Showing posts with label Adam Sandler. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Adam Sandler. Show all posts

Saturday, August 1, 2009

Funny People

There are few film going pleasures more delightful than to see an actor that no one expects much from giving an amazing performance. Everyone expects great things from Jack Nicholson or Meryl Streep, so it's not as satisfying when they do knock it out of the park. But when someone like Adam Sandler comes along and gives us - for my money - the performance of the year, it's something to really savor. Sandler has been great before in Punch-Drunk Love, so I knew he had this in him, but he buries his great work under piles of dumb comedies and bland melodramas. Yet even in films like Anger Management, you could tell there were layers to his performance that the film itself did not complement. Freed from all shackles, he is finally able to deliver the most fully formed character of his career.

Adam Sandler became popular at the exact moment that his brand of humor would have most appealed to me. I still consider Happy Gilmore and Billy Madison to be among the best comedies of the 90's.That said, after Little Nicky my interest in his comedy waned; I grew up and Sandler didn't. Yet he played such an important part in my early film going experience that it was hard to let that go. I still try and catch his movies from time to time, and I secretly hope he one day is able to leave behind his comedies and become a more respected actor. So my bias was certainly there to want a great performance out of him. In Funny People, he plays George Simmons, an Adam Sandler-like comedian who has reached the zenith of his career but has let fame get to him. With no real friends and no family, he is forced to deal with his diagnosis of Leukemia alone. He goes out to a comedy club to perform (his jokes consist of such winners as "what will you all do when I am gone, who will amuse you?") and quickly bombs. He is followed by Ira Wright (Seth Rogen), who rips into Simmons. Simmons decides to hire the young comic as his assistant/friend/confidant. It is from their relationship that the plot - and the humor - flows.

What struck me most about Sandler's performance was how completely unlikable he was willing to be. A real sticking point for me with a lot of big name actors is their unwillingness to be unlikable on screen. They always make the most unsavory characters redeemable, lovable even. Not Sandler. He embraces the inherent misanthropy in Simmons, making him a bitter, angry, vile person with no real sense of how to treat other people. He's like a funnier Daniel Plainview. And yet he earns our sympathy through the tricks of director Judd Apatow. Apatow fills the film with a sense of a lost past for Simmons. Sandler has had probably half his life recorded for audiences at this point, so the film uses much of that footage to gives us a history of Simmons. Perhaps the best use of such footage is from when Apatow and Sandler were roommates back before either was famous. The two would make prank phone calls and have a fun time together. This footage opens the film, and while very funny, it gives us such a strong sense of that human connection that Simmons has lost over the years. Where he once could enjoy life with his friends, fame and money have stripped that from him.

The film also wouldn't work without Rogen to balance it. He is at the opposite side of the career spectrum of Simmons, and we get the sense that he and his friends are living a similar like to Simmons and his friends pre-fame. We are asked to wonder whether they will be able to overcome that which destroyed Simmons, or whether they will follow in his footsteps. We can already see seeds of a similar life path and jadedness in the character played by Jason Schwartzman, but Rogen seems like a levelheaded enough person to avoid it. It is these wonderful character dynamics that make the whole piece really shine.

For me, Funny People was a perfect confection of humor, drama, acting, characters, story, themes - everything I could want from a motion picture - for the first hour and a half. Really just perfect. But it's a two and a half hour movie, and as a result, it starts to lose its power with the final hour. Apatow has always been a self indulgent filmmaker, and it has worked in his favor before. Here he goes too far, unfortunately, and it honestly could ruin the whole experience for a lot of people. As he did in Knocked Up, he casts his wife and two children in the film. Here, however, they become the central focus of the film for the final hour, taking the focus off of Simmons and his relationship with Ira. This segment was vital to sending home the message of Simmons being doomed to stay the unhappy person he is, but it could have been done in about twenty minutes or so. When Leslie Mann breaks out a home video of her and Apatow's daughter in a school performance of Cats, it's clear that Apatow has gone far off into his own head.

And yet, I love that a filmmaker would make a movie for himself first and foremost. Apatow's passion for these characters and their world shines through in spite of (or perhaps because of) that final hour. It's not a film for everybody, and especially not a film for those expecting the usual Sandler comedy, but it was the perfect film for me. It's a real shame that Sandler won't be remembered come Oscar season, because I really feel that he rises above other comedians turned dramatic actors of late (Jim Carrey, Will Ferrell) and delivers a brilliant performance. The real heart breaker, though, is that this film won't make as much money as his usual fare, and he will go back to starring in low rent David Spade or Kevin James comedies. I hope that the great actor hiding within Sandler doesn't stay hidden again for long, but when movies about man-babies and mermen make more money than thoughtful comedy-dramas, I guess it's only inevitable.

