Happy Gilmore 2 (3/5 Stars)

For those of us with memories of the 1980s and 1990s before streaming and really before the advent of Netflix DVDs, one’s experience of movies was influenced by what was a relatively limited supply. You either saw a movie in the theater, when it was on television cut up and divided by advertisements, or by renting/buying VHS. You generally bought less VHS movies then you rented, so you probably had a fairly limited number of movies that you could watch at will. As a result, those movies in your possession, well, you watched them alot. We watched Jurassic Park so much that my little brother (toddler age) would go around the house pretending he was a dinosaur. Happy Gilmore was another one of those movies that we had on VHS. I watched that movie many times, which clued me in on a lot of the call-backs in the sequel.

I like the sequel well enough and want to state that upfront because given how the rest of this review will go, I don’t want the reader to get the sense that I didn’t like the movie. The fact is, I like Adam Sandler and have no qualms with his type of comedy. I have no problem admitting that. The problem I have with him is that, well, the opportunity to turn in a superior product is there provided he just puts a little more effort into it. Everyone once in a while he does, and you get a glimpse of what he can do. But too often he doesn’t, and you leave a little disappointed and wonder what it would take to make him care enough to suffer just a little (just a little!) for his art.

Happy Gilmore, being a movie made before Sandler was an established star, does not have some of his trademark fat and happy bullshit. There isn’t an over-reliance on cameos by celebrities, mainly because celebrities wouldn’t have been drawn to the production of a relatively unknown comedian. There isn’t an overreliance on weirdos that Sandler, well ensconced in normality, merely chuckles and rolls his eyes at. In Happy Gilmore, Sandler is the odd man out, an unaccomplished hockey player who spills his rage onto polite golf courses. And Happy Gilmore has a particularly good antagonist, Shooter McGavin, (played by Christopher McDonald at his 1990s peak) who inhabits not only the smug country club class that looks down on the blue collar Gilmore, but also inhabits the critic that looks down on Sandler’s type of comedy. There is a sense of entitlement to McGavin that is earned. He has paid his dues, worked really hard, and is at the top of his game. He wants and (probably deserves) that gold jacket. And then Happy Gilmore comes over with a scientifically bullshit long drive. No doubt there were established comedians who looked upon Sandler’s comedy and his inexplicable success in the same way. Here was a guy who would go on the SNL Weekend Update Desk with characters such as Opera-Man (a Man who Sang Opera) and a guy with last-minute Halloween Costume Ideas (i.e. Sandler gives a big grin, calls himself Smiley-Man, and asks for candy) and somehow got consistent laughs. And then he became a big movie star. It feels unfair and McGavin, in one way or another, represents all of us who don’t find this sort of thing funny.

The sequel’s plot is derivative of the first. It should be mentioned that it feels that way on purpose in order to capitalize on nostalgia, not simply out of a lack of creativity. Gilmore kills his wife with an errant golf drive (a similar joke occurs in the first movie when Gilmore kills with his father with a slap-shot at a hockey game) and Gilmore gives up golf and starts drinking. Along the way he loses all his money because someone he beats up sues him for assault and battery (why didn’t anybody else think of that?), so now he needs money to support his daughter’s higher education bill. Hung over and desperate, he turns back to golf.

In the first movie, he was trying to buy back his grandmother’s house from foreclosure, which is a relatively good reason to raise money. Here, his daughter (Sandler’s actual daughter in a cameo) is a talented ballerina whose teacher recommends sending her to Paris Ballet College which costs $75,000 in tuition a year. That is a relatively stupid reason to raise money. With $300,000, you don’t need to go to a fancy school to establish your career. Just start your own company and fund your own shows. (Adam Sandler and Tim Herlihy, writers of the original are back as the writers of the sequel, except now thirty years of making Sandler comedies, I bet they are much richer than they were. That might explain this out-of-touch premise). What is better is Sandler’s four idiot sons who take after their dad. They are much funnier and are gainfully employed with careers that didn’t drive their parents into six figures of higher education debt.

After many decently funny montages in which Happy Gilmore realizes his lost golf game (getting sober helps), he attends a gold jacket dinner which epitomizes one of the problems with sequels to successful comedies in general. This dinner is attended by many many actual golf legends who sit there content to get credit for being themselves. Comedy is better told from the outside and though the makers of the sequel may pat themselves on the back for having the type of pull that gets Jack Nicklaus' onscreen participation, it doesn’t make the movie any funnier.

The golf world has a problem which has provoked this dinner of gold jackets. There is a new startup league called Maxi-Golf which promises to make golf more exciting. This gives the movie the convenience of defending traditional golf (now that Sandler is a secure incumbent) while also making the climax of the movie far more cinematic than traditional golf (i.e. the competition takes place in the new and exciting golf tournament space). One of the new Maxi-golfers carries around a working chainsaw as part of his persona. The only thing missing is Norm Macdonald as a commentator musing that it is Ridiculous.

