The Great Dictator (1940)

Posted on June 15, 2009 by badblokebob

2009 #31
Charles Chaplin | 120 mins | DVD | PG* / G

One of the great things about doing 100 Films in a Year has been the number of firsts it’s either led me to or just been there to document: my first time watching films on Blu-ray and via legal download; my first time seeing films from directors as diverse as Woody Allen, Akira Kurosawa, F.W. Murnau and Krzysztof Kieslowski; my first time viewing such notable works as Breathless, Brief Encounter, Chinatown, Taxi Driver, This is Spinal Tap, The Wizard of Oz, and many more — including my first time seeing Citizen Kane. And here’s another for the list: my first ever Charlie Chaplin film.

The Great Dictator is one of Chaplin’s most widely-known films thanks to setting its sights on the Nazi regime and Adolf Hitler in particular. The general perception of silent comedians like Chaplin immediately suggests slapstick, but the real-world targets here make his work (on this film at least) satirical as well. I’m sure this made for great propaganda when it was released just a year into the war, but Chaplin’s skill and accuracy mean it works beyond that: like all good impersonations or spoofs it doesn’t make its objects silly for no reason, but instead takes what’s inherently laughable about them and exploits it. This would age some satirical humour, reliant as it can be on topicality, but the wide awareness even a modern audience has of Hitler means there are no comprehension problems today.

The style of humour can date nonetheless, but The Great Dictator remains funny — arguably the real test of a good comedy. It might not be to everyone’s taste, but that’s a problem comedy faces whenever it’s made. Chaplin loads the film with inventive and timeless routines, like the upside-down-plane, the coin-in-the-pudding, or the classic dance with an inflatable globe. Sometimes with comedy from decades previous, there’s the feeling you’re watching something that was funny at the time but no longer actually makes you laugh, thanks to changed conventions and expectations. For me, at least, there was no such problem here.

Surprisingly, there are some serious scenes too. While it doesn’t outweigh the comedy, there’s a degree of semi-factual drama in the plot that’s been well judged to help the humour cut deeper. The closing speech could come across as overly propagandistic but, again, it’s well pitched and therefore more galvanizing than inappropriately laughable. There are some bits, like this, that are sadly just as applicable to the modern world.

Chaplin allegedly said he wouldn’t have made The Great Dictator if he knew how bad things really were under Hitler, though some dispute this, arguing he knew and made it regardless. Some bits are slightly uncomfortable when one knows the reality, but whether Chaplin knew the truth or not these moments are fleeting. And, either way, Hitler and the Nazis were a worthwhile target: laughing at those who attempt to terrorise and dominate us is one of the most powerful weapons we have against them. That, certainly, is still true today.

* For reasons known only unto the BBFC, The Great Dictator was classified U until 2003, when film and video reclassifications both made it a PG. ^

The Lunch Date (1990)

Posted on June 12, 2009 by badblokebob

2009 #9a
Adam Davidson | 10 mins | DVD

Short films are paid minimal attention by most people, but a good one can launch a career. Take this, for example, which won the Short Film Palme d’Or at Cannes in 1990 and the Oscar for Best Live Action Short in 1991. Writer/director Davidson may not have had a significant film career since, but he has directed episodes of Dexter, Deadwood, Grey’s Anatomy, Law & Order, Lie to Me, Lost, Rome, Shark, Six Feet Under, True Blood, and more. Not all great TV, true, but there are some outstanding series in there and it makes for an impressive CV.

If any short were to kick-start a career it would be The Lunch Date. As with many shorts, to attempt to describe the plot would be to give too much away, which would be a mistake because this is a beautifully shot (in grainy black & white) and performed tale with a distinct, yet subtle, character arc and an important, but not over-egged, moral message. There’s virtually no dialogue, everything conveyed by what Davidson does (and, importantly, doesn’t) show and the performances, particularly that of Scotty Bloch as the central Lady.

Some of the film’s power rests in a neat twist, cunningly obscured by intelligent blocking and timing of other plot elements. Personally I saw it coming, but that didn’t diminish its point. It’s also worth nothing that none of the twenty-or-so others I was watching with spotted the twist ahead of time and they all seemed to find it even more effective.

