Tag Archives: comedy

Movie Review: Somebody Up There Likes Me [2012]

Posted by

11

Somebody Up There Likes Me [2012]

Somebody Up There Likes Me [2012]
Director: Bob Byington
Screenplay: Bob Byington
Genre: Comedy
Starring: Nick Offerman, Keith Poulson, Jess Weixler
Running Time: 76 minutes

Somebody Up There Likes Me is an indie comedy that will no doubt fly under most people’s radars. Its biggest selling point is its co-producer, Nick Offerman, who also has a supporting role in the film. Without him, I imagine this would have a hard time gaining any traction.

The film follows the life of aimless twentysomething Max (Keith Poulson), a waiter who is recovering from a divorce. He works with his best friend, Sal (Offerman), and falls in love with another co-worker, the breadstick-chomping Lyla (Jess Weixler). Max and Lyla quickly get married, and the film shows their subsequent life together in five year increments.

The two of them have a kid, get rich, have affairs and struggle as parents, all within the film’s 76-minute running time. Max never ages in appearance, and the other characters only show their age via subtle changes to their hair color. Max is also in possession of a mysterious briefcase that emits blue color when opened — perhaps that is the source of his seemingly eternal youth? Not unlike Pulp Fiction, we are never shown what’s inside.

Somebody Up There Likes Me [2012]

There’s a lot crammed into the film’s brief length, yet it feels like nothing of any substance ever happens. Major life events come and go in a matter of minutes. While this is a part of the film’s shtick, it makes it hard to care about any of the characters.

It doesn’t help that Max is a completely unlikable guy anyway. His disenchanted and apathetic demeanor (think Napoleon Dynamite) isn’t appealing in the slightest, and it’s miraculous that he manages to stumble his way into success while hooking up with beautiful women as if it were nothing. Sometimes his deadpan delivery gives way to some good jokes, but most of the time it falls flat.

Somebody Up There Likes Me [2012]

The best moments of the film come from Nick Offerman’s character — no surprise there — even though he isn’t given much to work with. Sal isn’t terribly different from Ron Swanson (of Parks & Recreation), but his blend of sarcasm never fails to amuse. There are also a couple of welcome cameos from Kevin Corrigan and Megan Mullaly.

In the end, there isn’t a whole lot to separate Somebody Up There Likes Me from the countless other indie comedies that have come out in recent years. Even its unique characteristics, such as Bob Sabiston’s (Walking Life, A Scanner Darkly) animated interludes, are underutilized and fail to paint a lasting impression. There’s a lot of talent in this film, but sadly it never comes together as any more than a one-off project.

5/10

 
On a side note, I went to a screening where Nick Offerman did a Q&A in person. Those 10 minutes of Offerman speaking were more hilarious than anything found in this movie.

About these ads

Movie Review: Silver Linings Playbook [2012]

Posted by

19

Silver Linings Playbook [2012]

Silver Linings Playbook [2012]
Director: David O. Russell
Genre: Comedy/Drama/Romance
Starring: Bradley Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence, Robert De Niro, Jacki Weaver and Chris Tucker
Running Time: 122 minutes

Silver Linings Playbook is a romantic comedy by definition, but it is presented in a way that most in the genre are not.

Bradley Cooper (in a surprisingly subdued performance) stars as Pat Solitano, a former high school teacher diagnosed with bipolar disorder. After an eight month stay in a mental hospital, Pat is released into the care of his parents, Pat Sr. (Robert De Niro) and Dolores (Jacki Weaver). The only thing on Pat’s mind is a desire to reconcile his failed marriage with his ex-wife, Nikki (Brea Bee), who now has a restraining order against him due to a previous violent outburst.

Silver Linings Playbook [2012]

While having dinner at a friend’s house, Pat meets Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence), a young woman who is going through a very rough patch as well (her husband just passed away in Iraq). They begin a peculiar relationship in which Pat attempts to communicate to Nikki through Tiffany. She agrees to help him if he will enter a dance competition with her, something she never got to do with her late husband. This shaky agreement works as a sort of therapy for both of them, as both seem to come to grips with their respective mental illnesses at the same time.

