with a gag about his hair) - how can you resist? Close meanders in snobbery for that time required before the inevitable plop. Bening makes a useful hippie in a film filled with broad amusing stereotypes, which even includes the smallest use of DeVito one might expect. You've got Brosnan (one year removed from GoldenEye) getting to do exposition and silly snobbery next to Parker in bewildering chemistry that has some fun head-play. The most noted presence though is Brown, becuase there has to be at least one person who seems serious enough to take on Martian ass-kicking. Haas and Sidney make a charming pair when it comes to families that sure love to stay together and find the oddest way to take down aliens: one old crooner song. Jones apparently wanted to do something different and thus signed on for this film, where he gets to sing "It's Not Unusual" and pop in and out in escape. Ha. I imagine Steiger loved the bluster as much as the check, and that's alright with me. This was actually one of Fox's last live-action film appearances (prior to going public with his Parkinson's disease diagnosis in 1998), and it is fine to see him play a would-be bigshot before the inevitable. The Martians as a whole look pretty funny, particularly with the "ack" dialogue and their plastic features without needing to be explained too much when it comes to the art of "invaders for the sake of being invaders", where Marie doesn't even have to speak to make an eerie Martian as well. The 106 minutes run off pretty well for amusement when it comes to playing against the Establishment type, and it truly bewilders me that this didn't get the respect it deserved for its time. Over 25 years later, this is one of Burton's most underrated films as a director when it comes to entertaining vision in alien disasters and humor with a star-studded cast to back it up.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

August 28, 2021

Honeymoon in Vegas.

Review #1717: Honeymoon in Vegas.

Cast: 
James Caan (Tommy Korman), Nicolas Cage (Jack Singer), Sarah Jessica Parker (Betsy Nolan Singer/Donna Korman), Peter Boyle (Chief Orman), Seymour Cassel (Tony Cataracts), Pat Morita (Mahi Mahi), Johnny Williams (Johnny Sandwich), John Capodice (Sally Molars), and Robert Costanzo (Sidney Tomashefsky) Written and Directed by Andrew Bergman.

Review: 
"It wasn't based on anything. I wanted to do a boy-girl story, and in my perverse fashion, it turned out to be this."

One should have no real expectations with a movie that looks like a screwball comedy and moves exactly the way you might think it does. Does being a movie full of silly moments ripe for a romantic comedy excuse the easy lingering flaw that comes with just trying to be a silly little experience? This was the third directorial effort for Andrew Bergman. Once called the "The Unknown King of Comedy", Bergman (who had studied American history at the University of Wisconsin-Madison) was the originator of the script that became the film Blazing Saddles (1974), which went from a story outline meant to be developed by just himself into a collaboration with Mel Brooks and other writers. He continued to write while getting into directing with So Fine (1981), following it with scripts for stuff such as Fletch (1985) and Big Trouble (done in 1986 while having the dubious distinction of being replaced by John Cassavetes as director). Striptease (1996), for better or worse, is likely the most notable film of the six that he directed from 1981 to 2000.

Honestly, the quality of the movie depends on how much of its 96 minute run-time lands with a flimsy (but fairly human) premise (I mean the whole "son promises mom to not get married", not the "guy offers to pay someone to borrow their significant other for a while", which strangely was done again in a serious light with Indecent Proposal the following year). Besides, what honeymoon isn't complete with a plethora of Elvis Presley references and Elvis cover songs? Do you ever watch a movie and realize the quality in one's memory of it later on changed after you saw it? Work with me on this - sometimes a movie seems better or worse when one thinks about it after time passes from actually seeing it. Begrudgingly, I will admit this usually is more a negative sign than anything, as sometimes one thinks a movie was "not as good" as it originally seemed (hence why one should always take an opinion with a grain of salt). The funny thing is that sometimes it goes the other way around (depending, probably, if one likes to watch a movie with a triggered pause button or not). What I am trying to say is that eventually this movie won me over. Granted, I cannot in good conscience recommend it as any kind of great "hidden gem" or anything, but I can say that if one sees it they will likely be eventually convinced it is a worthy use of their time. Besides, with a dynamic trio like this, one can't go too far off the deep end of despair.