Why short films are ignored is a discussion for another time, but The Lunch Date is an outstanding example of why they shouldn’t be.

The Lunch Date is available on the Cinema16: American Short Films DVD.

In 2013 it was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant”.

In Bruges (2008)

Posted on June 7, 2009 by badblokebob

2009 #22
Martin McDonagh | 102 mins | TV | 18 / R

This review contains minor spoilers.

In Bruges has gathered quite a bit of indie-level praise and acclaim, culminating in wider recognition at the Oscars and other awards ceremonies at the start of this year. For those like me, finally getting round to seeing it in the wake of all this, it comes with quite a burden of expectation on its shoulders. Can it possibly be the modern classic many make it out to be? I mean, it is set in, y’know, Bruges…

First and (perhaps) foremost, In Bruges is hilariously funny, much more so than most by-the-numbers ‘comedy’ films can manage. The easily-offended might disagree, and some jokes are a tad too obvious (Americans are fat! Fat people can’t climb tight stairs!), but it’s nice to genuinely laugh at a film rather than force the odd smirk so as to at least get something from an otherwise wasted 90 minutes. It’s also dark and occasionally tragic though, and in this respect it’s unsurprising that writer/director McDonagh started out as an acclaimed and award-winning playwright, as stage plays mix humour and darkness more frequently (and with wider extremes) than films ever dare to. His theatrical roots also go some way to explaining the amount and ferocity of the swearing (again, something plays are more prepared to indulge in), but so too the brilliance of the dialogue. That it takes a playwright to craft such a good film is perhaps an irony, but not a troubling one.

Good dialogue is wasted without a good cast however, and thankfully everyone here gives a fantastic performance. The standout is Colin Farrell as hitman Ray. He initially seems a confident, cocky, experienced young hitman, and therefore verges dangerously close to stereotype, but we soon realise he’s actually twitchy, nervous, insecure, and genuinely sorry for the sole act of violence he committed. It might look like a Black Comedy With Nasty Violence to some — certainly, there are reviews that suggest some viewers are incapable of seeing anything beyond that — but there’s a lot more depth in the characters than the surface would suggest. Brendan Gleeson and Ralph Fiennes give consummate supporting performances, like Farrell chipping away at the stereotyped facades to find the hidden facets that the script is kind enough to reveal.

The quality of McDonagh’s writing (and direction) doesn’t stop with character and dialogue. The story is thematically considered, with a variety of paintings and associated imagery to occupy those who might be interested. Events are beautifully tied together and, best of all, none of the early scenes feel oddly inserted or have that nagging sense that they’re merely an excuse for something to be there later — everything works first time, and then has a seamless payoff too. Some viewers have criticised the ending, but I suspect they’re largely more used to mainstream fare and viewers who have ever enjoyed an indie film won’t bat an eyelid. All in, it’s easy to see why the screenplay has become the film’s prime awards nominee and winner.

Nominations, wins and buzz weigh heavy, but In Bruges has shoulders broad enough to carry such expectation with ease. “There’s never been a classic movie made in Bruges,” one character truthfully espouses, “until now.” It seems she couldn’t’ve been more right.

In Bruges placed 2nd on my list of The Ten Best Films I Saw For the First Time in 2009, which can be read in full here.

Commentary! The Musical (2008)

Posted on May 29, 2009 by badblokebob

2009 26a
Jed Whedon & Joss Whedon | 42 mins | DVD

Commentary! The Musical falls somewhere between DVD extra, TV episode and short film. Whatever it should be classed as, it’s utter genius.

You’ve surely heard of Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog, the project Joss Whedon created during the infamous US Writers’ Strike. (That in itself you could debate the status of. Three-part miniseries? Short film? Feature film? (At 42 minutes it’s over the Academy’s boundary.) And endlessly on.) Well, on the Dr. Horrible DVD can be found this — an alternate audio track, on which the cast and crew discuss the making of the feature… except it’s all scripted and the majority is sung. Not your traditional audio commentary then.

