Showing posts with label Danny DeVito. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Danny DeVito. Show all posts

Saturday, 5 October 2019

Mars Attacks! (1996)

"For dark is the suede that mows like a harvest..."

I saw this once in the ‘90s- at a festival, I think, perhaps Phoenix ‘96. But I was very drunk, and let us not discuss any herbal substances which may or may not have been imbibed. Let us also, in the same token, disregard the bottle of Aragonian wine (yes, the bottle states it’s from “Aragon”, a name from the annals of history) that I have just imbibed at the time of composing this paragraph. Let’s just say that, yes, I can see this film is no classic, but it’s fun.

Tim Burton is always brilliant at making his films feel likes stylised worlds of their own, but he generally has his own gothic style. This film, like its superb predecessor  Ed Wood, gives us a style very different from Burton’s norm- in this case that of the ‘50s flying saucer movie. Hence the many CGI saucers look exactly as we might expect from countless movies. Hence the ever-present sound of the theremin. And the Martians, in old fashioned stop motion, look awesome.

Oh, and the film is bloody hilarious. No, it’s not the funniest film ever, but it’s a fun little spoof and extraordinarily well cast- Jack Nicholson is superb, as ever, as the cynical President. Pierce Brosnan is hilarious as a character taking the piss out of all those pipe smoking, exposition-spouting professors. Also excellent are Sarah Jessica Parker and the wonderful Pam Grier, with a small role for a Michael J. Fox presumably too far into his Parkinson’s disease for a larger role.

It’s also very, very ‘90s- Richie dresses just like I used to back then, and the less Grungy fashions are... yes, well. But the film is enormous fun, with its capricious Martians putting people’s heads on dogs’ bodies and zapping US Senators. And can we please have a Martian do you Trump what is done to the President here?

Sunday, 7 October 2018

Batman Returns (1992)

"I'm tired of wearing masks."

I haven't seen this since 1992, at the old Cannon cinema in Hinckley. I don't much remember what I thought of it then, but I like it a lot now. It doesn't quite beat its predecessor for me (sorry, Nick!)- it doesn't quite have the depth, visual elegance or Batman screentime- but Tim Burton leaves the franchise with two superb films under his utility belt.

Batman’s lack of screen time here is a surprise- Batman and Bruce Wayne are little more than a plot function here, with Michael Keaton not given much interesting stuff to do, especially as compared with the first film. But then we must remember that this isn’t primarily a franchise film but a Tim Burton film; the film is about the Penguin and Catwoman.

Interestingly, though, neither of the two traditional villains are wholly evil; that accolade goes to the splendidly named Max Shrek, a corrupt and morally depraved businessman whose Nosferatu-inspired name fits well with the film’s aesthetic for Gotham. He’s the catalyst for Catwoman. Selina Kyle, a downtrodden and humiliated secretary, single, alone and browbeaten by all and sundry, finds out stuff she shouldn’t and is thrown out of a high window, losing the first of her nine lives, and something snaps. At first it looks as though there’s a bit of a feminist message here, especially as Catwoman’s first outing is to rescue a woman from a man in a dark alley, but this doesn’t go anywhere. Still, Michelle Pfeiffer is pretty good and the kinky latex costume and whip looks cool- although it sort of takes over from the whole cat thing. Still, an impressive treatment of the character.

The treatment of Danny DeVito’s Penguin is much more radical; this Oswald Cobblepot grew up in the sewers, abandoned, and the only cigarette holder to be seen is that of his father, glimpsed early on. The umbrellas and monocle are present and correct, but this is a much more feral Penguin, no angel but genuinely vulnerable, and bordering even on likeable if he were not so lecherous.

These characters are fascinating, and what the film  is about, much more so than Batman or even Gotham. This is notably much more of a Tim Burton film and less of a Batman film than its predecessor, and the respective values you place on those two categories will probably decide which of the two you prefer. Personally, I may like this one less but it is nonetheless superb.

Wednesday, 2 September 2015

Twins (1988)

"Actually, I hate violence."

"But you're so good at it!"

How '80s can you get? We even get a montage, for heaven's sake. 

This film is a silly old piece of fluff, of course. It's 80s Hollywood comedy by the numbers. But it's fun. And it features the always excellent Danny DeVito, Chloe Webb from Sid and Nancy and, of course, Arnold Schwarzenegger in a comedy role.

Arnie is the revelation here. He can do comedy, and he can do it well. Comedy is hard. This means he can actually act when he puts his mind to it. People are shocked. Also, I must admit, this may be no one's favourite film but it's entertaining to watch, with a decent if silly plot and sufficient laughs to get away with calling it a comedy. Arnie's even gets to say "I'll be back" at one point. The film's best moment, though,  is Arnie's face after he pops his cherry. Yep. He can do comedy. 

In fact... I say this through gritted teeth, but the straight man in a comedy double act is often underappreciated and, well, Arnie is great at it.

What next, then? Kindergarten Cop?


Friday, 2 May 2014

Matilda (1996)


"Are you being smart with me?"

I devoured all of Roald Dahl's children's books as a little boy but I must confess, dear reader, that I'm a little too old to have read this one. Still, it's Dahl to a tee: books and imagination are good, TV (see Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) and Gradgrindian adulthood are bad and there's plenty of kid-friendly grotesques of the kind all good Roald Dahl tales demand.

The film is directed, interestingly, by your actual Danny DeVito, who also plays Matilda's wilfully ignorant and ethically deficient father. Her alienated home life is eventually replaced by school, a British school, as apparently British schools are strict, one of those odd American stereotypes.

The biggest grotesque of the lot is headmistress Miss Trunchbull, who looks very kinky with her strict sexy uniform and riding crop, and who is rumoured to use several gloriously outré punishments which no parent would believe.

She is counterbalanced by the rather nice Miss Honey. I'm reminded at this point of an old sketch by The Mary Whitehouse Experience (remember them?) who pointed out that Charles Dickens called all his good characters names like "Mrs Lovely" and all his villains  names like "Mr Complete Bastard". Roald  Dahl is very Dickensian in that sense, gloriously and unapologetically so.

The film (and, I assume the book) is an impassioned cry for reading and learning and a furious cry against the sort of inverted snobbery against learning and culture that keeps the poor ignorant and powerless. The message is perfectly pitched to children in this furiously moral film. Matilda is a heroine for speaking out against the Trunchbull's cruelty, and soon sets out to investigate the truth behind her headmistress, typical Dahl protagonist that she is.

There's a happy ending, of course, with our telepathic heroine being adopted by that nice Miss Honey. I suspect the book has more life to it than the film, but this is a fun little adaptation.