Familiar conventions of the romantic comedy genre eventually arise, particularly in the film’s final act, but the journey to this point is anything but conventional. Director David O. Russell’s inclusion of mental illness as an integral part of the storyline is a bit of a ballsy move, but he manages to portray both characters and their traits in a sensitive light.

Silver Linings Playbook [2012]

The chemistry between Cooper and Lawrence is electric, with both turning in what may very well be the best performances of their careers. It’s shocking that Lawrence is just 22 years old — she has the presence of a seasoned veteran in this. Perhaps most exciting is seeing Robert De Niro return to relevance with one of his greatest roles in years. His take as the OCD diehard Eagles fan shows glimpses of just how Pat Jr. began struggling with his own mental issues. Chris Tucker even has a small role that is worthy of a mention, largely because he is not as obnoxious as usual.

Silver Linings Playbook deserves credit for bringing something new to a tired genre, and even though it falls back on familiar tropes, it’s still a strong effort with a likable set of characters.

8/10

Movie Project #41: The Philadelphia Story [1940]

Posted by

24

Due to the surprising success of my initial Movies Project, I decided to do a part two for 2012. This time around I put a greater emphasis on directors I am not familiar with, but I also tried to compile a mix of different genres and eras. This will be an ongoing project with the finish date being sometime this year.

The Philadelphia Story [1940]

The Philadelphia Story [1940]
Director: George Cukor
Genre: Comedy/Romance
Starring: Katharine Hepburn, Cary Grant, James Stewart, Ruth Hussey, John Howard
Runtime: 112 minutes

While researching The Philadelphia Story, I came to the startling realization that I had never seen any of Katharine Hepburn’s work. Despite 51 films to her name, the incredibly well-regarded actress had somehow eluded me over the years. It was perhaps fitting that The Philadelphia Story became my first Hepburn film, as not only was this her first big hit, but the screenplay was written specifically for her.

Hepburn stars as Tracy Lord, a wealthy, strong woman who is getting ready to marry a lower class — but on his way up — gentleman named George Kittredge (John Howard). Just days before the wedding, a publisher at Spy magazine gets the idea to cover the wedding, and he assigns reporter Macauley Connor (James Stewart) and photographer Liz Imbrie (Ruth Hussey) to write the story. Their introduction to the wedding comes via C.K. Dexter Haven (Cary Grant), who just so happens to be Tracy’s ex-husband. With the introduction of these unexpected patrons, not to mention appearances from members of Tracy’s eccentric family, the pre-wedding weekend suddenly becomes a lot more complicated.

The Philadelphia Story [1940]

It doesn’t help that there is an underlying unsettled romance between Dexter and Tracy. Their marriage was rocky at best, but there is still a clear connection between the two. Further difficulties arise when Tracy begins to discover some of Connor’s more appealing traits (apparently she is a sucker for good poetry). Now, the day before her wedding, she finds herself in a bit of a love triangle.

While Katharine Hepburn is very much the center of the film — and she delivers a phenomenal performance — she was fortunate enough to be paired with the unbelievable 1-2 combination of James Stewart and Cary Grant. Stewart is as charming as ever, and he has a lengthy section in the film where he is flat out drunk — played with sterling effectiveness. Grant seems keen to stay in the background (surprisingly), but he is crucial to many important moments in the film. Special mention must also be made of Ruth Hussey, who delivers a strong performance that is unfortunately often overlooked when compared with the three leads.

The Philadelphia Story [1940]

For all its star power, The Philadelphia Story is backed by a sharp, witty screenplay that ultimately won an Oscar (the film itself received six nominations, winning two). The dialogue moves at a brisk pace with plenty of snappy one-liners, though there were a handful of lines with dated 30s/40s slang that had me scratching my head. Even if I didn’t know exactly what something meant, I was able to understand it somewhat thanks to the conviction these lines were delivered by the strong cast.