As an audio commentary, it does little to illuminate the production of Dr Horrible — though, surprisingly, it does do some — but instead focuses its energy on spoofing commentary tracks, DVD extras, and the American film and TV industry in general. Specific targets include the Writers’ Strike and its lack of success, rivalry between lead actors, the importance of ensemble cast members, Asians in US TV and film, the dissection of art by DVD extras, and many more. It’s almost all incredibly funny — inevitably there are a few duff gags and dull songs, although they are uncommonly rare — and it moves at a rate of knots, meaning it rewards multiple listens to pick up every gag. Having already re-listened to a couple of tracks, I can attest to noticing funny lines that I was too busy laughing through before. In a spot of technical impressiveness, the commentary is often surprisingly scene-specific, sometimes even shot-specific. When you consider the effort that must’ve been involved to script and time both songs and spoken dialogue to make this happen, it’s even more impressive.

It’s this careful scripting and the sure-handed attentiveness to theme that marks Commentary! The Musical out as a fictional work in its own right, rather than ‘merely’ a DVD extra, in much the same way that Mystery Science Theater 3000 or the short-lived (and easily forgotten) Rob Brydon series Director’s Commentary are original works. With its well-targeted thematically-appropriate comedy and plentiful gags, it’s pure delight for fans of DVDs, or anyone else with a mind open to the concept.

Airplane! (1980)

Posted on May 10, 2009 by badblokebob

2009 #21
Jim Abrahams, David Zucker & Jerry Zucker | 84 mins | DVD | PG / PG

Airplane! is not… well, many things. But what it is is a comedy, and, as I’ve said before, if a comedy makes me laugh that’s good enough — it’s its job and, unless there’s more advertised, there’s no good reason to expect or desire more. So is it funny? Yes. But…

The main problem with watching Airplane! for the first time now is that it occasionally suffers from its own popularity. Many jokes are too well known to seem original in context, and while some retain their humour others look tired. The ungenerous would mark it down for this, but that seems unfair considering it’s only the film’s fault in the sense that it was so good everyone’s copied it. However, age is a problem in other ways: cultural references always date, and some jokes here depend on those; some depend on being American too, meaning they passed by with an uncomfortable awareness that I was watching a joke but had no idea why it should make me laugh.

Airplane! combats these almost-faults in two ways: one, it is irrepressibly silly, which in this case is a very good thing; and two, it has an incredibly high joke rate. Combined, these mean it can coast over some of the problems. Even when it slows for a minute or two while running through a gag you don’t get, there’s an overriding silliness that can raise a chuckle and an awareness that there’ll be another along promptly enough.

There’s a good mix of gags too. As well as visual and out-there humour there’s a pleasing use of moderately intelligent wordplay — you’d be hard pushed to find that in a modern populist comedy film. Considering the BBFC’s PG rating there’s also a surprising number of gags that are adults (or, really, teenagers+) only. Even more surprising is that a film with jokes about blow jobs, suicide and cocaine, and which briefly features a pair of bare breasts, only received a PG from the MPAA.

This model of comedy — the silly spoof, as it were — is still in use today in the depressingly endless series of …Movie movies (like this weak example). But where they’re just crude, Airplane! is witty; where they’re just random, Airplane! is irreverent; and where they’re just derivative, Airplane! was original. It may have aged a little, but it’s still funny, and that’s good enough.

Big Nothing (2006)

Posted on May 3, 2009 by badblokebob

2009 #12
Jean-Baptiste Andrea | 82 mins | TV | 15 / R

Big Nothing was co-funded by the Isle of Man and Welsh film boards; it’s therefore unsurprising that it was filmed in those locations; and there’s a bunch of British actors in it… but they’re all playing Yanks and it’s set in Oregon.

