Daily Archives: July 21, 2007

I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry

Film Reviews

Comedy has a long history of muddying the sexual waters, whether it’s Jack Lemmon and Tony Curtis dressing in drag, Dustin Hoffman doing whatever it takes to land an acting job, Jason Biggs humping an apple pie or Steve Carell slowly navigating the exit ramp of submissively accepted virginity. The exquisitely unfunny new comedy I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry — which descends to stultifying, almost pathologically twisted levels to assert its heterosexuality — purports to examine clichés of gay lifestyle, and then conclude in positive fashion that we should all be tolerant of one another’s private lives. But it’s actually so caught up in tweaking well-trodden territory of air-quote prissiness that it manages to do nothing more than make narrow-minded guys feel pretty good about the fact that they don’t actually use the term “faggot” in mixed company anymore, as one character herein initially does.
Any amount of nuance or small comedy of sociological insight in Sideways and About Schmidt scribes Jim Taylor and Alexander Payne’s original screenplay is reduced to mere vestiges in this incarnation, strangled to within an inch of its life by erstwhile The Golden Girls show runner Barry Fanaro and a passel of uncredited rewrite doctors. If Chuck & Larry were merely a schlubby, down-market comedy, that’d be one thing. It awkwardly crams in a few humanistic soapbox monologues, though, in fitful starts and stops. The film’s basic story credibility isn’t much better, burdened with risible leaps of logic and inconsistency. The humor is desultory, as if from a lazily written sitcom where character motivations shift to fit whatever introduction or extrication a particular scene requires.
Just as Speed 2: Cruise Control circuitously affirmed the genius of Keanu Reeves (sometimes the best movies are the ones you don’t make), Chuck & Larry serves as a testament to Will Smith’s savvy and judgment. It was Smith, after all, who was first approached about teaming up with Sandler, but he passed — recommending in his stead his Hitch co-star James. Well played, Mr. Smith… well played. For the full review, from FilmStew, click here. (Universal, PG-13, 110 minutes)

John Travolta on Women’s Clothes

Interviews

At the recent press day for Hairspray,
John Travolta talked about his newfound experience with women’s grooming and fashion
for his role as hefty home laundry operator Edna Turnblad, mother to inveterate
dreamer Tracy (Nikki Blonsky).

“I don’t know how [women] do it, I really don’t,” Travolta
says. “I mean, of course, this is 1962, and of course, there was a lot more
accoutrement in those days, right? Bras, bustiers, what have you, especially if
you were overweight. But I do remember my mother wearing stockings, a girdle, a
bra, and then high heels. Of course, that was enough to exhaust her in getting
ready. And I remember I thought, ‘What’s up with this? Why is it so exhausting?’
Well, cut to 40 years later, I know exactly why it’s exhausting,” says Travolta
with a laughs. “I tried it. It’ll take your breath away, putting all that on.”

While some of his preparation brought back thoughts of his
mother, Travolta didn’t fashion his specific movements on her, per se. “I have
a library of memories because I grew up with a lot of great women. But I also
grew up with a lot of women in theater, and women on films,” he says. “And I
think that collective memory of watching… you know, I like watching women. As
an actor, I observe as much as I can. I think I never thought I’d ever have to
use it, but it didn’t mean that I wasn’t noticing it. And I think that, you
know, you watch her mother’s friends, you watch the ladies on screen, on stage,
you get to build up a knowledge of behavior. And to that degree, it became, ‘Oh,
this is interesting. I wonder what it would be like to try this?’ or ‘I
remember so and so, and they looked like that.’ And of course I had people
reacting to me in fame, you know, whether it be fans or whatever. So with Tracy,
the character in the movie, becoming a local star, I could [show a] fan’s
reaction to that to a certain degree. So it was a mixture of things, really.”

Fox, Critics Strap on Gloves

Irritations, Musings

The 20th Century Fox Vs. Critics (Temporary Subsets: Chicago, and Online) kerfuffle — ably elucidated and summarized by Hollywood Elsewhere, as well as David Poland over at Movie City News — is all over the internet, and certainly the hot chatter in entertainment journo circles these days, but I can’t really be bothered (at least quite yet) to wade into the breach with my full opinion, and not just because it’s apparently so toxic. A lot of this is also tied up in the current handling of The Simpsons Movie, but the fact remains that this is old shit, re-heated.

I talked off the record with a sympathetic Fox publicist who claimed that a showdown with “online desperados” (read: reckless embargo breakers and other assorted flame-throwers) has been brewing for some time and that its dovetailing with the Chicago Film Critics Association dust-up is coincidence, but the fact is that Fox has a fairly clearly established recent history of hide-the-cookie, dating back at least to last year’s utterly perplexing handling of the release of Borat, and likely much longer. Their screening schedule (Wednesday, week of release) for the Fantastic Four sequel was another recent point of contention. Even so, there are multiple admittance lists and points of entry at every major studio, with matters often complicated by the fact that some writers, like myself, write for trade, international, print and online outlets. So it’s a fuckin’ wild and wooly world… what’re ya gonna do? Things might get interesting, we’ll see. Some sort of stand-down seems more likely, only to have this flare up again next summer, when movies with $80 million-plus budgets start rolling down the pipeline.