[Freya-dæg] The Room: "Leave your stupid comments in your pocket!"

{The Room‘s movie poster, found on Wikipedia.}

Plot Summary
The Good
The Bad
Judgment
Closing

Back to Top
Plot Summary

Everything in the life of Johnny (Tommy Wiseau) seems to be going well: he’s lined up for a promotion at work, he’s about to marry his girlfriend of seven years (Lisa, played by Juliette Danielle), and he’s surrounded by friends. However, little does Johnny know that his world of easygoing trust is about to collide head on with the truth of a betrayal of all he holds dear.

Although he lives there, Johnny risks it all when he enters The Room!

Back to Top
The Good

The first 30 minutes of The Room are a bizarre quasi-softcore porn hurdle (sex scenes make up 1/3 of it at least) that needs to be leaped in order to arrive at the movie’s middle. And what a middle. Although it should really take a viewer out of the movie, this movie’s middle is like a sweet cream filling while the first and last 30-35 minutes are like a low-grade chocolate shell. What matters, though, is that this set up works.

As the movie’s events heat up and become more dramatic Wiseau’s curious delivery makes all of his intense lines unintentionally hilarious. This is, after all, the home of the internet-famous

{“You’re tearing me apart, Lisa!”}

Speaking of Lisa, it’s refreshing to see an average, real woman featured in the female lead role of a movie such as this.

{But, as Lisa’s mother Claudette (Carolyn Minnott) says, she “can’t support herself.”}

Back to Top
The Bad

Although Wiseau’s acting often has a tinge of the (unintentionally) comedic, the movie as a whole doesn’t share in the same off-yet-endearing quality.

For starters, several side characters are introduced and then forgotten like so many Scooby-Doo villains, and quite unnecessarily. For example, we’re introduced to Mike (Mike Holmes) and Michelle (Robyn Paris) fairly early in the movie, but they don’t survive into the third act, as Mike is nowhere to be seen at Johnny’s party.

What’s more, Mike and Michelle, as a fellow couple, could easily have been the source of advice for Johnny and Lisa. Instead, for the space of a couple of scenes we get Peter (Kyle Vogt), the psychologist friend. Even stranger is the third act introduction of a mysterious man in a white button up shirt at Johnny’s party who is the one who finds out about Lisa’s and Mark’s betrayal.

Much more importantly for a movie called The Room, the setting is really unclear. We’re definitely watching a story in San Francisco, and that takes part in an apartment building of some sort for the most part. But what kind of apartment is difficult to nail down. Some establishing shots suggests a modest apartment building:

Others suggest a townhouse:

Perhaps the movie’s uncertain setting is simply meant to make the titular room more expansive than one four-walled enclosure, but this lack of clarity is distracting.

Along with the uncertain setting and character introductions, a couple of side plots are mentioned but then just forgotten.

Denny’s run-in with drugs and owing drug money? Apparently solved after Johnny and Mark attack the drug dealer.

Claudette’s troubles with her brother and a house she’s looking to sell? Just noted, and never returned to.

Both of these sideplots feed into the movie’s drama, but developing and integrating either or both would have given it a much more consistent feel.

Back to Top
Judgment

Decidedly a weird one to watch, The Room has its merits (it inspired its own indie flash game after all).

Wiseau’s strange, quasi-high/drunk, almost entirely eye-contact-less acting style makes all of his dramatic scenes utterly laughable. But as a result the movie’s drama is almost always turned on its head and rendered ineffective. Coupled with an awkward handling of what can only be assumed to be an attempt to make Johnny’s apartment a main character, too much of the movie’s acting and writing undermine the possibility of it all being taken seriously.

The Room is good for a laugh, but its uneven characters, settings, and side stories hamstring its ability to be anything more.

So, Freya, let this one be. It lay already in a prominent place, splayed across a crumbling battlement – there shall all who desire to shall see it, but it simply is not the sort to be raised up.