And it’s as schizophrenic as this would suggest. Across its running time — and mostly in the opening half-hour — Big Nothing jumps wildly from mundane comedy to confidence scam thriller to black comedy to geeky spoof. Early on there’s a nice bit referencing The Matrix, for example; a brief moment which feels like it belongs in another film — as do many others. This flitting around makes for a showy opening, Andrea’s direction screaming “look what I can do!” in a way few films have since Guy Ritchie showed off everything he could do in Lock, Stock. It might help Andrea’s showreel, but the downside for viewers is it makes for taxing viewing and a sense that the film lacks its own identity. In short, it’s trying far too hard.

It does settle down however, improving immensely once it gets on with telling its (still loopy) story and stops trying to impress with flashy tricks. It becomes a lot funnier and a lot more enjoyable, slowly fulfilling any hopes the viewer may’ve had.

But it can’t keep it up, despite the brief running time. A long time before the credits roll it degenerates into a grab-bag of random incidents and twists strung together until the made-up-as-it-goes-along script hits something approaching a produceable page count. On the one hand this randomness at least makes it feel different, but on the other it pushes it too far — the array of twists don’t feel like natural occurrences, just plot points that are completely unforeseeable due to being equally nonsensical.

For a good stretch in the middle Big Nothing does more or less what you want it to, leaving the showy opening and desperate series of endings as unfortunate asides to a watchable film struggling to reach feature length.

Some Like It Hot (1959)

Posted on March 22, 2009 by badblokebob

2009 #2a
Billy Wilder | 117 mins | DVD | U / PG-13

Did you know that Some Like It Hot is a remake of a 1951 German film, Fanfaren der Liebe? I didn’t. Anyway…

The first (and last) time I saw Some Like It Hot was so long ago that, even when watching it again, there are whole swathes of the film I didn’t recall. How few clothes Marilyn Monroe wears, for one thing. I guess I was quite young first time. The only thing I did remember was enjoying it immensely; and, enjoying it again, didn’t want to skip the chance of handing it five stars in this pathetically brief review.

To be concise, it’s a very funny film even 50 years on. It rattles from situation to situation at an occasionally surprising pace, literally without a dull moment. Not that there’s anything wrong with slower old films, but its certainly spritely for its age.

And with it, a genuine classic. Never mind some — everyone should like it a lot.

Sorry for the pun.

Watchmen 2: a couple of suggestions

Posted on March 7, 2009 by badblokebob

After finding Total Film’s humourous suggestions for a Watchmen sequel a little lacking in the funniness department, I thought I’d jot down a few myself. It doesn’t mean they’re actually any better, obviously, but it kept me amused for a few minutes.

Betcha can’t spot all the references…

The Watchmen Strike Back
In which the Watchmen form a rebel alliance to fight crime and try to repeal the Keene Act! Sounds depressingly plausible…

The Watchmen: Part II
Split between shocking events of the present day (which, for the viewer, is still the past) and flashbacks to the beginnings in an even-more-past New York. Oh, wait, that’s the first film…

Watchmen: The Superhero Who Shagged Me
The first one deconstructed the genre, the second spoofs it! Hey, it can’t be any worse than Superhero Movie… probably…

Watchmen Supremacy
Modern-day version that induces motion sickness.

2 Watch 2 Men
In which the least memorable lead from the first film goes on some redeeming mission for no reason other than more ‘cool’ action sequences. Stars Silk Spectre, but no one else.

Watchmen 2: Judgement Day
In which the bad guy turns out to be a good guy and an implausible nuclear explosion destroys a major US city. Oh, wait…

Watchmens
“Get away from her you bitch!”, screams Nite Owl as Ozymandias tries to steal his woman.

Watchmen to the Future Part II
Dr Manhattan takes everyone to the future, and then back into the events of the first film, and into the past, and things get mucked up, and the present starts getting erased, and then the future’s different too, and it barely makes sense but it’s still pretty good. And then it ends with them in the Wild West.

Watchmen Reloaded
In which things get even more convoluted and pretentious. Most likely option, then. No need to do the rubbish sex scene set to inappropriate music in the sequel this time though.

Watchmen: The Two Towers
I think leaving it at that is insensitive enough.