Ultimately, this is a clever little film with plenty to like. It would have been hard to mess up a film with the trio of Hepburn, Stewart and Grant starring, and thankfully this lives up to its classic billing. Consider me a new fan.

8/10

Movie Project #40: Chicago [2002]

Posted by

23

Due to the surprising success of my initial Movies Project, I decided to do a part two for 2012. This time around I put a greater emphasis on directors I am not familiar with, but I also tried to compile a mix of different genres and eras. This will be an ongoing project with the finish date being sometime this year.

Chicago [2002]

Chicago [2002]
Director: Rob Marshall
Genre: Comedy/Crime/Musical
Starring: Renée Zellweger, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Richard Gere, Queen Latifah, John C. Reilly
Runtime: 113 minutes

I approached my viewing of Chicago with an open mind. I was feeling optimistic — after all, I had went through a good run of musicals (Singin’ in the Rain, Moulin Rouge!, Dancer in the Dark) that made me look at the genre with renewed interest. Maybe I was being biased for no good reason and I just needed to see a few strong musicals to make me a fan. I was all set to love this, especially since the film was set in my city (albeit in the 1920s). All of the pieces were aligned, but alas, Chicago didn’t quite live up to my expectations.

Based on the stage musical of the same name, Chicago revolves around two murderesses who are in jail and awaiting trial in the 1920s. Roxie Hart (Renée Zellweger) is charged with the murder of Fred Casely (Dominic West), her lover who never gave her the broadway gigs he promised her. She dreams of being a vaudeville star like Velma Kelly (Catherine Zeta-Jones), who is also sent to jail after killing her husband and sister, whom she finds in bed together. Faced with the prospect of death sentences, the two women enlist the services of highly talented lawyer Billy Flynn (Richard Gere) to set them free.

There is also a sense of jealousy between the two women. Velma is the queen of the roost, so to speak, and she gets all of the headlines due to her past popularity. Roxie is envious of this and does everything she can to weasel her way into the newspapers — much to Velma’s dismay.

Chicago [2002]

Now, while some may find interest in the satirical plot, the appeal of Chicago lies in its bombastic song-and-dance numbers. This is a film that revels in its visual style, piecing together large and exuberant dance routines with a distinct Jazz Age flair. The set pieces are fantastic; the costumes, flamboyant. It’s easy to get lost in the flashy showtunes, despite the fact that most songs are utterly forgettable. “All That Jazz” is a treat, but nothing else really left a mark on me.

Ultimately, that is the biggest problem I had with Chicago. Outside of the glitz and the glamour, this is a film with very little substance. I enjoyed the spectacle of it all, but everything felt shallow, and I lacked any real connection to the characters or the proceedings. Taken on its merits, there is a certain amount of charm. I was just hoping for more… substance.

Chicago [2002]

Still, there are some brilliant performances that beg to be recognized, particularly that of Catherine Zeta-Jones. She is absolutely stunning as Velma Kelly, and it was always a treat to watch her on screen. I have no complaints about her winning an Oscar — she really is that damn good. Zellweger and Gere are also up to the task in their performances, though they did not leave as much of a lasting impression. Special mention should be made of two entertaining supporting roles — John C. Reilly as Amos Hart, Roxie’s cuckolded husband, and Queen Latifah as “Mama” Morton, the strong and independent matron of the Cook County Jail.

While I did enjoy Chicago overall, I just didn’t connect with it in the way I was hoping. I get the appeal of it, and its visual style is certainly impressive, but it’s a bit of a head-scratcher as to how this won Best Picture in a year stacked with great films.