Back to Top
Closing

Leave your thoughts on this internet cult classic in the comments, and watch for tomorrow’s Annotated Links – especially if you’re drawn to weird science!

Back to Top

[Sæternes-dæg] Annotated Links #22: Different, but the Same

1. Ramstad, Evan. “Are Koreans the Irish of Asia? Here’s a Case.” Korea Realtime (Wall Street Journal) 16 October 2012. Web. 20 October 2012.

Ramstad recounts the recent visit to Seoul of Eammon McKee, Ireland’s ambassador to the Koreas, and a speech he made there wherein he fleshed out the Korea-is-Ireland cliché. He quotes McKee’s speech selectively, compiling a brief list of the ways in which the two nations are similar. This article is written in a pure journalistic style, this article reports on the idea of the two nations having shared traits.

An article about how two disparate nations actually have quite a bit in common is a great way to start of an Annotated Links about different things that, upon further analysis, can easily be considered similar. Thus, this article was an easy pick for this week’s batch.

2. Lorditch, Emilie. “Using Science Fiction to Educate.” Inside Science 17 October 2012. Web. 20 October 2012.

This one is a brief article that provides an overview of the basic argument for using science fiction in science education: to show the relevance of science to young people so that more of them will take an active interest in pursuing the sciences at college or university. It makes specific reference to science fiction and super hero films while leaving out anything about science fiction literature. Lorditch writes in a direct style of reportage, with an effective use of quotes.

Science fiction and science fact are definitely different, but the limits of human technology are always making gains on the limits of human imagination. This article doesn’t make a direct comparison between science fiction and science in the classroom, but mining science fiction for examples to show how science does and doesn’t work bridges the two nicely.

3. Houpt, Simon. “IBM hones Watson the supercomputer’s skills.” The Globe and Mail 19 October 2012. Web. 20 October 2012.

In this interview with the IBM T.J. Watson Research Center’s Eric Brown, Houpt explores the different uses for IBM’s Question Answering supercomputer Watson. Specifically, Houpt asks about IBM’s work with the US healthcare insurance provider WellPoint and how Watson will figure in with that. It’s written as any interview is bound to be written – in a conversational tone.

Though comparisons between Watson and human personalities don’t come up until near the end of the interview, this piece is included in this week’s Annotated Links because it underscores how a stripped down version of human thinking (parsing sentences, taking certain elements and understanding the relationships between them) is being emulated by computers.

4. Taylor, Kate. “Picnicface: Why are we laughing? I don’t know, but it sure beats crying.” The Globe and Mail 20 October 2012. Web. 20 October 2012.

Taylor’s article offers some quick background information on the Picnicface story, along with a very quick rundown of where the three-person comedy trio is today. Her article also offers some thoughts on the matter of internet fame vs. old school fame, and how being popular on YouTube does not necessarily translate being popular on the boob tube. This one is written in a straightforward style, with quotes from players in the Picnicface story sprinkled throughout.

Including this one in the Links for this week was necessarily partly because it fit and partly because of personal prejudices. Picnicface is an hilarious troupe, and the ways in which culture on the internet is different from culture on TV or radio or in print is something that needs more mainstream attention.

5. Strickland, Eddie. “Red Potion (The Legend of Zelda cocktail).” The Drunken Moogle 14 October 2012. Web. 20 October 2012.

Simply a recipe for a cocktail inspired by the Legend of Zelda (clicking on that tag at the bottom of the recipe shows another 4 pages worth of Zelda-inspired booze bombs). This recipe is written in a direct style without any extra notes.

This one’s included for the obvious reason that video games (‘The Legend of Zelda,’ perhaps especially) are not the same as real life. However, it must definitely be noted that medieval medicine (and therefore medicine in a high fantasy setting such as the one in ‘Zelda’) would invariably involve alcohol in some way – so the two different worlds of the real and the virtual are bridged by the cause of and solution to all of life’s problems: alcohol.

Back To Top
Closing

Next week, watch for a poem post for Monday, and Part Four of Shocktober, when I’ll make the call for the conversion of the campy horror flic The Convent.