In a sense, you could argue that Cage was suited for comedy. He has a fluid presence that takes on a movie as if the role is a juicy piece of steak waiting to be devoured. Hell, how many of his action roles are just ones begging to be turned into comedies? Actually, while he does decent here in a role plagued by neurosis, one can't help but compare it to the other, more notable love triangle romcom with him in Moonstruck (1987), but that might be me just thinking out loud. At least when he starts shifting from neurotic to impatient it becomes a more interesting movie, because it also strangely times right to the point where the movie is trying to become interesting, such as venting about a long line at the airport. Caan might have picked a wide variety of movies to hit or miss with, but at least one can't see the desperation here (i.e. self-parody in annoying awareness). He makes a decent riff of the tough guy conman type with a brief amount of good humor that makes a worthy guy to contrast Cage. Sure, it eventually becomes a bit easy to see where it will really go (aside from the "look alike" thing, which seems like a gimmick ripped from something else), but at least it seems semi-interesting to sit with. Parker is exactly the warm presence required to balance these two folks out with fair chemistry between each that at least makes the momentum not stop as easily as it could. With a lesser actress (or perhaps one trying to hone on the sitcom touch), one would just see a mild one-sided romance. But she has the patience and spunk required to keep interest there without boredom, so that means there isn't a weak member of the main trio. Honestly, with all of the Elvis stuff (because if an Asian Elvis isn't enough, how about a kid Elvis?), I wish there was a bit more from the actual supporting cast, but having goofy stuff from Morita and Boyle kind of helps in passing the time for atmosphere of attempts in zany stuff (again, having a grouchy Cage helps). By the time it gets to the inevitable climax, at least one can welcome the attempts at going for a zany time while seeing a few interesting sights from Vegas or Hawaii every now and then. I kid you not, the lasting legacy of the movie is the fact that the movie was later turned into a musical, with Bergman collaborating with Jason Robert Brown (Bergman decided to try and develop it after he had open-heart surgery in 2001), with a premiere on Broadway in 2014 (which had the Caan role played by Tony Danza, no seriously). In the end, it all depends on how much one believes in the material when it comes to a useful experience at the movies, and I guess this manages to slip by with enough support in the right places to make an ordinary average movie that you could pick and not regret it too much. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.
Come one, come all for the doubleheader to close out Anniversary in August, which you will get to see this Monday. We started with...an interesting one-two punch of movies not regarded well by folks of the time (and not much else since)...so how about bookending it with two further films with distinct reputations? Saddle up.

June 18, 2021

Footloose.

Review #1690: Footloose.

Cast: 
Kevin Bacon (Ren McCormack), Lori Singer (Ariel Moore), Dianne Wiest (Vi Moore), John Lithgow (Rev. Shaw Moore), Chris Penn (Willard Hewitt), Sarah Jessica Parker (Rusty), John Laughlin (Woody), Elizabeth Gorcey (Wendy Jo), Frances Lee McCain (Ethel McCormack), Jim Youngs (Chuck Cranston), and Timothy Scott (Andy Beamis) Directed by Herbert Ross (#244 - The Sunshine Boys and #1455 - The Goodbye Girl)