7/10

Movie Review: Sleepwalk With Me [2012]

Posted by

10

Sleepwalk With Me [2012]

Sleepwalk With Me [2012]
Directors: Mike Birbiglia, Seth Barrish
Genre: Comedy
Starring: Mike Birbiglia, Lauren Ambrose and James Rebhorn
Runtime: 90 minutes

Mike Birbiglia is a man who wears many hats. He’s a comedian, writer, actor and now, a director. He’s also a sufferer of rapid eye movement behavior disorder, a medical issue that causes him to sleepwalk. This unique disorder has served as the catalyst for much of Birbiglia’s latest work, and it has culminated with his directorial debut: Sleepwalk With Me.

While sleepwalking does play a part in the film — it leads to many laughs and some “did he really do that?” moments — it is mainly a backdrop to a story that serves as a sort of delayed “coming of age” for Birbiglia’s character of Matt Pandamiglio. Matt is a 30-something bartender whose dream is to one day be a successful comedian. The only problem is that he isn’t exactly working hard to achieve that goal. The best part of his life is his beautiful girlfriend of eight years, Abby (the fantastic Lauren Ambrose). He is lazily stumbling through life, dodging the idea of marriage while seeming content to clean up vomit in the bathroom at the end of his nights. A meek encounter with a low-rate agent gets him on the road, and somehow, someway Matt begins to find his voice.

Sleepwalk With Me [2012]

Now, right away Pandamiglio isn’t an entirely likable character. Sure, he’s charming and often very funny in an everyman kind of way, but there are times when it’s hard to empathize with his slacker persona. It takes some time to get behind him, but as he builds confidence, so do we in his character. It helps that Matt comes across as a genuinely nice guy; the socially anxious type who may fumble with his words but means well. It’s a lot of fun to watch him grow, especially as his sleepwalking becomes more and more frequent.

Pandamiglio assures us multiple times throughout the film that all of the sleepwalking incidents are completely real. The final incident is absolutely shocking, and Birbiglia has some real world scars to show for it. There is a deeper message to the film beyond its laughs, as it also examines relationships, marriages and other long-time partnerships, forcing us to look at them in a different way.

Sleepwalk With Me [2012]

The appeal of this film ultimately comes down to Mike Birbiglia and whether or not you find him funny. I found myself cracking up at many of his jokes, including his early standup bits that were meant to be old, tired bits. There is a certain type of charm with Birbiglia, almost like a more likable Woody Allen.

Sleepwalk With Me currently has a limited theatrical release, so most will unfortunately have to wait for the DVD to see this. As it stands, this is one of the funniest, most likable films I have seen this year. Keep an eye on Birbiglia — he has some serious potential as a filmmaker.

8/10

Movie Project #36: Singin’ in the Rain [1952]

Posted by

16

Due to the surprising success of my initial Movies Project, I decided to do a part two for 2012. This time around I put a greater emphasis on directors I am not familiar with, but I also tried to compile a mix of different genres and eras. This will be an ongoing project with the finish date being sometime this year.

Singin' in the Rain [1952]

Singin’ in the Rain [1952]
Directors: Stanley Donen, Gene Kelly
Genre: Comedy/Musical/Romance
Starring: Gene Kelly, Donald O’Connor and Debbie Reynolds
Runtime: 103 minutes

It has come to the point where I should probably stop saying I don’t like musicals. I have never had much interest in the genre, but the last few I have seen — Moulin Rouge, My Fair Lady, Dancer in the Dark — I enjoyed quite a bit. Now I can add another to this quickly growing list: Singin’ in the Rain.

What can be said about this 1952 classic that hasn’t already? The songs have been immortalized in American pop culture, so much so that I hear the title song during every trip to the local Jewel Osco grocery store (it plays when the produce sprinklers kick on). The film’s influence is massive — The Artist bears more than a striking resemblance — and it has all sorts of accolades to its name: two Oscar nominations, eight mentions in multiple AFI lists, a ranking of #86 overall on IMDB, a rare 100% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. And, to top it all off, it is considered one of the greatest musicals of all time.