Plus, over at Tongues in Jars, watch for the fifth stanza of “Dum Diane vitrea” in Tuesday’s Latin entry, and Wiglaf’s tongue lashing of the cowardly thanes in Thursday’s Beowulf entry.

Back To Top

[Freya-dæg] Shocktober Pt.2: Is Leprechaun in the Hood any Good?

{Leprechaun in the Hood‘s movie poster, found on Wikipedia.}

Introduction
Plot Summary
The Good
The Bad
Judgment
Closing

Introduction

Welcome to Part Two of Shocktober – a look into the litanous Leprechaun series. Specifically, as requested, this week’s review is a foray into the fifth movie in the Leprechaun franchise: Leprechaun in the Hood.

Interestingly enough, after four previous movies, this one’s picked up the label of “comedy” as well as “horror,” so let’s just see how this freestyle film fares.

Back to Top
Plot Summary

It’s the 1970s and the man who will soon be known as “Mack Daddy” O’Nassas (Ice T) strikes it rich when he finds a stash of gold and an ugly statue of a leprechaun. He learns the secret of the two, and uses a magic flute found in the leprechaun’s (Warwick Davis) gold to drive himself to fame and fortune.

Flash forward 20 years. The rap trio of Postmaster P. (Anthony Montgomery), Stray Bullet (Rashaan Nall), and Butch (Red Grant), are trying to get on the hip hop scene but just aren’t that great. Down on their luck, and looking for some quick promotion to earn money they need to repair their equipment, they turn to rap mogul Mack Daddy.

But Mack Daddy’s help will come at a cost: the trio will have to change their entire image! The trio’s de facto leader Postmaster P. objects, and they’re thrown out. Having no other alternative, the three plan to steal the medallion they saw hanging on a grotesque leprechaun statue in Mack Daddy’s office.

Their heist is a success, but when they remove the medallion, the leprechaun comes back to life and begins hunting down everyone the trio’s pawned his gold to. On top of that, Mack Daddy starts after them as well to get back the flute that they stole – the very source of his fame and fortune.

Will the trio figure out how to use the flute to cause their own meteoric rise to stardom? Will Mack Daddy catch up with them and bust a cap in each of their asses? Or will the leprechaun succeed in stealing back his gold as he leaves a trail of bodies in his wake?

The only thing that’s sure is that nothing can be good when there’s a Leprechaun in the Hood!

Back to Top
The Good

First off, because this is a Leprechaun movie, it’s an Irish exploitation movie to some degree. Add in the hood, and you get a modern blackspoitation film. Take them both together, and we get a heaping helping of rhyming lines. And any form of entertainment with rhyming couplets is as good as a cellar full of fine wines.

Additionally, we’re treated to turns of phrase like this one:

{“Kinda like Robin Hood, ‘stead we gonna be robbin’ in the hood.”}

Further, we get to see Ice T show off his acting chops. For example, we see him reacting to his friend’s death:

We also see him scrounging around his afro for another weapon:

And, we see him (for much of the movie) acting pretty full of himself:

It’s not an Oscar-worthy performance, but it ups the comedy and campiness of the movie. These things are important ingredients for its potency because they really help to carry it along. After all, being the fifth in the series, it can’t really be expected to be as terrifying as the last four movies. So, instead it goes for the base comedy so often found in B-movies. As a result, this movie’s like a bag of popcorn: you take one handful and then by the time you actually check to see how much is left in the bag, you find it empty.

Beyond the movie’s B-qualities, it has some surprisingly dark moments. These are both major plot points, but definitely work well both to bolster the movie’s characters and to buttress its comedy and campiness by adding some variety.

Back to Top
The Bad

However, it can also be said that the movie’s darker moments are there to make up for its lack of a “horror” element in general.

Leprechaun in the Hood follows the formula of a slasher or serial killer movie well enough (one person or entity is out to kill a group of people or an individual), but we’re told right off the bat why the leprechaun goes after who he goes after. Because we know that whoever has the leprechaun’s gold is going to buy the farm, the movie musters very little tension.