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Catching Up: Mini Reviews

Ah, summer. We wade through months of uninteresting movies to get here, only to be reminded that the majority of summer movies suck. This year was worse than normal, as there was nearly no redeemable movies all winter or spring. Thankfully we already got Iron Man and Indiana Jones, because without them this summer would be shaping up to be the most painful in recent years. These mini reviews range from mediocre to downright painful. Let's hope WALL-E can pick the pace back up next week.

Kung Fu Panda

I have a bias against the films of Dreamworks Animation. They rely too much on pop culture references and seem content aiming for the middle, never trying to be something special or new. I was expecting the same thing here, but was pleasantly surprised. While not up to the Pixar high standard, this is the closest Dreamworks has come to making a genuinely good animation. It focuses on characters and story over pop culture jokes, and the animation is actually artistic for a change, notably the opening sequence. That said, I felt it treaded a little too much on familiar waters, and the supporting characters were almost non-entities (I think Jackie Chan had one line the whole movie, and I'm pretty sure Lucy Liu didn't say anything, though she must have or they wouldn't give her a credit). I also have a bit of a problem with an animated kung fu movie, as that seems to go against the whole point of making a kung fu movie. That said, this is the first step down a path of respectability for Dreamworks. If they can improve upon this one, they may yet overcome my bias.




The Incredible Hulk

Count me among the many who disliked Ang Lee's 2003 take on the Marvel character. It was long, dull, and uneventful. This reboot solves many of the problems of the original, but in doing so creates all new ones. It starts off with a great opening credits summary of what has happened so far, then follows that up with Bruce Banner in South America trying to overcome his curse. For the first twenty minutes I thought this might be a really good movie, but as soon as Banner heads back to America, it becomes another mindless action spectacle with no characterization, no plot, and entirely CG fight scenes. By the end I felt overloaded. I fear the Hulk may just be one of those comic book characters that doesn't work on the big screen, no matter how much producers seem to think he belongs there. He is just as uninteresting a character here as he was in the last film. Perhaps he'll work better as a secondary character in the proposed Avengers film Marvel is working on.




You Don't Mess With the Zohan

I can't believe Adam Sandler is still as popular now as he was a decade ago. That's not meant to be a knock against the man - most comedians have a very short shelf life. A Bill Murray is far less common than a Chevy Chase. Yet he continues to churn out hit comedies every summer, occasionally even taking the time to fit in a drama here and there. I was a huge Sandler fan back in his early days, and would honestly consider Happy Gilmore to be among the ten funniest films I've ever seen. But the quality in these things have trended downwards over the years, and this one is just dull. By far the best part of the film is John Turturro as The Phantom, an over the top Palestinian terrorist. Too bad he's not in more of the film. The whole hairdresser angle is not funny and often tedious, and Rob Schneider is once again playing an unfunny stereotype. The jokes in Sandler's films are less and less funny each outing, and at some point Sandler is going to lose too much of his fan base to continue making these kinds of movies. It may not happen anytime soon, but it will happen one day, and I sincerely hope that by that point he has carved out enough of a niche as a dramatic actor that he can sustain himself in a new arena. I really like the guy, and he does have some great acting chops (Punch Drunk Love was a minor revelation), so I hope he can grow beyond films like Zohan one day.




The Happening

Has Shyamalan really run so completely out of ideas that he could think of no better title than The Happening? It's especially ironic because quite the opposite happens, actually. I've stuck with Shyamalan far longer than most, even feeling that The Village was a worthwhile product. But what made his last few films overcome their shortcomings was his wonderful and nuanced direction. He had a mastery of the camera that you can really only find in a Hitchcock or Spielberg film. That is completely missing here. There is no sense of urgency or dread, no matter how many times he cuts to a menacing tree or wind. It almost feels like a parody of his past works. And the characters are atrocious. I honestly couldn't care less if they all died. Part of this is due to the writing, but it's largely because of the awful acting on display. Mark Wahlberg delivers every line so insincerely that when one woman falsely accuses him of trying to kill her, his response of "Nooo, of course I'm not" makes him sound like he's lying to her, which isn't supposed to be the case. This has been touted as Shyamalan's first R rated film, and that R rating is only used to prop up a boring film. It seems that he could think of nothing exciting or dramatic to put on the screen this time around, so he relied solely on gratuitous violence to keep us watching. The old Shyamalan could get us excited simply by using his camera in a daring way. The new Shyamalan would rather take the easy and less fruitful route.