W2 (or, in the US ad campaign only, W2: Watchmen United)
Bigger, better, and even more focussed on The One Everyone Liked (i.e. Rorschach). Refuses to resolve his plot line, but then doesn’t do it in a third film (directed by Uwe Boll as Snyder goes on to relaunch V For Vendetta) because Watchmen Origins: Rorschach is scheduled for a couple of years later.

The Dark Nite Owl
Just had to get that one in there.

Son of Paleface (1952)

Posted on February 15, 2009 by badblokebob

2009 #2
Frank Tashlin | 91 mins | DVD | PG

A sequel to 1948’s The Paleface only in the sense that it features Bob Hope in a Western setting, this time playing the son of his character from the first film.

Much of it is only gently funny and likely to try the patience of an unforgiving audience, despite the addition of “King of the Cowboys” Roy Rogers to returning stars Hope and Jane Russell. Between them the three manage to deliver some songs too, but the only memorable one is a reiteration of Buttons and Bows from the first film.

Things improve as the film goes on though. It slowly morphs into a live-action cartoon, in the process becoming a lot funnier and, in recreating the style of cartoons, technically impressive too. That the comedy is genuinely entertaining when Son of Paleface finally reaches these sections makes it a shame it takes so much time — and viewer persistence — to get there.

Be Kind Rewind (2008)

Posted on December 31, 2008 by badblokebob

2008 #90
Michel Gondry | 97 mins | DVD | 12 / PG-13

The work of Michel Gondry and the comedy of Jack Black are both, shall we say, acquired tastes, and not ones you would necessarily expect to overlap. Yet here they do — at least to an extent — but while Black is again doing his usual schtick as the Ker-Azy Best Mate, it’s the writer-director who is perhaps offering some surprises.

Gondry has exactly the sort of fanbase you’d expect for a French director who started out in music videos for Bjork and The Chemical Brothers before progressing to films like Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and The Science of Sleep. It’s not inconceivable those fans may’ve been a bit surprised by this effort, about two video store clerks who begin to remake well-known movies when all the store’s tapes are accidentally wiped, because it seems so thoroughly mainstream; or, to put it a nicer way, accessible. That’s not to say it doesn’t have an oddness about it — early plot points hit unreal levels, before the film becomes more grounded — but for the most part it errs on the side of realism. It’s almost hard to believe Gondry wrote and directed it, considering his previous output.

In fact, so conceivable is so much of the story that one could almost believe it was a fictionalised version of real events. The way the films are remade — using elaborate cardboard props and cunning camera tricks — are all pleasantly innovative, but well within the bounds of believability; and when they gain a previously-meaningless nickname (“sweded”) and explode with cult popularity, it’s heavily reminiscent of so many Internet-based crazes, several of which do revolve around retelling popular films. Indeed, placing the concept of ‘sweding’ at the heart of the film taps into the popularity such things tend to garner, and the enjoyability of the idea helps carry the film through some rougher patches.

And Be Kind Rewind is at its best — and, crucially, funniest — during the ‘sweding’ of recognisable films. These sequences are packed with the vicarious joy of recreating iconic moments from beloved films with just a video camera, some mates, and a pile of card. It’s here that the lovability of the concept comes to the fore, and it would perhaps benefit from even more of this. On the other hand, an endless stream of re-made movies is no substitute for a proper plot, so Gondry wisely limits how many films we see being ‘sweded’.

The problem is, the rest of the story doesn’t always do a great deal to make up for it. There’s a surprising number of stock moments and subplots considering Gondry’s roots, and some threads are underplayed to the point of seeming extraneous. In particular, a romantic subplot is so inconclusive — not even ‘resolved’ in an open-ended manner — that one wonders why it was included at all.

Your enjoyment of Be Kind Rewind is likely to ride on how much you like the idea of ‘sweding’. If it sounds like a fun thing to watch or do, the goodwill engendered by the concept may carry you through the film’s weaker moments. If, however, you think it sounds faintly silly, there’s not much else on offer besides a familiar moral message about community, and achieving your goals, and all that jazz.

100Films.co.uk

100% movies. Except when it's about TV.

Category Archives: Comedy