It doesn’t help matters that the movie’s titular villain isn’t very menacing either. He’s definitely brutal in the pursuit of those who have his gold, but otherwise he’s as comedic a character as Ice T.

The other issue with the movie is that it doesn’t really answer many of the questions it raises. Questions like: how did Mack Daddy know enough about the flute to only be interested in it when he first comes across the leprechaun’s gold? Why is the flute’s power selective in certain scenes? And how does the leprechaun manage to escape and hypnotize someone at the end?

Why all of these things happen is clear (convenience, convenience, and to leave it open for the next one), but the “how” is just as important because without that the movie loses its depth.

Explaining how the leprechaun’s magic (and magic in general in the movie work) would add such depth, and help to build more tension as audiences tried to figure out the leprechaun’s weak point for themselves based on what we’re told. Instead, we’re told nothing, and the movie becomes just a bit of light entertainment.

However, the worst part of the film is that the leprechaun isn’t even really the main focus – instead, it’s “The Hood.” Since both things are in the title, both should share the spotlight, but the leprechaun is used as little more than a plot device.

He spouts off some dope rhyming couplets, makes cheerful threats, and then follows through with them. But he’s really just the impetus for events, he never really gets into them. For example, the whole conflict between the rap trio and Mack Daddy barely involves him at all – he’s just a third party that sometimes interferes with either side’s plan.

Back to Top
Judgment

Leprechaun in the Hood is an light romp that mixes comedy, camp, and exploitation style film into one entertaining blend. But if you’re looking for substance, you’ve got to go with an earlier Leprechaun movie, or an older horror film. This one’s as substantial as blown smoke.

That said though, Leprechaun in the Hood is well-paced, and it does offer some rather surprisng twists near the end.

So, Freya, dust this one off, and lift it up (but be sure to set it along the lower seats of Filmhalla).

Back to Top
Closing

Check back here tomorrow for Annotated Links #21!

Back to Top

[Freya-dæg] An Audience With Your Highness

{Your Highness‘ movie poster, found on Wikipedia.}

Plot Summary
The Good
The Bad
Judgment
Closing

Back to Top
Plot Summary

There is an ancient prophesy in the land that says that if a great warlock can lay with a virgin when the two moons meet, he will create a dragon. The Order of the Golden Knights has stopped the warlock before, but many years later all of the knights of the Order have been wiped out, a great warlock has arisen and the moons begin to converge.

Of course, none of that matters to the brash prince Thadeous, son of King Tallous (Charles Dance) and brother of the all-favoured Fabious (James Franco). He’s about as concerned with prophecies and quests as a bear is with a block of cheese. But when his brother returns from yet another successful quest with the virgin Belladonna (Zooey Deschanel) only to have his wedding crashed and his bride carried off by none other than the great wizard Leezar himself (Justin Theroux), Thadeous is forced by his father to join Fabious on his quest to save his bride and ultimately the kingdom.

Will Fabious be successful in averting a doom that will envelope the land, though he is beset on all sides by villains both traitorous and bad? Will Thadeous grow to be more than a spoiled bawd of a king’s son? Or will Lazeer prevail?

Only by watching can you find out if this disparate bunch of questors can break Leezar and make him scream Your Highness!

Back to Top
The Good

Your Highness‘s cast is simply star-studded. Zooey Deschanel, James Franco, and Charles Dance, – all of them have sizeable roles in the film and bring all of their acting chops to bear on the film as a whole. What’s more, even the lesser known Danny McBride does a great job as Thadeous.

But what really sends this movie over the top in terms of the acting is the sheer devotion that all of the players show to keeping things medieval. The dialogue, the delivery, everything is nicely tinged with the very stuff of high fantasy. It isn’t necessarily accurate to actual historical fact, but neither are many high fantasy stories, and neither are many of the medieval romances on which they’re based – something which this movie gets quite close to being.

