The Campaign (2012)

Well, the 2012 presidential election is almost over (thank God Almighty), and while I had not planned on doing a election-themed review, I recently saw a movie that fit that description, so might as well. So will it be the Robert Redford classic "The Candidate"? Or maybe a full review of "The Ides of March"? 

Nope, its going to be the movie where Will Ferrell punches a baby. Stay classy, Observer...

Starring: Will Ferrell, Zach Galifianakis

Directer: Jay Roach

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Campaign_(film)

IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1790886/

The movie stars Will Ferrell as a buffoonish congressman named Cam Brady who is running for reelection when he is caught trying  to make an illicit phone message to a mistress. Suddenly vulnerable, he is challenged by an odd yet idealistic tour guide named Marty Huggins, played by Zach Galifianakis. While he seems like a long shot, he is under the influence of the wealthy Motch Brothers, played by Dan Aykroyd and John Lithgow (or as they are known on this blog, the sitting president in "My Fellow Americans" and the Trinity Killer from "Dexter"). They remake his image with the help of a shady campaign manager (Dylan McDermott) and it leads to a race that get nastier and nastier by the minute.

This an okay movie. I know, I know, I know, I say that about a bunch of different films which by most critical measurements do not deserve even that small positive feedback. That is partly a matter of how I view films, which is trying to see all sides of the picture. But I am also being honest about this one. 

Now that being said, its not exactly a game-changer. Ferrell and Galifianakis play the roles that they usually play, the former being the loud and angry jackass who hurts himself a lot, the latter being...weird. The supporting characters do their parts more or less the way they are suppose to do them. The plot is that of a typical political comedy: Groups A and B just can't get along and get into wacky situations because of it. It also ends on a familiar note: serving the people = good, greedy special interests = bad. In other words, this is another "it is what is is" type of movie.

So what exactly keeps this movie afloat, if anything? Well, it has a bunch of idiotic characters being really crass and unpleasant, which has been the death of many a comedy, and Will Ferrell in particular has been guilt of that on more than one occasion ("Step-Brothers," "Blades of Glory," etc.). I guess the big difference with this one is that, well, it's about politics: the way people act in this movie are obviously over-the-top, but given the way real campaigns are run, I do not think a lot of people are going to be seeing this and complain that it depicts our political system in a negative light. They may not approve of a lot of the bathroom humor or some of the other things that are shown or said, but not the overall emphasis on the nastiness. Comparing your opponent to Al-Qaeda does not look quite as outrageous in a political environment that spreads rumors about "death panels" and features ads about Grandma getting tossed off a cliff. So on that basic level, it works.

So, is the movie funny? Mmm, parts of it. Despite being a dramatic actor, McDermott is pretty amusing as Tim Wattley, an intense campaigner whose methods are a bit extreme to say the least. And Karen Maruyama also provides some humor as Mrs. Yao, the maid of Huggin's father (Brian Cox) who is obligated to talk with a Southern black accent (despite the fact that she is Asian) so that he can be reminded of the "good ole days." Saturday Night Live's Jason Sudeikis does a decent job acting as  Everything else is kind of hit and miss, but it keeps the film going at a steady paste (and it helps that it is only 85 minutes long).

On a side note, I kind of wished that the Motch Brothers had gotten more of a role in the film. Although they were modeled after the real-life Koch brothers, they remind me a lot of the rich brothers from "Trading Places," which was not a political film but had a vaguely similar plot. This comparison is even more compelling when you consider that Dan Aykroyd was the victim of the brother's conspiracy in that film and is now a brotherly co-conspirator in this one. I just think that is an interesting career transition, even if it was not intentional. So I wish that the movie had played more upon their characters, particularly given the comedic abilities of both Aykroyd as well as Lithgow (remember that episode of "3rd Rock from the Sun" where he brutally murders a woman in her bathtub and...wait, I think I am getting his TV roles confused...). Then again, if they did end up doing that and the attempt flopped, there is a good chance I would be complaining about how the filmmakers were trying to rip off "Places" or that they were trying to make a partisan political statement (they are, in fact, a bit partisan, but not in an overwhelming manner). So, it cuts both ways. I just thought I would point this out from my own nerdy, movie-obsessed point of view.