Cameos are one thing. The movie includes such non-Hollywood types as Travis Kelce (football player) and a host of musicians in small roles (Bad Bunny, Post Malone, and Eminem). These are generally neutral developments though I did like Eminem’s short bit a decent amount. What is actively detrimental to the movie is the re-telling of jokes from the original movie. This clearly is purposeful, the movie wants you to remember the old movie for nostalgia purposes, but it is antithetical to comedy, which abhors the telling of the same joke twice.

The frustrating thing is that the movie doesn’t really have to rely on these nostalgia traps. It has enough new things to explore, and with a little more effort could have explored them more. Here are two story ideas that would have helped the movie: 1) It is revealed that Shooter McGavin has spent the last 30 years in a mental institution because he couldn’t get over the events of the first movie. Why? Wouldn’t it be funnier if Shooter McGavin had spent the last 30 years trying but continually failing to win a gold jacket for various reasons? 2) It is revealed that the Maxi-Golf people are enhancing their golfers via experimental surgery which enables longer drives. Why not reveal that Happy Gilmore suffered a hockey injury way back in the day that had the same effect? That would go a long way in justifying his unscientific golf drive. And it would bring up a conflict about what truly counts as performance enhancement that is natural as opposed to deliberate.

The movie is good enough to the point where I can see these improvements as possibilities of where it could have gone had it put in the effort. But the movie is just content enough to be mediocre, to get all of Adam Sandler’s friends onscreen and paid, and to have several obvious product placements before Sandler moves onto the next film. You could say this about Adam Sandler’s career in general. Every five or six years, he shows us how good he can be, which is why the vast majority of his work product, which revels in mediocrity, is such a continual disappointment. If only this movie could have positioned Shooter McGavin in such a way that the main conflict was a comment on Sandler's career, just like it was in the original movie. If only.

Tower Heist (4/5 Stars)

Beautifully orchestrated if not especially funny

What is most impressive about “Tower Heist” is the obvious superlative aspects of its production. The story takes place mainly in the Central Park West Trump Tower, herein referred only as the “Tower.” It is a beautiful building in a beautiful part of New York City and the cinematographer, not to mention, the location scouts, have milked the opportunities for all its worth. We see really gorgeous vistas of the Manhattan skyline, we witness the opulence of the tower itself and especially its spectacular penthouse apartment, and in a rather convenient move, the title “heist” takes place during the Macy’s Thanksgiving parade when all those gigantic floats of Snoopy and Kermit the Frog are making their way down the skyscraper-laden avenue. The professionalism shown by Ben Stiller and company is perhaps the tops of any comedy production team around. Notice how they have put in special care to develop the vast array of characters, from the building manager Josh Kovacs played by Ben Stiller himself, the concierge Charlie played by Casey Affleck, the doorman Lester played by Stephen Henderson, the new elevator operator enrique played by Michael Pena, the maid Odessa played by Gabourney Sidibe, etc. etc. The story sets up that this is a well-oiled team of superior service professionals and then actually puts in the effort to prove it by throwing in the requisite vocabulary, routines, and details needed to establish such a claim. The team of writers, Ted Griffin, Jeff Nathanson, Adam Cooper, and Bill Collage seem to know what they are talking about. But above all else, notice how clean and clear the editing, directing, and score is in moving the story along. Ben Stiller’s last movie “Tropic Thunder,” was especially impressive to me in the exact same way. It did something very hard in that it kept up a breakneck pace that never confused the storyline. To help accomplish this, they seamlessly edited hardcore rap into many of the scenes. In "Tower Heist," the story's action is perfectly complemented by a brilliant "heist" score composed by Cristophe Beck. I was humming the main tune as I left the theater. Beck deserves an Oscar nomination. And I would, if I felt I had more technical expertise, also claim that the editors, sound editors, and director, Brett Ratner, also should deserve some recognition. Having said that, there is something missing here that “Tropic Thunder,” one of the best movies of 2009, had that “Tower Heist” does not: consistent laughs. “Tower Heist,” is a well-made beautifully orchestrated movie but it is not especially funny.