However, rather than being written by some gallant-minded self-styled bard, Your Highness is closer to what might have come about had Geoffrey Chaucer ever wrote a non-historical verse romance.

The movie’s writing is also quite strong, and though the plot develops in a more or less expected way, there’re enough fantastical elements to keep your interest throughout all of its 100 minutes.

The movie also nicely straddles the line of satire while also keeping the movie’s illusion in tact. Watching it, it’s very easy to get the sense that the actors know that they’re playing in roles and through ridiculous situations, but they maintain their act all the same. The fourth wall is left firmly in place, so much so that the best analogy is that this movie is the way that players of a D&D game might imagine their own games as they’re playing them.

And, just like many a D&D game, the movie has some unexpectedly dark moments, such as when the quest seems to be entirely hopeless and Fabious exclaims that “Belladonna will get raped and die” if they don’t get to her in time.

But, most importantly, setting this movie apart from In the Name of the King, is that nothing in it is contrived for the sake of action or a good laugh. Instead all of the jokes arise out of the characters’ personalities and the setting itself.

Back to Top
The Bad

However, Rotten Tomatoes’ consensus on this movie does have it right – the jokes here are almost all based on the same theme. In this regard it’s kind of like something that Trey Parker and Matt Stone might have written, and it does run the risk of getting a little thin by the end. Though that remains as only a risk.

Also, there are some things in the movie that are pretty outlandishly off when it comes to medieval culture, even that of a fantasy realm. Such as this:

Powdered wigs and pale faces weren’t quite a male fashion statement until the 18th century, which is just a few centuries too late.

There are also some elements introduced early on in the movie that could use some more explanation: Thadeous’ distaste for mechanical things (focused entirely on his brother’s mechanical bird companion), and why the “triangle face” that Courtney (Rasmus Hardiker) pulls scares him.

{The horrific “triangle face” in action.}

However, as the film picks up and goes on, these things are forgotten by viewer and writer alike. Adding them into the development of Thadeous would have made this movie all the stronger, though. Perhaps, in fact, instead of just temptations to indulge himself, he could have had to face a mechanical being with a “triangle face” in the labyrinth where they find the Blade of Unicorn.

Back to Top
Judgment

Your Highness is a grand farce of a medieval romance comedy. The humour can be overbearing, but the actors, the script, and the chemistry between them all keeps things going at a lovely trot from start to finish. What’s more, this movie passed one of the ultimate tests: it was as fun to watch a second time as it was the first.

So, Freya, don’t mind the lewd way in which this one comes on to you as you scoop it from the Field of Fallen Films, nor its lascivious words as you fly with it from there to where all great movies deserve to be.

Back to Top
Closing

A Glass Darkly is going to be undergoing some changes starting next week.

Monday’s and Friday’s entries will continue as usual, but instead of Annotated Links throughout the week and an editorial in the middle, Annotated Links will be moved to Saturday and expanded to five links from three. The editorial is being dropped and will be replaced with a brief update on my writing endeavours that goes live every Sunday.

Check out the first of these Sunday entries on the 17th of the month!

Back to Top

[Moon-dæg] Parody Reporting, Gold, and Laughter

Preamble
Billionaires Breathe Comedy Gold
Closing

{Forget gold mining, today’s bit of writing reveals a more sought for metal. Image from portableantiquities on Flickr via Fotopedia.}

Back To Top
Preamble

Tonight’s piece of creative writing is another that came from the local writing group. It was written in response to an exercise where we each had to name a despicable person and either defend or incriminate that person. The person we were writing about at the time was one Kevin O’Leary, a periodically controversial entrepreneur, investor, and TV personality.

I must have been thinking about a particular root vegetable when this was written on the night of 20 November 2011, because my writing took the form of parody reporting. So some things may have been exaggerated for effect.

Back To Top
Billionaires Breathe Comedy Gold

It appears that in a world where jobs are scarce, resources are being eaten up, and reasons for laughter seem few and far between, there is a ray of hope.