So overall, the movie is...passable, I guess. It all really comes down to how you feel about the two main actors. As I have indicated here and in the past, I have mixed feelings about Ferrell and I like Galifianakis well enough but I won't say I am crazy about him. If I had to place a range as to where this falls in terms of their respective filmographies, I would say it is not as good as "The Other Guys" but better than "Due Date." Sound like a ringing endorsement to you? Eh, didn't think so. My point being is that if you are a big fan of one or both of them, you will probably like it. If you don't like either of them, you may want to skip it. As far as being a political comedy goes, this one relies a lot more on gags than satire. Again, it depends on what you like, though for me it's a little hard to recommend it since there is better stuff out there (such as, well, "My Fellow Americans": http://docuniverse.blogspot.com/2010/09/my-fellow-americans-1996.html).

But if any of this appeals to you, by all means, go and see it. I am guessing, however, that you may want to wait a bit before you do so. I think we have all had enough of campaigns for the time being, don't you?

I do not own the pictures or links displayed above. They are for entertainment purposes only. Please do not sue me.

REVIEW: It's Kind of a Funny Story (2011)

Director: Anna Boden, Ryan Fleck

Starring: Keir Gilchrist, Emma Roberts, Zach Gilafianakis

Website: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0804497/

I remember seeing the trailer for this movie almost a year ago and thinking it looked good, so I was delighted to find that the film itself was about as enjoyable as I’d hoped. It’s Kind of a Funny Story, despite the cumbersome and indie-esque name, is a tight and well written film, and while it could have easily have fallen into the cracks of mediocre trashy modern rom-coms, it avoided the pitfalls by delivering a unique premise and some good, heartwarming scenarios that kept me interested. Of course, it also helped that I needed this kind of thing for my own catharsis…but this isn’t a blog about my personal feelings, it’s a blog about reviewing movies. Let’s dig in.

The main character is Craig (Keir Gilchrist), a 16 year old pressured on all sides who feels like he wants to kill himself. He checks himself into a mental hospital and makes friends with a troubled but caring older man named Bobby, played by Zack Gilafianakis. He also starts talking to a girl named Noelle (Emma Roberts), who is pretty much everything he could ask for in a girl – funny, open minded and a free thinker. There are other complications along the road, unfolding into the movie’s lotus-like web of problems, but the movie manages them all deftly, and I was never bored. I liked how well it managed every little subplot.

This is a good film by way of expert storytelling and the lighthearted bent it has to keep everything peppy and upbeat – although there are a few moments where things get dire, it’s never done too melodramatic or played like it’s less of a big deal than it is. Balance is the key word. Everything in this movie is balanced out to a nice, clever and level-headed crest that I rode pretty easily. There are funny parts, some romantic parts that come out pretty energetic and sensual actually and some serious and dramatic parts, all given their proper dues.

Acting is quite good, with Gilafianakis delivering a performance far greater than his goofy slapstick on The Hangover. He captivates in every scene, and goes from a deadpan, snarky monotone to a raging howl whenever he wants. I have a lot more respect for him after this. Emma Roberts is really good too, even though the script kind of sells her short with the fact that she doesn’t get many big scenes at all – but the ones she does get, she’s always fun to watch. And quite pretty. Gilchrist is a solid protagonist, and although he doesn’t really stand out, he does what needs to be done.

Mostly this is a film about getting help in tough situations and finding your place in the world. It’s aimed at a younger audience, sure, but it’s still relatable in general. The theme is a little generic – don’t buckle to the pressures of your parents and your peers and you’ll eventually get a hot chick and make friends with an amiable older comedian – but it’s air-tight, and delivered with conviction.

I will say the one flaw with this is that it was a bit short. What keeps It’s Kind of a Funny Story from becoming a real masterpiece is the fact that it doesn’t really do much outside of the conventions – it doesn’t go over and beyond our expectations like Whip It did, for instance. But it works with those conventions and creates a fun and likable film anyway, and remains far more engaging than tripe like Forgetting Sarah Marshall or Juno, if I have to point any fingers. It’s Kind of a Funny Story is a good film, honest and full of heart, and if you’re not completely stone-hearted, you’d do well to check it out. 

Review: Due Date (2010) TH

Having toleration is an understatement

After Peter Highman (Robert Downey Jr.) gets a quick look at the guy who just hit the door off of his chauffeur's car at the airport, like with everything else he's a busy man who doesn't think very much about the bearded guy who's probably got more than an issue or two hidden behind the facial fortress. But soon enough that man with a perm to match turns into that person who just won't go away. He's the most foulest, unashamed "companion," but one who instead acts more like a capture of his every next move. As the saying goes, "Sometimes you have to give a little to get a little," but no matter what he does to compromise, the pesky man named Ethan Tremblay (Zach Galifianakis) just keeps getting worse and causes Peter to nearly reinvent himself along the way so he can just get to his wife's labor in time but first he has to cover a stretch from Atlanta to L.A. Simple enough, right?

