Tuesday, February 8, 2022

Legally Blonde 2: Red, White & Blonde

Year 14, Day 39 - 2/8/22 - Movie #4,041

BEFORE: I'm doubling up (or is it doubling down?) on "Legally Blonde" movies today, because this will put the "right" film - aka the one with the best title - square on Valentine's Day. I won't know if it's thematically the right film for February 14 until I watch it, sometimes all I have to go by is the title.  For a while this was going to be the 1992 version of "Wuthering Heights", but after the re-organization of February, another opportunity arose, so I'm taking it.  Also, I'm watching both of these films because I'm a glutton for punishment, really I don't have a better explanation than that.  Maybe this saves me the trouble to trying to land this film (set in Washington DC) on July 4? I already have movie plans for that date, so let's cross this one off now, shall we?

Reese Witherspoon, along with several others, carries over from "Legally Blonde". 

THE PLOT: Elle Woods heads to Washington, D.C. to join the staff of a Representative in order to pass a bill to ban animal testing.

AFTER: A couple of programming notes - there's a "Legally Blonde 3" movie currently in production, so keep an eye out for that.  Jeez, it seems that as soon as I get caught up on a franchise, they announce another sequel.  That's what happened with the "Scream" movies last year.  Is another "Twilight" or "Hunger Games" movie on some studio's schedule?  Maybe that's the key, if I want to see more films made in a franchise, I should just watch what's out there, because irony dictates that I'll never be totally caught up, despite watching the latest "Terminator" "Godzilla" and "Bill & Ted" movies last year.  Let me know what franchises you'd like to see resurrected, and I'll do what I can. 

Also, since this film is about animal rights, don't forget that this year's Puppy Bowl is coming up on February 13 - I'm going to set my DVR for it today.  Don't worry, there are no other big events happening that day that you'll miss by tuning in to the Puppy Bowl, I can almost guarantee this.  JK - just DVR the SuperBowl and watch it later for the ads, like I do.  

I think I'm in the clear with this one, because in addition to her adventures in D.C., Elle Woods spends a fair amount of time here planning her wedding, and we do see the wedding at the end of the film - so I think there's just enough "rom" in this rom-com to justify including it.  Watching it here is not a mistake, at least, not for this reason.  But I'll admit the romance is not the primary focus here, not when there's the cause of animal rights to fight for, along with an explanation of how underhanded and manipulative the legislative process is in America, and how badly it's in need of fixing if a representative can be so tied up in her secret deals that she ends up pulling her support away from the bill that SHE introduced herself. Once again, I plead ignorance, but does this happen?  I've become more of an expert in the past two years (six years, really) in how Congressional bills work, or more often, fail to, and honestly I'm still working with most of my knowledge coming from that Schoolhouse Rock "I'm Just a Bill" song. Still I feel confident in calling a NITPICK POINT here, because an elected Representative from Massachusetts would probably know her own agenda from the get-go, and if she were controlled by corporate interests who wanted her to kill a particular piece of legislation, my guess is that she would KNOW that earlier in the process, and never sponsor the bill in the first place. Right?  

(I don't know, is there a tie-in here with recent events concerning Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema, consistently voting against their own party? It's not like they were FOR the Build Back Better bill and then against it, I think in the case of DINOs and RINOs we pretty much know where they stand, serving their own self-interests, but these two congresspeople still cause me a lot of head-scratching. Do they just want to be wooed, do they want something special from the bill in question to bring back dollars to their constituents, or are they just trying to be contrary?  How can you call yourself a Democrat if your voting is aligned with the other party?  Who does this help in the long run? I've given up, more or less, I can't figure it out.)

Elle Woods still annoys me, however, I still can't stomach her optimism, because she just keeps forging ahead with that sunny California attitude and she doesn't let anything stop her, for the most part.  She still has to fail before she succeeds, but that's just so the movie can provide us with some kind of "always darkest before the dawn" situation, that's Movie 101, Act 5 of the six-act structure practically demands it.  You can't just have a movie where people succeed, we've all determined that's boring - they have to FAIL and success needs to seem impossible, like they have to get all the way to Mount Doom and it still needs to look hopeless before it isn't, and the giant eagles swoop in with Gandalf riding one to sweep up.  So this animal rights bill is doomed to fail before it succeeds, in order to fit with a movie formula that's worked, time and time again.  Don't believe me? Watch 4,000 movies in a row your own damn self and then we'll see if you agree. 

By the same token, Elle has to get fired from the Boston law firm, in order to set her sights on Washington.  She had to lose the first boyfriend in order to get a better one.  And she had to risk losing her Boston wedding in order to set up the possibility of getting married somewhere else - once you figure out the formula, you can apply it everywhere - but the down side is, then you're going to be aware of the formula, and you'll see little else.  Still, there are a couple of notable reversals here, like one character mistaken as a villain who turns out to be very helpful for Elle's cause, and then another character - played by an actress who is NEVER EVER cast as a villain - turning out to have a hidden agenda. That was pretty cool, the rest is all fairly formulaic, though. We've seen the "we need X number of votes, we need X number of people to sign this petition" stuff before, and you'll never see it done better than on "The West Wing", so why even try?  

The only part that seemed ahead of its time, really, was the tracking down of Bruiser's mother, because I think in 2003 genetic sequencing and genealogy of dogs was a technology that was in its infancy.  But even now, when doggie DNA tests are widespread on the internet, I think the best they can tell you is exactly what breed(s) your mutt is made of, I doubt they can tell you, "Oh, your dog's mother lives in the Boston area."  So we have to suspend disbelief a little bit here, also the fact that a regular private detective would even know how or be willing to investigate this, back in 2003. And what are the odds that Elle's California dog would have a mother in Boston, where Elle & Bruiser just HAPPENED to be at that moment?  Very unlikely, because, you know, the U.S.A. turns out to be pretty big, and there are a LOT of dogs.  Super NITPICK POINT there, sorry.  (I'm not even going to address whether dogs can have sexual orientations as seen here, I'm just not qualified to comment.)

What happened to Selma Blair's character? I thought they became besties in the first film, but maybe that actress wasn't available for the sequel?  Or was she smart enough to turn it down?  Either way, it makes my linking a little more difficult that neither she nor Victor Garber had roles in the sequel - of course I came up with a plan, it just took a little more effort, that's all, and it's going to leave at least one film stranded in advance of next year's chain. 

Also starring Luke Wilson, Jennifer Coolidge, Jessica Cauffiel, Alanna Ubach, Bruce Thomas, James Read, Tane McClure (all carrying over from "Legally Blonde"), Sally Field (last seen in "Spielberg"), Regina King (last seen in "Higher Learning"), Bruce McGill (last seen in "The Best of Enemies"), Dana Ivey (last seen in "The Color Purple"), Mary Lynn Rajskub (last seen in "Night School"), J. Barton, Stanley Anderson (last seen in "Proof of Life"), Bob Newhart (last seen in "Richard Pryor: Omit the Logic"), Ruth Williamson (last seen in "The Family Man"), Jack McGee (last seen in "Father Figures"), Sam Pancake, Octavia Spencer (last seen in "Thunder Force"), James Urbaniak (last seen in "Cinema Verite"), Lauren Cohn (last seen in "Morning Glory"), Dale Waddington, Josh Holland, Jackie Hoffman (last seen in "Birdman"), Erin Cottrell, with cameos from Desi Lydic (last seen in "Irresistible"), Masi Oka and archive footage of James Stewart (last seen in "MLK/FBI")

RATING: 3 out of 10 warm fuzzies in the Snap Cup

No comments:

Post a Comment