Singin' in the Rain [1952]

The film’s story is a simple one. Gene Kelly stars as Don Lockwood, a wildly popular silent film star who has been on a roll lately thanks to his collaborations with leading lady, Lina Lamont (Jean Hagen). With the onset of talking pictures looming, their studio, Monumental Pictures, decides to make the transition. Lockwood and Lamont are up to the task, but there is one small problem: Lamont’s voice is far too grating for “talkies.” At the suggestion of Don’s best friend, Cosmo Brown (Donald O’Connor), the studio decides to dub Lina’s voice with that of Kathy Selden (Debbie Reynolds), Don’s new flame. Naturally, conflicts arise because of this, but this is a light-hearted musical and it doesn’t get into dark territory at all.

Really, this is all about the song-and-dance numbers, and they sure deliver. This was my first Gene Kelly film, and his performance blew me away. Not only is he ridiculously charismatic, but the dude can dance, too. The choreography in this is just insane, and his numbers with Donald O’Connor and Debbie Reynolds ae often mind-boggling. Some of the physical stunts they pull during their routines are beyond impressive. The three of them have natural chemistry, making their complex numbers look effortless. Jean Hagen is also a treat as the stereotypical dumb blonde, and she was rewarded with a Best Supporting Actress nomination.

Singin' in the Rain [1952]

My only beef with the film comes from O’Connor. While I appreciated his talents, I found his character to be a little too silly/over-the-top for my liking. I know that many love his big solo routine, Make ‘Em Laugh, but it was just too slapstick for me. Regardless, that is just a small blip on what is otherwise a fantastic musical.

Singin’ in the Rain really is a delight, and it is just one of those rare movies where it’s near impossible to not have a smile on your face for most of its running time. Plus, something must be said if a film has made me second-guess my stance on its genre — maybe there’s something to this, after all?

9/10

 
For more reading on this American classic, I highly recommend these two articles:
Movies That Everyone Should See: “Singin’ in the Rain” from Fogs’ Movie Reviews
What a glorious feeling! Musings on Singin’ in the Rain from FlixChatter

Singin' in the Rain [1952]

Movie Project #35: O Brother, Where Art Thou? [2000]

Posted by

39

Due to the surprising success of my initial Movies Project, I decided to do a part two for 2012. This time around I put a greater emphasis on directors I am not familiar with, but I also tried to compile a mix of different genres and eras. This will be an ongoing project with the finish date being sometime this year.

O Brother, Where Art Thou? [2000]

O Brother, Where Art Thou? [2000]
Directors: Joel and Ethan Coen
Genre: Comedy/Adventure/Crime
Starring: George Clooney, John Turturro, Tim Blake Nelson, John Goodman and Holly Hunter
Runtime: 106 minutes

O Brother, Where Art Thou? is one of those films that just slipped through the cracks for me over the years. I remember the soundtrack being a hot commodity — and damn that bluegrass is infectious — but never sat down to watch the entire movie. It’s a shame that it took me twelve years to see this because this is yet another ridiculously fun effort from the Coen brothers.

Set in 1930s rural Mississippi and loosely based on Homer’s “The Odyssey”, the film follows the exploits of three escaped convicts who are in search of hidden treasure. The trio, comprised of de facto leader Ulysses Everett McGill (Clooney) and his two pals, Pete Hogwallop (Turturro) and Delmar O’Donnell (Nelson), run into all sorts of trouble on their journey. Not only are they constantly chased by the law, they also have a habit of becoming entangled in other unexpected endeavors. They form a bluegrass group — the Soggy Bottom Boys — with a young black musician named Tommy (Chris Thomas King), and as a result somehow get caught up in a political race as well as a KKK rally. The group also comes across undesirable characters including a trio of “Sirens”, a one-eyed bible thumper (Goodman) and a bipolar bank robber named George Nelson (Michael Badalucco).

Oh yeah, and in the middle of this, Ulysses is trying to get back with his estranged wife, Penny (Holly Hunter). It’s a wild ride for sure.