This is easier said than done, as he's got no ID, money, luggage or car, and he just got put on the No-Fly list due to a misunderstanding involving Ethan. Now, the man who just caused him enough grief offers him a ride in his rental car with his little dog Sonny because he's going to Hollywood to become an actor, face-shot portfolio, impressions and all. Peter grudgingly excepts, because how bad could it really be? Well, he probably puts up with more idiocy than Charles Darwin himself researched and catalogued. He's the Clint Eastwood of comedies as he's a man of fewer, quicker words and isn't used to opening up. Ethan, on the other hand, is an imploding, extroverted personality all his own. Though he's a walking, talking conundrum: nice, but rude, giving, but takes, a talker, but not a listener, and then sympathetic in one way and a jerk the next. If that wasn't enough Peter meets all kinds of contradictory characters in middle America that he might not have ever seen or wanted to see ever again. Including rude and violent employees and drug dealers who want him to watch their obnoxious kids while they score a deal.

"Due Date" is a comedy/adventure that is often delivered with deadpan humor that revolves around the ridiculousness of the situations and interactions, rather than droves of inventive dialogue or witty one-liners. The whole trip is a trip, so some impossible and implausible scenarios happen that can insult one's intelligence from getting into fights, near death accidents and possible trouble with the law, but that is only if you take it seriously. Zach Galifianakis puts on a detestable but commendable role as a delusional, sheltered man who's naive and unapologetic but he doesn't even realize it himself. Robert Downey Jr. plays it straight but is able to still line up the comedic scenes and slip in a few lines of his own when it gets the best of him. The R is for drug use, frequent cursing and some minor sexual references. The greatest aspect about this movie, is it never lets up. Even when there's a supposed sad and touching scene, something still manages to goof up, go unexpectedly wrong or put the two actor's back on the ropes. Like the old gag of pulling away with a handshake, it puts the unsure audience on edge but still leaves room to anticipate what will happen next. It's still a growing experience that breaks down their barriers to make the two leads who are entirely different people beforehand now either best friends or just knowledgeable chums that are still at each other's throats.

Director: Todd Phillips (Road Trip, Old School, The Hangover)
Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Zach Galifianakis, Michelle Monaghan, Jamie Foxx, Juliette Lewis
Website: IMDB

Quotes:

Ethan: "Dad, you were like a father to me."

Heidi: "You know, only, like, fucking jerk-offs get perms."

Ethan: "I'm not an accountant Peter. I'm not even Jewish."

Peter: "How have you made it? How have you not run yourself over in a car?"
Ethan: "I've done that."

Ethan: "God Almighty, holy moly. It's like I'm traveling with a child!"
Peter: "Did you use the restroom?"
Ethan: "Good point. I need to take a pee-pee."

The Hangover: Part II (2011)

Starring: Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis

Director: Todd Phillips

IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1411697/

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hangover:_Part_II

Here we go again...

The Wolfpack is back, and they are once again having to retrace their steps after a not-so-unforgettable night. Phil, Stu, and Doug (Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Zach Galifianakis respectively) are in Thailand to attend Stu's wedding, but things go airy when they wake up in a shady motel in Bangkok and find that the groom's future brother-in-law (Mason Lee) has gone missing. They go out to look for him, and in the process get into all sorts of shenanigans, particularly when a returning Leslie Chow (once again played by Ken Jeong) and a cigarette- smoking monkey (Chrystal) get involved.

There isn't much more I can really say about this movie. I mean, I can, but it would involve spoiling a bunch of the jokes. So I will just say that it is both entertaining and funny. It's not quite as good as the first one, but it's fairly close; not bad for a sequel. I guess my only criticism is that it's basically the same movie as the original. Obviously, the specific details are different, but the basic story-line is practically identical. But to be honest, this really didn't bother me that much. After all, it's a comedy, which tend to be less dependent on their plots and more on the jokes they provide. And the filmmakers managed to make it interesting enough so that even if you have some idea of what will happen next, you will still look forward to it.

Well, that's pretty much it. If you liked the first film, you will like this one, but I also recommend it in a general sense as well.

I don't own the rights to the poster above. It's for entertainment purposes only. Please don't sue me. But you can sue Leslie Chow; he's cool with it.