 |
|
Shtick without sweetness: (l-r) Stiller
and Monaghan in The Heartbreak Kid. |
Unloved
By
Laura Leon
The
Heartbreak Kid
Directed
by Peter Farrelly and Bobby Farrelly
I try not to judge movies based on what they could or, god
forbid, should have been—really I do. As with life,
what’s the point of bemoaning what didn’t happen, when what
you’ve got to do is deal with the reality in front of you?
So, when I’m reviewing a movie, I might refer to how a movie
could have been stronger had the director focused more on,
say, the plot than special effects, but I try to refrain from
going on and on about what could have been. Really, I do.
But when I see a movie like the Farrelly brothers’ loose remake
of Elaine May’s The Heartbreak Kid, all bets are off.
I saw the original, starring Charles Grodin and a very dewy
Cybill Shepherd, when I was just a child, and I absolutely
hated it. Grodin’s character and his lifestyle were so foreign
to me that I couldn’t understand what made him tick. Worse,
I got the distinct impression that this guy was just plain
repugnant, and for a 7-year-old weaned on Old Hollywood, that
was a little too much to bear.
Older and hopefully more mature, I now get what May was saying
about guys—in particular, Jewish bachelors of a certain age
and background—and I sort of looked forward to seeing how
Ben Stiller, inheriting the Grodin role, would play this,
as he seems infinitely capable of playing the comedic, the
pathetic and the highly neurotic. His Eddie, the owner of
a San Francisco sporting goods store, spends the early stages
of the movie pondering his apparent fate to be single, as
old girlfriends marry, his friend Mac (Rob Corddry) waxes
poetic about the marital state, and even his elderly father
(Jerry Stiller) fondly remembers marriage, even as he heads
to Vegas for a geriatric threesome. These scenes evoke a vulnerability
and sense of wondering that really speak to the question of
whether or not we are all meant to pair off and be fruitful.
Then, Eddie meets beautiful Lila (Malin Akerman), and all
bets are off. Within weeks, they’ve wed and are off on a blissful
honeymoon. Unfortunately, Lila goes from too-good-to-be-true
to absolutely maniacal, and the bonkers behavior the Farrellys
play for shock value serves solely to make Eddie’s subsequent
play for Miranda (Michelle Monaghan) palatable. What could
have been a poignant tale of missed opportunities is instead
a ridiculously complicated romp in which Eddie’s boorish behavior
is excused because, well, Lila is nuttier than a fruitcake
and wears tacky beachwear . . . and Miranda is just so darn
cute.
The Farrellys mine their Something About Mary vein
again, right down to apparently having instructed Akerman
to channel Cameron Diaz (in lieu of character development),
and including sight gags involving a deviated septum, beef
fajitas and guacamole. (Don’t ask.) Carlos Mencia is also
on hand as a randy hotel clerk whose real purpose is, again,
to make Eddie’s chicanery seem quaint.
The Farrellys specialize in the gross-out factor, but in their
last movie, Fever Pitch, they did a much better job
of letting us into the life of a longtime bachelor and allowing
us to feel empathy for both his fear of commitment and his
girlfriend’s desire for it. None of that matters here: The
only purpose is to make Eddie seem like the funniest guy in
the room, which is extremely difficult to accomplish when
everybody else in the room recognizes in him as a completely
self-centered, self-loathing jerk. I tried, really tried,
not to make this a rant about what could have been, but with
The Heartbreak Kid, the Farrelly brothers missed a
golden opportunity and, in the process, made me long for Charles
Grodin.
How creepy is that?
Witless
The
Jane Austen Book Club
Directed
by Robin Swicord
Tepidly adapted from the Karen Joy Fowler novel, The
Jane Austen Book Club belongs on the Lifetime channel
instead of the big screen. The repartee is predictable, the
humor bland. The film’s motto, spoken by Bernadette (Kathy
Baker) while standing in line for a Jane Austen movie, is
“A little Jane Austen is better than none.” She says it to
Prudie (Emily Blunt), a glum French teacher who is in line
by herself because her jock husband canceled their vacation
to Paris. Bernadette is friends with Sylvia (Amy Brenneman),
a housewife and mother, who is friends with Jocelyn (Maria
Bello), a single dog breeder. Bernadette, who is in between
husbands, forms a book club devoted to Austen as a form of
support for Sylvia after Sylvia’s husband (Jimmy Smits) leaves
her for a woman of the same age and zip code.
Grigg (Hugh Dancy), a tech-industry geek, is invited to join
to add “a little testosterone” after Jocelyn meets him in
an elevator while he’s on his way to a Sci-Fi convention.
Bernadette’s motto thus becomes “All Jane Austen all the time,”
and the women’s lives begin to resemble the plots of Austen
novels—minus the perspicacious wit and originality of character.
The setting is California, with sunny coffee shops and beaches
replacing Austeniana parlors and croquet lawns, to little
dramatic effect, aside from contrasting Grigg’s high-tech
geekwear with the faux-hippie duds of the women. Dancy, whose
usual fare is costume-drama adaptations, is slightly miscast
as Grigg (written younger than the character in the novel),
a clumsy but appealingly unpretentious Silicon Valley boy
more likely to be living a Most Eligible Bachelor lifestyle
than joining a book club to get know a stand-offish, slightly
older woman. But since the woman is played by the lovely Bello,
his pursuit is one of the livelier strands of conversation
in the club, though that’s not saying much (and there should
always be plenty to say about any courtship in a movie with
Jane Austen in the title).
Complications of the routinely domestic variety develop, with
nary a surprise or hairpin turn. This chick-lit modernization
couldn’t get so much as a titter, scowl, or tsk-tsk from a
19th-century dowager.
—Ann
Morrow
Not Illuminating
In the Shadow of the Moon
Directed
by David Sington
If you weren’t around then, it’s almost impossible to convey
now how exciting the Apollo 11 moon landing was. I was 5 years
old, and can still vaguely remember staring at the family
GE color console, waiting anxiously for the damn door on the
lunar module to open. (I fell asleep and missed it.) People
hung their flags out the following day, just like it was Memorial
Day or July 4. On TV, the news showed people from all over
the world celebrating this American achievement; for the lunar
astronauts, there were ticker-tape parades.
As one of the Apollo astronauts interviewed in this so-so
documentary remembers, his elderly father could barely believe
that man traveled to the moon, while his young son thought
it was no big deal. I was hoping that In the Shadow of
the Moon would bring back the excitement of July 1969.
It failed. In fact, the film seemed to be trying to make viewers
feel ashamed that no one’s been back to the moon in 30-plus
years.
This is too bad, as the interviews with now-elderly astronauts
are interesting, and the vintage color NASA footage is often
riveting. The story of the Apollo space program is fitfully
told, jumping from mission to mission in an often confusing
fashion. The filmmakers couldn’t resist using the usual stock
footage of Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., Vietnam
bombings and dirty hippies to make a Statement about the ’60s;
they should have.
Still, it’s almost worth sitting through this arch, Ron Howard-produced
failure to see the astronauts cruising along in the lunar
rover—a kind of geeked-out dune buggy—across the relentlessly
gray moonscape, or Neil Armstrong, again, taking that “giant
leap for mankind.”
There are any number of questions raised in this documentary,
but no answers. For example, the speed with which this amazing
event went from front-page news to footnote is still shocking.
(Current events didn’t help: As the Mekons later sang, “It’s
just a small step for him/It’s a nice break from Vietnam.”)
It’s as if the filmmakers were content to try to shame us
back into space—“in the shadow of the moon,” indeed—instead
of explaining why we’re not there.
—Shawn
Stone
|