O Brother, Where Art Thou? [2000]

At its core, O Brother, Where Art Thou? is a road movie, and we are there for the entire epic adventure. The aforementioned run-ins with other characters lead to a number of memorable scenes, many of which are so ridiculous that it’s hard not to fall in love with them. Of course, the addictive soundtrack adds even more to the overall film, and even non-bluegrass fans should enjoy the catchy tunes. Even as I sit here writing this review, I have “Man of Constant Sorrow” stuck in my head. That’s a good thing.

Clooney, Turturro and Nelson make for an entertaining trio, and they play off each other fantastically. Clooney’s natural charisma makes him the obvious choice for the leader of the group, but I was most impressed with Nelson’s humorous slack-jawed yokel of a performance. The overall cast is amazingly well-rounded, with great takes from Goodman, Hunter and my personal favorite, Stephen Root, who plays a blind radio station manager that gives the Soggy Bottom Boys their big break.

O Brother, Where Art Thou? [2000]

While some may find fault in how O Brother, Where Art Thou? sometimes feels like a collection of short films thrown together as one, there’s no denying that this is uproarious fun from beginning to end. The Coen brothers have a knack for these zany comedies, and the script is full of brilliant, quick-witted dialogue. I had a great time with this film, and I get the feeling that this is one that just gets better with age.

8.5/10

Movie Project #33: The Sting [1973]

Posted by

21

Due to the surprising success of my initial Movies Project, I decided to do a part two for 2012. This time around I put a greater emphasis on directors I am not familiar with, but I also tried to compile a mix of different genres and eras. This will be an ongoing project with the finish date being sometime this year.

The Sting [1973]

The Sting [1973]
Director: George Roy Hill
Genre: Comedy/Crime/Drama
Starring: Paul Newman, Robert Redford and Robert Shaw
Runtime: 129 minutes

In the context of the film’s title, the term “sting” refers to a deceptive operation designed by con artists to swindle a target of their money. The actual “sting” happens when the operation is complete. If handled correctly, the rube won’t even know what hit ‘em, and the cons make out like bandits. It takes some true professionals to pull something like that off.

The Sting tells a story of two such professionals, Johnny Hooker (Robert Redford) and Henry Gondorff (Paul Newman), who work together in an attempt to pull off “the big con.” Their target is the infamous mob boss Doyle Lonnegan (Robert Shaw), a mean son-of-a-bitch who the duo became intangled with after unknowningly conning $11,000 in cash from one his couriers. Hooker and Gondorff enlist the aid of dozens of other associates in their attempt to steal a good chunk of Lonnegan’s money. This becomes an intricately detailed plan, with the group eventually setting up a fake off-track betting parlor, complete with a phony announcer and patrons.

The Sting [1973]

Watching Hooker, Gondorff and their bit players work together to pull off this con is a thing of beauty. These guys are masters at their craft, and every person serves a purpose in their plan. This plan appears to be coming together perfectly, but it soon becomes convoluted once undercover FBI agents, a crooked cop and an unsuspected individual all become involved. With so many others in the mix, it’s a little difficult to keep track of everything, and I kept questioning just who was conning who. By the time of the big “sting” scene, my thoughts were scrambled and I had no clue what exactly was going to happen. This impressed me quite a bit, actually, as I like to think I have a good sense for what’s going to happen in caper films like this. Director George Roy Hill and writer David S. Ward kept me on my toes with this one, and I couldn’t be happier about all my second guessing.

In line with the 1930s Chicago setting, the film adds a certain whimsical feel by including a ragtime era soundtrack, as well as using old-fashioned title cards to announce each section of the movie. These are nice touches that help keep the film lighthearted, even as the plot digs deeper and deeper.

The Sting [1973]

Of course, much of the film’s success rides on the shoulders of the immensely talented cast. Newman and Redford have tremendous chemistry, perhaps even surpassing their entertaining pairing in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (also directed by Hill). They are so much fun to watch together, and they have a worthy adversary in the form of Robert Shaw, who plays the target with a certain “cartoonish” vibe. Other highlights include Charles Durning and Ray Walston, the former of which plays the crooked cop, an integral character in the story.