Billionaires like Mr. Kevin O’Leary.

Good, kind, old, “I like money” O’Leary is one of the few things that comedians can still use to connect to the common man, woman, and child. These brave people of the punchline – never out of work themselves it seems – are able to use figures like Mr. O’Leary for a nearly inexhaustible supply of funnies.

“In this tough economic time, I’m just glad that there are still some fat cats for us to still poke fun at,” said Lana von Opsidoodle. “It’s really taken the pressure off in our search for material. And, finally the plight of African children working in ridensium mines across that continent have been heard. Mr. O’Leary and those like him are real heroes to us. And to those kids.”

Ridensium is a rare metal found only in places that were once rife with hyenas. Scientists say that the animals’ hilarious barks echoed off the walls for centuries, infusing them with what they like to call “pure funny.”

“We were very near a ridensium shortage” Dr. Arno Leggit said at a recent press conference. He explained further that “Hyenas are nearly extinct because of people like Jamie Oliver and Chet McCooks who lauded the animal for its nutritional value and steak-like taste. So the mines were just about tapped out and no new ones have been discovered.”

In a later interview Professor Legit was quoted as saying “I think Mr. O’Leary should get more money. Now we can free the slave workers of African ridensium mines, clean up those governments, and maybe bring back the majestic howl of the hyena.”

Yet ridensium mines aren’t just filled with laughter. They’re also popular lion hangouts since along with the animal’s sound, the rocks are also rife with the hyenas’ scent. Therefore, lions frequent the caves in the hopes of finding there what has long since been absent from the savannah.

As of press time, Mr. O’Leary is slated to receive a large novelty check from the president. The nation’s comedians are reportedly standing at the ready.

Back To Top
Closing

Check back here Wednesday for an article on the newest news and on Friday for a hunt for the good in Wrath of the Titans. Also check this blog out on Tuesday and Thursday for more “Annotated Links.”

Back To Top

[Freya-dæg] Johnny English Reborn Improved

{An example of Atkinson’s Mr. Bean-esque mugging in Johnny English Reborn. Image from Pfangirl Through The Looking Glass.}

Introduction
Plot Summary
The Good
The Bad
Judgment
Closing

Back to Top
Introduction

Johnny English Reborn is one of those movies that you hope is better than it’s predecessor (especially given the 8 year span between them) and that gives you a performance like a trained monkey at a piano recital. The judgment on this one’s going to be all hush hush until the very last minute.

Back to Top
Plot Summary

The movie’s plot follows from the ending of the first.

Johnny English (Rowan Atkinson) has since become a real MI7 agent, but has lost his knighthood because of his failure on a major mission in Mozambique. However, because he gets the call from Pegasus (played by Gillian Anderson) to come out of suspension, he returns to the agency and takes on a mission involving the mysterious group “Vortex.” Some slapstick gags, antics, and a Behavioral Psychologist love interest (Kate Sumner, played by Rosamund Pike) later, Johnny’s the only one who can foil Vortex’s plan to assassinate the Premier of China while he’s meeting with the UK’s Prime Minister in a high security Swedish fortress.

Back to Top
The Good

Showing some of the true colors of a worthy sequel, the main character in this flick has changed. Johnny English is no longer the bumbling new agent who has no clue whatsoever, now he’s the bumbling experienced agent who has every clue necessary but still has his penchant for mixing things up fully running the show.

This character growth might sound like a minor improvement, but the growth helps to deflect a lot of the predictable jokes that may otherwise have come up, and it allows Atkinson to deliver many of the comedic moments in a style that’s similar to the one he use for Mr. Bean.

Particularly in the section of the movie where he’s fleeing capture on a souped-up motorized wheelchair. The section takes many of the conventions of a regular chase (the interruption, the surprise appearance) and uses them to comedic effect. Dave White of movies.com described the film as “a reasonably steady stream of closed-mouth chuckles over comic incidents,” but the wheelchair scene turned those chuckles into guffaws.