One of the main reasons for this has to do with the actual storyline. Whereas “Tropic Thunder” dealt with ridiculous characters making a serious Vietnam movie for the purpose of baiting the Oscars, something that is far more pretentious than actually important, the heroes of this movie are hardworking honest working men who have been defrauded of all of their pension and retirement money by the penthouse billionaire Arthur Shaw, played with just the right amount of sociopathic tendencies by Alan Alda. One of the workers, Lester the doorman was just about to retire and travel the world with the 73K he had responsibly saved up during the last three decades he had been opening doors for people. It is shown that Arthur Shaw knew his ponzi scheme was going to go up in smoke in a few months when he took all of Lester's money in order to “invest” it. When the fraud is found out and the doorman learns the fate of his life savings, he attempts suicide. This is not funny. It’s more enraging than anything else, especially because of all the real world parallels involved. Such a story line is definitely effective. We love the heroes who are trying to steal their money back. We dislike with special venom the dishonest and disrespectful billionaire. We care about the outcome of this story, but we aren’t laughing all that much during it. The fate of the doorman’s pension is not a joke.

“Tropic Thunder,” had the almost uncanny ability to get laughs from every single character in the movie. Even the straight man, Jay Baruchel, was funny. Here only a few characters can be described as comic. Gabourney Sidibe, Michael Pena, and Matthew Broderick tend to say funny things from time to time. Eddie Murphy is the funniest although his part is hardly large enough to make the movie a full blown comedy especially when the two main characters, Ben Stiller and Alan Alda, don't get any laughs at all. What they are involved in is a dramatic game of life chess with rather big stakes attached to the outcome. Like I said, it is effective, but it isn’t all that funny.

Of course in the end, a heist movie, whether it is comedic or not, will always be judged by how well done the heist is. In other words, would it have worked in real life? That’s a good question here. There are a few moments when I was like, well that shouldn’t have worked that way, but overall there were enough intelligent parts of the heist (like for instance how they got Arthur Shaw out of the apartment, how they snuck into the tower, how they cased the place, how they knew where the safe was) that the few moments that are a bit ridiculous could be swept under the movie rug we call the “suspension of disbelief.” At times the direction of the movie was so clear that I was vaguely reminded of how it felt to watch "Die Hard," the landmark movie that all skyscraper thrillers should be judged by. "Tower Heist," does not rise to the heights of "Die Hard," but I will say this; I hope you are not afraid of heights. There are some moments in this movie where you will definitely be feeling the vertigo. It was sort of unrealistic how Matthew Broderick didn’t die but hey, I can forgive the movie for not killing him.

Tropic Thunder 08/18/08

Earlier this year, I felt that ‘Forgetting Sarah Marshall’ had sent an ultimatum to the rest of the comedic moviemaking world. Make a movie as fresh and funny as this first time outing by Jason Segal. The youngster had thrown down the gauntlet and one by one the veterans had trouble stepping up to the plate. Some were decent (Carell’s Get Smart, Ferrell’s Step Brothers), some were above par but still fell short (Rogen’s Pineapple Express) and some landed flat on their face (Myer’s Love Guru, Murphy’s Meet Dave.) None could match the quality (laughter and quality of story) quotient of ‘Forgetting Sarah Marshall.’ That is until Ben Stiller’s ‘Tropic Thunder’ came out this week. Not only did it match the quality quotient of ‘Forgetting Sarah Marshall’ it was also a demonstration of what can only be done by a seasoned veteran with a hell of a lot of money and connections. 
The two movies couldn’t be more different. Tropic Thunder isn’t a romantic comedy, it a biting satirical swipe at the movie industry. It is impressive the amount of new subject material that has been brought into the comedy forefront by this movie: Vietnam, Blackface, the mentally retarded, heroin withdrawls, environmental disasters. Does that sound like anything that might offend you if treated the wrong way? The incredible thing about this movie though is that all of this material is somehow okay because the joke always ends up on the door of a subject that’s perfectly fine to make fun of: Hollywood, obscene producers, method actors, pretentious directors, gung ho pyrotechnics, and crazy writers. 
Tropic Thunder is the name of an Vietnam movie that stars Ben Stiller as Tugg Speedman the action star, Robert Downey Jr. as Kirk Lazarus the five time Oscar winner, Jack Black as a Hollywood badboy, and Brandon T. Jackson as rapper Alpa Chino. Steve Coogan is the first time director Damian Cockburn. Up and coming character actor Danny McBride is the gung ho explosives expert. Nick Nolte, plays the crazy Vietnam Vet turned writer. Matthew McCoughnahay is Stiller’s overzealous agent. Tom Cruise, in his best role since Magnolia, plays an obscene producer. Bill Hader, who seems to be in everything nowadays, is his assistant. That leaves out a score of other parts, but you get the sense of star power here. All of these parts are juggled effortlessly. Every single person has a great scene, or a great macho line, or a great back and forth dialogue. It’s hard to tell who’s stealing the scene from who. Ben Stiller, as a director here, has produced his finest movie, maybe even the best he’s ever been in. It is simply brilliant how truly an ensemble this movie is when it consists of so many over the top characters. You’d think they’d drown each other out but instead the nuttiness of one complements directly the nuttiness of another. 
The two greatest performances are given by Tom Cruise and Robert Downey Jr. At last Cruise super focused intensity is put to comic use. His profane producer is truly frightening and hilarious at the same time. You even get to see him dance. This movie has done the impossible. It’s made the guy cool again. Robert Downey Jr. on the other hand, was already super cool. With this movie, he probably will be remembered for many many many years to come as super cool. In the best performance of the movie, he plays a method actor from Australia that becomes black in order to play the part of the African American seargent. When the entire movie goes terribly wrong, his dedication is such that he still stays in character. I got the sense while watching that everyone involved was having a ball the entire time they filmed this. To be in that same room with Cruise or Downey Jr. would have been something to behold. Robert Downey Jr. has got to be nominated for this movie. Between him, Heath Ledger, James Franco, and Tom Cruise, the supporting actor category has filled up fast this year. I’ve got a feeling that this will be the year of the comedy