Review: 
It it hard to say a movie is inevitable. And yet, this is one of the most obvious movies that one will ever glare at in their lives, not so much because it is memorably great or terrible, but because one just has the feeling that they will watch it at some point in time. This is a long and dull way of saying I knew I would have to do this movie because I once had to practice dancing to the title song of this movie for a sweet sixteen birthday party...nine years ago. Trust me, time has not withered the memory of having to hear that Kenny Loggins song over and over again, and I say this as someone who digs the singer, even for a movie that is inferior to other movies with Loggins doing the lead song (well, there is Caddyshack II, but pretend that doesn't exist). You may be interested to know that the film was written by Dean Pitchford, who had won an Academy Award for his song-writing with the title song to Fame (1980). He had been inspired by a news story he had heard in 1979 that involved Elmore City, Oklahoma, a town that had just eliminated a ban on dancing that lasted 80 years. He would ultimately co-write ten of the thirteen songs present in the soundtrack, which included singers such as Loggins, Bonnie Tyler, and Sammy Hager. Strangely, the first director in mind to direct this movie was Michael Cimino (fresh off the production fiasco of Heaven's Gate (1980), if you remember). No, seriously, he was hired in 1983 before filming was to start. This occurred due to stalled negotiations with Herbert Ross (a director familiar with dance since he had done choreography on films and Broadway before taking on directing in 1969), but the demands that Cimino would put on pre-production ended up in his dismissal. Specifically, he wanted $250,000 for the script to be re-written in order to make it darker (as quoted by a producer, who stated that they wanted to make entertainment, and it probably doesn't help to go over a budget when you have just $7.5 million to spend). I will admit that while The Deer Hunter (1978) wasn't exactly a great favorite of mine, I would certainly have been interested to see just what Cimino would have done with his type of polish involved instead of what we received instead.

So yeah, I guess this is a movie for the teens. At least I think so, if one wants to have a movie filled with a grab-bag of 80s songs like a music video (the jury's out on pairing Bonnie Tyler's "Holding Out for a Hero" with a game of chicken with tractors), or maybe it's supposed to be a teen drama, filled with oddballs that have to deal with the terrible task of no dancing or rock music in a small town with a gymnast for a lead character. Or maybe it is the classic teenage hokum movie (small town folks, let me know if you've ever seen a truck with deer antlers on it). Teenagers doing bits of gymnastics in a warehouse? Sure, go ahead, and add a secret place full of graffiti of forbidden words put there by kids that even includes a daredevil who likes pulling dumb stunts like standing on the train tracks with a train ahead (that opening stunt is a crock, because I actually thought that would be the impetus for the whole "dancing/rock music leads to debauchery and maybe death", just look at that car...nah, it just gets told to us later). By the time folks start to think about burning books, my eyes were already on their fifth cycle of rolling (how the focus goes from rejecting an offer to do a prom to books in the library are harming the children is up to you). At least the parents don't start to use the mountains in the background (filmed in Utah, where else?) for watchtowers. Technically speaking, there is an interesting drama that is just begging to play itself out (albeit one with maybe four or five actors present, not the handful here), but even Saturday Night Fever (1977) manages to dance circles around this movie, and the weirdest thing is that both movies have pretty good performances from the lead actor. Clearly the movie has made an interesting fit for some folks when it comes to its era and mood, but it just didn't click with me. I never really found much to care about in its attempts at balancing music and its plot, because it all reaches with the depth of a marshmallow, equating to a book report about why folks should be allowed to express themselves (in other words, Saturday Night Fever wasn't merely a disco movie, and Footloose isn't merely anything). Bacon (whose first prominent film role was with Diner two years prior alongside a handful of stage work) is the best presence in the movie, mostly because he handles everything with composed charisma. In a movie where he has to play the fish-out-of-water from Chicago that deals with odd yokels and friends with dance, he makes sure to play it on key, because he sells what needs to happen on his end with no trouble because of his energy. Singer fares less than great, probably because the whole daredevil attitude is probably the most interesting thing about her character, and we are talking about someone who gets to share time with Bacon and Lithgow, which means one gets to be overshadowed twice. Wiest has a few moments to share with Lithgow that compliments the adult perspective of trying to deal with a growing adolescent. Lithgow is the other side of the interesting coin, devout in his composure that acts like a parent of a community, which naturally has to shift in layers for 110 minutes (albeit not a complete 180), which works okay. Penn plays a sturdy folksy relief character (one who can't dance, but come on, that hasn't stopped dummies like me from trying) - he soon would become better known with comic / tough roles, and this is a moderately curious early role for him. This was the second film role for Parker (familiar with theater and television from a young age); those brief moments on screen are enough for a positive sentence, for what it is worth. As a whole, Footloose is cheese that has the kind of polish that can satisfy those who find its sweet spot to their liking, whether because of the music, the charm of its lead (or Lithgow), one that has a little bit of what counts in expressing oneself that might just prove enough in entertainment. I can't endorse it, but I also can't stop one from having the curiosity to seek what all the fuss is about.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

January 23, 2021

L.A. Story

Review #1630: L.A. Story.