Speaking of other reviewers – another major criticism of the movie, lobbed by Lou Lumenick of the New York Post, is that the movie puts way too much emphasis on jokes that appeal to “…children who laugh at the sight of men being repeatedly kicked in the groin.”

Maybe watching the Love Guru can forever change your perspective on cheap gags, but Johnny English Reborn really doesn’t use crotch-hit gags that often. In fact, the writer seems to be wary enough of them to veer left of a few potential instances of the gag throughout the film.

However predictable the movie may be in some ways, it mostly failed the major predictability test: whether or not Johnny cross dresses at any point in the film ala Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows.

Back to Top
The Bad

Overall, Johnny English Reborn‘s major problem is with its supporting cast of characters. Many of them are acceptable because they have such small roles, but Kate, the love interest, and Agent One are two dimensional at best.

In fact, the entire romance sub-plot of the movie appears to have been added in a quick and dirty kind of way. It’s obvious that Kate’s interest in Johnny starts off as clinical (as she herself points out) but we never really see it become emotional, it’s as if the integral we’re-a-couple-now scene is missing from the movie.

Agent One, aka Simon Ambrose, (Dominic West) is similarly thin in character, being simply the ideal agent who’s more than he seems.

The other supporting cast member worth mentioning is English’s sidekick, Colin Tucker (Daniel Kaluuya). Tucker’s character is actually given some loose back story, and so he’s something of a 2.5 dimensional character, but there simply isn’t enough done with him to make him substantially different from Bough (pronounced “Boff”) in the first movie, except, just as is the case with English, he’s an actual agent rather than an office worker.

Back to Top
Judgment

Johnny English Reborn isn’t worthy of the extra word added to the title. “Reborn” is simply pushing things too far. “Improved” would’ve worked nicely and is much more accurate.

The improvements in some of the characters, in the use and execution of the jokes and gags, and in the character of Johnny himself suggest that the writers for this one (screenplay: Hamish McColl; story: William Davies) are an improvement over the writers (Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, and William Davies) for the last movie , but unless a movie by the name of Johnny English Renewed comes out in 2020 you shouldn’t expect too much from this series.

That said, Johnny English Reborn is an improvement over the original in terms of comedy, but it steps backwards in terms of characters – a lot of this movie seems to be here simply because the standard elements of a spy movie are necessary for the comedic premise. Yet, the major thrust of that premise, Johnny English himself, has been improved, and so, though narrowly, this one gets a save.

Freya, swoop down and save this film from the likes of Gigli and The Love Guru.

Back to Top
Closing

Next week watch this blog for the conclusion to my four part series on wind power in Ontario, an article on the newest news, and a search for the good in London Boulevard.

Back to Top

[Freya-dæg] When Love Hurts

Mike Myers’ movies aren’t necessarily the most high concept films around. Nor are they always the most original. But it’s definitely a low mark when one of his movies takes gross-out comedy so far that it becomes hard to watch. The Love Guru is just such a Myers’ movie.

It’s only an hour and a half long but, because of all of the gross-out comedy, it’s difficult to get involved with the story, characters, or dialog.

In fact, it felt like a three hour flick rather than the quick 90 minute fluff that Myers’ generally produces. What’s worse though, is that the story itself is so clearly defined and straightforward that it should be more difficult to throw the movie from its track.

The movie follows Guru Pitka (Mike Myers) who comes over from India to help a star player on the Toronto Maple Leafs (Darren Roanoke, played by Romany Malco). Setting the movie in Toronto is one of a few nods in the flick to Myers’ Canadian origins, one of the few things in the film that work. At any rate, Pitka helps the player out so that he can get a spot on Oprah and become “the next Deepak Chopra.”

The plot is made even simpler by its being given a Stanley Cup playoff time-frame, which at the least assures viewers that the movie has a definite end.

Characters like Guru Pitka and his master (played by Ben Kingsley) are indeed characters, and they embellish this otherwise plain story. But their embellishment is in shades of brown rather than shades of grey.