The Sting was a wildly successful film, earning nearly $160 million on a $5.5 million budget. It also cleaned up at the Oscars, earning ten nominations while winning seven (including Best Picture, Best Director and Best Original Screenplay). With such impressive accolades, I was primed to be let down by the film, but this blew me away. As far as caper films go, I can’t think of much better than The Sting.

9/10

Movie Project #32: The Blues Brothers [1980]

Posted by

40

Due to the surprising success of my initial Movies Project, I decided to do a part two for 2012. This time around I put a greater emphasis on directors I am not familiar with, but I also tried to compile a mix of different genres and eras. This will be an ongoing project with the finish date being sometime this year.

The Blues Brothers [1980]

The Blues Brothers [1980]
Director: John Landis
Genre: Comedy/Crime/Music
Starring: John Belushi, Dan Aykroyd, and Carrie Fisher
Runtime: 133 minutes (extended: 147 minutes)

“It’s 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it’s dark… and we’re wearing sunglasses.”

As a Chicago resident, it’s almost blasphemous that I just now saw The Blues Brothers for the first time. This much-loved 1980 musical/comedy/action/whatever-the-hell-you-want-to-call-it is pretty much the quintessential Chicago movie, and it has a bit of a legendary status around here. Hell, last month Wrigley Field held a screening of the film (though the $20 bleacher and $40 lawn seats were too pricey for me). To say it was due time for me to familiarize myself with this is an understatement.

The Blues Brothers [1980]

The eponymous brothers are, of course, “Joliet” Jake (John Belushi) and Elwood Blues (Dan Aykroyd). The film begins with Jake being released from Joliet Prison, making sure to grab his retained items on the way out (including “one unused prophylactic” and “one soiled”). Elwood picks him up in what they call the Bluesmobile — a beat-up 1974 Dodge Monaco patrol car. Before being incarcarated, Jake had promised the nun at their childhood orphanage that she would be the first person he would visit after being released. Upon arriving, the brothers are hit with the news that the orphanage will be forced to close unless $5,000 in property taxes are collected. Some financial brainstorming, aided by a trip to a wildly entertaining gospel church service, leads Jake and Elwood to discover a way to help come up with the money. Their plan? Re-form the Blues Brothers rhythm & blues band.

In order to do so, the siblings drive around the Chicagoland suburbs, making stops to attempt to lure their old bandmates back for their fundraiser gig. This hilariously leads to random musical encounters in which they run into legit musicians, all playing minor characters. The aforementioned church service is led by James Brown, who may be the coolest reverend I have ever seen. Other noteworthy appearances include Aretha Franklin running a soul food restaurant, Ray Charles owning a music shop, and John Lee Hooker jamming on a South Side street. Not knowing much about the film, these musical interludes were a pleasant surprise, and many of them were absolute highlights.

The Blues Brothers [1980]

There are two extended scenes in the film that I loved the hell out of. One is when the band, in their first gig in years, masquerades as “The Good Ol’ Boys”, a country group in a divey hick bar way outside of the city. The bartender reassures the guys that they have “both kinds of music here, Country AND Western“. With little choice, the band hops on stage. Their opening blues jam doesn’t go over well with the local folk, so they improvise by playing — what else? — the “Rawhide” theme song. Throw in a cover of “Stand By Your Man” and slowly they start to win over the increasingly drunker patrons. And with this scene, I fell in love with the movie.

Later, the big Chicago moments arrive. Watching the brothers drive their Bluesmobile through all sorts of familiar locations — lower Wacker Drive, Lake Street and the Daley Center, to name a few — was a lot of fun. Even more entertaining was watching them destroy damn near everything in their path, Daley Center included. As the cop cars continued to pile up, I just couldn’t believe how much damage was being done. This would have been crazy as hell to see being filmed, that’s for sure.