Cast: 
Steve Martin (Harris K. Telemacher), Victoria Tennant (Sara McDowel), Richard E. Grant (Roland Mackey), Marilu Henner (Trudi), Sarah Jessica Parker (SanDeE*), Susan Forristal (Ariel), Kevin Pollak (Frank Swan), Sam McMurray (Morris Frost), Patrick Stewart (Maitre d' at L'Idiot), Andrew Amador (Bob), and Gail Grate (Gail) Directed by Mick Jackson (#202 - Volcano)

Review: 
"My mature film career started with All of Me and ends with L.A. Story."

There are plenty of films that involve a depiction or shall we say "love letter" to a city, whether that involves symphonies like Berlin: Symphony of a Metropolis (1927), films involving history with a city like San Francisco (1936), or films with a city in mind for a theme like New York Stories (1989), or even films that just happen to have a city in the title like The Houston Story (1956). But what about Los Angeles? One could offer up La La Land (2016), sure, but there exists a more clear option, one with a dreamy touch. Here is one for the "City of Angels", written and starring Steve Martin, who was raised near the area (in Inglewood and Garden Grove), which even included study at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). This was his sixth writing effort, which he wrote on and off over the course of seven years (while working on other films, of course). Elements of William Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream come out in in the film (alongside modified quotations from the author recited in voiceover), although Martin noted that The Bothy Band's "The Maid of Coolmore" affected his writing for the film as well. This was the second directorial effort of Mick Jackson, a British director who went to Hollywood after directing numerous television films.

This is certainly a nice little film for what is a romantic comedy that drips satire every which way it can that takes amusement of everyday life in a city as eccentric as Los Angeles with clever interest that hits most of its marks when it comes to amusement made over its pokes that range from architecture to gags involving art (complete with a rolling scene at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art). In addition to that, there are various cameo appearances throughout the film that range from Woody Harrelson to Chevy Chase to Rick Moranis, which result in a few giggles as well. If one lets their mind go, the body (and enjoyment) will follow, you might say - it happens with a film that involves a mix of sight gags and other moments within the sunny superficial city (whether that means gun etiquette on the highway or a scene at lunch for example). In this sense, Martin is obviously in his element here, wry but always on the move when dealing with modern struggles that come with neurotic success. He skates, he (loosely) quotes Shakespeare, and he even gets to have an interesting time to spend in chemistry with Tennant (the two were married at the time of production, coincidentally). Tennant is up to following along with the offbeat times spent as the outsider bemused at what passes for L.A. culture without seeming distant or too wry for bemusement. Grant may not have as much to do, but he sure is nice to see here, offbeat but useful for what is needed in this love rectangle. Parker (best known for work on Broadway as a youth alongside films like Girls Just Want to Have Fun) does well here, playing a Valley Girl type with energy and enthusiasm that counters Martin (and the evident age difference, obviously) without being just being used for cheap gags and nothing else. Others have their moments, such as an accompanying Henner and Forristal in go-getter status and friendly eccentric, respectively. Pollak and others like Stewart (utilized in one fun sequence involving restaurant negotiation) fill in the edges of a L.A. that will feel right at home for those who live there without seeming too lofty for anyone else to enjoy for themselves. At 98 minutes, it sure will make for a fine way to spend one's time for enjoyment, having a touch of the bizarre without any sort of false note or any love lost when it comes to optimism and carefree time spent in a city that still finds way to resonate after three decades like the lights on a freeway sign - it's a labor of love that one could only hope to have for their own city, you might say.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.