The rest of the cast is relatively lackluster. There are some exceptions, but I need an ace in the hole to give this one a chance at redemption, so I’ll return to that later.

The core issues with this movie are that it constantly resorts to graphic, low brow humour that at points is truly gag-worthy (a fight using mops soaked in urine, for example) and an overall lack of subtlety.

Of course, these two things are generally staples of Mike Myers’ movies. The exception with The Love Guru is that for some reason they’re both served up in such grandiose proportions that it’s difficult to figure out why or to get past them to the simple, lightly feel-good story.

But so little time spent on the bad, must mean that there are a lot of redeeming qualities here, right? Well, in a way.

I can name all of the good things about this movie off in a single list, actually: Stephen Colbert, Justin Timberlake, John Oliver, and Ben Kingsley. Yeah. That’s right, Ben Kingsley. I’m not incredibly familiar with his career, and appearing here as Pitka’s master may have been a move to play off type, but still. I was flummoxed when I saw him in this film. Flummoxed.

Now, of these four exceptional actors, Kingsley, Colbert (as Jay Kell), and Timberlake (as Jacques Grande) all played their parts exceedingly well. It’s clear that despite the terribleness of the film otherwise, they were having fun doing it. But John Oliver (as Dick Pants) seemed to be phoning it in.

In all of his scenes I got the impression that Oliver just didn’t want to be there. In fact, it seemed as though he’d gotten a call from Mike Meyers about a movie, got so excited that he didn’t read the script and accepted without any hesitation only to realize what he had inextricably gotten himself into well after it was too late to back out.

That said, these four actors really do make the movie glow when they’re on screen, even if those glows may be brief or very well-basted in silliness.

Actually, those four actors might also be what’s wrong with this movie. They wouldn’t have come cheap, and neither would the movie’s special effects. These effects are concentrated in a scene where Mike Myers’ head is smoothly CGI-ed onto a child’s body and another where a third eye opens up on Darren’s forehead in a very organic and nicely done way.

Not to mention, they must’ve spent a fair bit buying cover licenses for the three pop songs performed on sitar (though all of these are are definite highlights).

A lack of money in the film’s account by the end, or maybe even before filming really hit its stride is clear in camerawork that makes some scenes look almost handy-cam quality. Editing must have also taken a hit since there a few jerky cuts between scenes that are no doubt where the deleted bits are included in the “uncut” version.

In spite of all this, there were a few laughs here and there. The words of Guru Hathasmalvena cracked me up as only syphilitic ramblings can. And some of the guru’s book titles were ridiculous self-help parodies, but by the movie’s half-way point all of the funny jokes run their course.

Though the line “keep the elephant running,” might just stick with me for a while.

But context- or subtext-reliant lines and jokes are as sparse in this film as all-beef burger stands in New Delhi.

Surprisingly however, the romance aspect of the film involving Darren Roanoke and his estranged wife Prudence (Meagan Good) is played well and produces a surprisingly tender moment. Of course, this is buried under the rest of the film’s scatological and penis jokes.

Colbert, Timberlake, Kingsley, Oliver, a joke voice-over by Morgan Freeman, and a cameo appearance by Daniel Tosh are all well and good, but these talents are better showcased in other things (like Oliver in The Bugle, for instance). Waiting through the movie to spot these actors, and the few effective moments would be tiresome rather than entertaining.

Critics on Rotten Tomatoes panned it (15%), audiences weren’t much pleased (38%), and Harry Knowles (of Ain’t it Cool News) even said that this movie is a career killer for Myers. And, I just can’t find enough to really bring it back.

The Love Guru‘s got an amazing cast in many respects, a handful of actually tender or funny moments, some pretty impressive effects, and cool sitar pop song covers, but they’re all bound together with a script that cripples the lot and a story that is just a vehicle for scatological jokes and bawdy puns.

Freya, leave this one where it lay – and, if you touched it, you should definitely wash your hands.