The Blues Brothers [1980]

While the stars of the film are undoubtedly Aykroyd and Belushi, it was Aykroyd who nailed it with his famous remark, “Chicago is one of the stars of the movie. We wrote it as a tribute.“

I’m not sure what the differences are between the theatrical cut and extended version, but I watched the latter. I feel there were probably two or three unnecessary scenes included, as the nearly two-and-a-half hour runtime was a little exhausting. Regardless, I can’t say I have seen another film like The Blues Brothers, a rambunctious ode to my favorite city.

8/10

Movie Review: The Do-Deca-Pentathlon [2012]

Posted by

5

The Do-Deca-Pentathlon [2012]

The Do-Deca-Pentathlon [2012]
Directors: Jay Duplass, Mark Duplass
Genre: Comedy
Starring: Mark Kelly, Steve Zissis and Jennifer Lafleur
Runtime: 76 minutes

Anyone who has a sibling likely knows a thing or two about the intensity of competing. While often starting as “fun and games”, competitions can escalate in a hurry, especially between brothers. Sometimes this desire to become better than the sibling dissipates over time, but sometimes it just stays there, burrowing inside until waiting for the right moment to strike out.

In The Do-Deca-Pentathlon, the latest film from the Duplass brothers (Jeff Who Lives at Home, Cyrus), we are presented with a textbook example of this primal urge. Jeremy (Mark Kelly) and Mark (Steve Zissis) are two estranged, thirtysomething brothers who have rekindled an amateur marathon tournament they created as teenagers, the Do-Deca-Pentathlon. This competition consists of 25 events — everything from basketball to table tennis to Laser Tag — and the winner will be dubbed the greatest of all time. While teenagers, their first attempt at this epic battle ended in controversy, as the “holding your breath underwater” event concluded when their grandfather thought one of them was drowning and pulled him out. This lack of conclusion has vested within them for 20 years, and now, at a family gathering they are ready to decide the winner once and for all.

The Do-Deca-Pentathlon [2012]

Of course, now the guys are out of shape and quite frankly are in no condition to partake in a grueling tournament such as this. That doesn’t stop them, however, and they stealthily find ways to leave the rest of the family so they can compete. Mark’s wife, Stephanie (Jennifer Lafleur), knows what they are doing and tries to put a stop to it. After all, Mark has been advised by his therapist to avoid any stressful activities for fear of a heart attack, and this is about the absolute worst thing he could be doing. This leads to the brothers meeting up in the middle of the night — while everyone is sleeping — in order to continue their marathon. To say they are dedicated is an understatement.

There is a certain amount of drama herein thanks to the estranged relationship of the brothers, as well as the conflict between Mark and Stephanie, but there are enough laughs throughout to make this a lighthearted venture. The tournament is whimsical in nature, and it lends itself to some truly amusing moments such as when the family heads out to play Laser Tag. The brothers decide to team up and take out the rest of the family, leaving them to battle one on one for event purposes. In doing so, they go so far as to use military hand signals (which I get the feeling they learned from Call of Duty).

The Do-Deca-Pentathlon [2012]

If you are familiar with the work of the Duplass brothers, all of their trademark “mumblecore” techniques are at the forefront. This means that the obnoxious — and random — zoom-ins are heavily prevalent, and they quickly grow tedious. This is an extremely low budget film, and it was actually shot in 2008 before they had to move on to making Cyrus. Later commitments pushed this back to 2012, when they were finally able to put it all together. This film is also rather short, at just 76 minutes, but it feels like the perfect length.

I must admit I was a little surprised with The Do-Deca-Pentathlon. The Duplass brothers can be pretty hit-and-miss, but they succeeded in crafting an enjoyable film that is both lighthearted and fun. I would have preferred a little more closure, and the aforementioned camera zooms can be bothersome, but I was generally pleased overall. Hopefully the brothers don’t forget about their humble beginnings and will take on more projects such as this.

7/10