BEFORE: Matt Damon carries over from "The Rainmaker", this is a recent acquisition that came in after watching the Greg Kinnear films earlier this year, like "Sabrina" and "Someone Like You". And I admit it doesn't seem to fit thematically here, with a month full of suicides and war and serial killers and concentration camps, but you just never know. Anyway, I'm no longer programming thematically, it's now catch-up time on a wide variety of topics. I'll admit I've been a bit curious about this film, could it be as bad as it seems to be? Plus, this helps link to where I want to go tomorrow, and sets up a chain that will last at least two more months, I think - at least until my Comic-Con break.
THE PLOT: Conjoined twins from Martha's Vineyard move to Los Angeles so that one of them can pursue an acting career.
AFTER: OK, it's not as bad as I thought, it's watchable, but just barely. It could have been a lot worse. Hey, I endured "The Radioland Murders" and "Miss March", so I can watch just about anything at this point.
Most of the humor, scratch that, ALL of the humor, originates from one source - the state of being a conjoined twin. So you could say it's the same joke, over and over, for nearly the whole length of the film. One twin is outgoing with the ladies, the other is shy and has a pen pal relationship. One wants to be an actor, the other one gets stage fright. One wants to stay in Hollywood, the other one is happy flipping burgers in Martha's Vineyard. What to do?
The physical nature of their situation is driven home, again and again, to the point of ridiculousness, even in flashbacks. What would it look like if conjoined twins played baseball? What would it look like if conjoined twins played hockey? What would it look like if one twin had to go to jail? What if one of them gets drunk, and he's the one on the right, so the one on the left has to drive home? What if one takes a shower, and the other one wears a raincoat?
The problem with all this is the logistics, which are sacrificed quickly in the name of comedy. And if the logistics don't work, then for me, the jokes don't work either. You simply can't close a jail cell in a way that will keep one brother on the inside and one on the outside - because the cell door can't pass between them. How did that door close? Wouldn't they have realized that on the set while filming, that there was no logical way to make that happen? Same thing with the bus gag, where one gets stuck on the outside of the bus. Well, the bus can't move unless the door closes, and the door can't close unless both of them are inside, so you simply can't have one outside, so that gag doesn't work either. My advice - if the joke has no possible bearing in reality, try a different joke.
Perhaps I'm overthinking things - maybe the conjoined twin thing is just a metaphor, not to be taken literally, because it doesn't seem to conform to any realistic physical laws. Maybe any two people who are brothers, or in any kind of relationship, can spend so much time together that they get on each other's nerves, but also can't stand to be apart. Really, aren't we all conjoined twins in some way? And the film was directed by two brothers...hmm...maybe we're getting a little insight to their relationship, joined at the hip?
Again, something tells me I'm giving the film too much credit. Safe money says this is just a silly little comedy, not meant to be taken seriously, not a metaphor for something else. When one brother goes on a date and tries to hide the fact that he's attached to his brother, or the other brother thinks he's got a solid chance at an acting career, despite the obviousness of his situation, it seems beyond ridiculous.
On the other hand, dare to dream, right? It's kind of heartening to think that someone with a physical disability like this wouldn't let it slow them down, they still want to work, and play sports, and have relationships just like anyone else. I just think at some point, like in playing high-school sports, reality would set in, and the opposing team would claim that you can't have two pitchers on the mound, or an extra man on the football field, as this represents an unfair advantage. The twist here is that these two men (and legally, they are TWO men) seem to keep finding ways to turn their disability into a positive advantage.
The most famous conjoined twins were, of course, Chang and Eng Bunker, born in Siam, which is where we get the now less-preferred term "Siamese twins". Like the brothers in this film, they were joined at the torso and shared a liver, although in more modern times they probably could have been separated medically. They both were married and slept in a bed made for four - one had 11 children and the other had 10, so clearly they didn't let their condition slow them down either, though things were no doubt awkward.
Speaking of awkward, the Farrelly brothers seemed to go out of their way to hire their friends and family to make cameos in this film, along with a disproportionate number of people with physical and mental disabilities. I want to believe they had the best intentions in doing so, but my cynical side wants to believe that they did so because of some odd fascination, or perhaps a tax break for their hiring practices. Or perhaps this was some kind of move to make the film critic-proof, because if I call attention to this or make fun of the actors involved, suddenly I'm the bad guy.
At the very least, this is distracting. Maybe it's more reflective of the way society is, I don't know, these questions are above my pay grade - and maybe there's a larger point being made by putting people who don't match Hollywood's beauty standards into a film, but if it's not done correctly, it seems to stray towards exploitation. Remember when there was a big wave of Hollywood comedies like "The Ringer" (also produced by the Farrelly brothers) and that news show produced by the creators of "South Park" that featured reporters with disabilities? I think you have to walk a very fine line when you cast real disabled people in a comedy, because you open up the possibility that people will laugh AT them, or worse, feel uncomfortable laughing WITH them.
Wikipedia is telling me that one of the Farrelly Brothers is a longtime volunteer with Best Buddies, a group that mentors people with intellectual disabilities, so I'm going to cut them a little latitude here. Still, I don't know if it's appropriate to load up this film, or any film, with every person you've ever met who wants to be on camera, disabled or not. Also, does it belittle the condition of people with real disabilities to cast two Hollywood pretty-boys as conjoined twins? I mean, it's a contrivance, and a necessary one because of the plot - in its own way, this is as contrived as casting the same actor in two roles (like Ed Harris in "The Face of Love"), where the form follows function.
Once the brother who wants to be an actor achieves some measure of success on a crime show, and attempts are made to either cut his conjoined twin out of the frame, or dress him in chroma-key green and remove him from the shot digitally. The show, "Honey and the Beaz" is at first a laughing-stock, then a surprise hit, then a runaway success, then becomes the victim of its own success. By placing a character with a disability in the middle of all that, there's nearly a parody look at Hollywood and how it treats actors, especially ones that don't conform to some imagined standard of perfection. Between reality TV and social media, opinions are starting to change, but it's a long slow road, and I suspect that pretty people will always have the inside track. But if you want to take this as a metaphor, and substitute "gay" or "transgender" or "overweight" or "Mormon" (or whatever) for "conjoined twin", then there's almost - ALMOST - a point being made here.
I did watch that TLC show about conjoined twins, which aired back in 2012 - "Abby & Brittany". These were girls in their late teens who were about to graduate from high school and go to college. The difference between them and the characters seen in this film is that they're joined at the spine, and have just one ribcage and two legs. They had three arms initially, but a central one was removed, resulting in the necessity of teaming up in order to walk or ride a bike. They work together to drive a car, but also had to receive separate driver's licenses. This supports my point about conjoined twins being legally two different people, which I think would also prevent them from playing team sports like the characters in this film - not for physical reasons, but to conform to the rules. I'm filled with questions about how they live their lives, but I'm going to table them because I felt pretty darn invasive just from watching their show.
Also starring Greg Kinnear (last seen in "Someone Like You"), Eva Mendes (last seen in "Hitch"), Cher (last heard in "Zookeeper"), Meryl Streep (last seen in "August: Osage County"), Seymour Cassel, Griffin Dunne (last seen in "Shrink"), Wen Yann Shih, Jackie Flynn, Ray Valliere, with cameos from Dane Cook, Peter Dante, Gary Valentine (last seen in "I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry"), Jeffrey Ross, Jay Leno, Luke Wilson (last seen in "The Skeleton Twins"), Lenny Clarke (last seen in "Rounders"), Tom Brady, Cam Neely, Jesse Ventura, Frankie Muniz,
RATING: 4 out of 10 crossword puzzles
No comments:
Post a Comment