The Heartbreak Kid 10/05/07

I've said it before with the Farrelly's. Their movies would sometimes be better after being edited for TV. These guys aren't just okay with being funny, they want to shock also. Unfortunately those two things don't always go together. There are two jokes in this movie that fly off the ramp of shock/funny compatibility and completely miss the landing. They don't work and shouldn't be in the movie. I'm talking about that nude elderly woman with DDD breasts in a hot tub and the scene where there is urinating on jellyfish wounds. Both are unneeded and unfunny and probably cost this movie a dozen good reviews and millions in box office receipt. 

But I'm not giving it a bad review. Mostly because practically every other joke in this movie landed, the story itself was very good, it had real emotion, and a plot that surprised me as to where it went. Calling it 'The Heartbreak Kid' is no mistake. One feels real sympathy for the Stiller charachter and his extremely bad luck. He finds the women of his dreams on his honeymoon trip with a wife that turns out to be a nightmare. They kind of get married to quickly you know. At one point she calls him Edmund and he has to correct her. His name is Edward. Apparently they had never talked about it that much. 
This movie is filled with laughs from beginning to end, and between the raunch and filth there are moments of sincerity that give the characters real depth and sympathy. Like I said, all it needed was a few trims here and there. Take out about 3 minutes of bad jokes and this is as good a movie as the Farrelly's made in there Dumb and Dumber, Kingpin, and There's Something About Mary heyday.

Night at the Museum and Oscar-Talk 02/28/07

This is really good family entertainment. Not only is it a great idea, it's well put together and scripted. I say family entertainment because there really isn't a chance that anyone anywhere will be offended by anything in this movie. no one whatsoever. well, maybe monkeys. But because of that, it's also not as hilarious as great comedies. It's amusing is what it is, yes that's the right word. Amusing, and perhaps cute. (Owen Wilson) Listen kiddos put this into the DVD player when your parents are around. That way they won't get embarrassed or nervous those poor impressionable parents. 
I specifically liked watching Ben Stiller high tail it across the screen a bunch of times. Museums really are the best places to run around in.

Now let's get down to business. Oscars. I think they did a pretty good job this year. I only saw three of the five best picture nominees, but the three I saw were good enough to be there. But let's say this shall we: Let's ask this question. What were my favorite movies, as opposed to What do I think was the best movie. This way i'm truly voting for the movies that deserve to win.
The five best movies I saw this year were:
Little miss Sunshine (Finally a comedy made it to the best picture list!)
The Departed (Way to go Scorcese!)
Marie Antoinette (Perfect)
Casino Royale (The best bond I've seen)
The Prestige (The thinker of the bunch)(Director Christopher Nolan is now on my "see every movie he makes" list.)
I will probably buy all of these and watch them bunches of times. Although I love Scorcese and support his best director oscar, I would vote Little miss Sunshiine for best picture. The lead acting prizes I can't comment on because I haven't seen those films. I wasn't completely blown away by Jennifer Hudson, but then again I can't really think of anyone else for supporting actress. But my God, what the fuck happened in the Supporting Actor category! Alan Arkin! Are they insane! Not only was Eddie Murphy the best, far and away, of anyone else in the category, Alan Arkin shouldn't have even been nominated. I felt Greg Kinnear and Steve Carell put in better charachters than that guy did. He was the weak link in the movie if anyone was. This is such bullshit. It reminds me of when Morgan Freeman won for his do-nothing role in Million Dollar Baby, beating a very deserving Thomas Haden Church who had the role of a lifetime in Sideways. It begs the question of what the hell do they think they're doing. Listen if they want to give Arkin a lifetime achievement award then they should just do it. They shouldn't give him an Oscar for a sub par performance based on a long career. If I were Eddie Murphy I'd be heartbroken. Here's a huge salute to that guy, who was really slapped in the face this year. Hopefully he gets other chances.