BEFORE: I was out late last night, working a screening of "Captain America: Brave New World". It's probably the first big Marvel movie in a while, if you don't count the third "Venom" film and also "Kraven the Hunter" - I'm waiting for both to make it to some streaming platform, really, I'm in no rush, I already did my Tom Hardy chain for this year. For the new Cap movie, I'm willing to wait to see it too, since I'm deep into this romance chain - like, who releases the new Marvel joint in February? Look, it's gonna be on Disney in 3 months, so maybe I'll catch up with it around Memorial Day, or July 4 or even Veterans Day, those all seem thematically appropriate. Or as soon as I can, once I know when it will be streaming. I've got bigger fish to fry.
Lainie Kazan carries over from "My Big Fat Greek Wedding 3", and I know, I know, everyone ever has only ever said this is a terrible movie, but that's kind of made me very curious about it - I knew it was on Amazon Prime so I put it on my list, and then I dropped it from the J. Lo chain I did last February, because I got spooked. Or maybe I had a feeling that I would need it for better linking down the road, in which case I was totally right. However horrible this film is, it's serving a function now, it's connecting other films and therefore making this year's chain more possible. Oh, and the film's no longer on Amazon Prime, it moved to Peacock, just like "My Big Fat Greek Wedding 3" did. This is happening more and more, a film will be on one streaming service when I program it, and then it's on another when I go to watch it. It's very annoying because some services I access through the Playstation, which is downstairs, and others I connect to through my computer, which is upstairs. So I can get my drinks, get settled in the recliner, fire up the PS3 and then load Netflix or Amazon, only to find that the film's no longer available. Then I have to de-camp and climb the stairs and move all my supplies with me, snacks AND drinks, it's a whole process - and it's better for my legs to be in the recliner with my feet up. Just saying.
Here's the line-up for Monday, 2/17, Day 17 of TCM's "31 Days of Oscar":
Best Foreign Film Winners and Nominees:
7:00 am "Loves of a Blonde" (1966)
8:30 am "The Virgin Spring" (1960)
10:00 am "Kapo" (1960)
12:00 pm "The Burmese Harp" (1956)
2:00 pm "Babette's Feast" (1987)
4:00 pm "Mon Oncle" (1958)
6:00 pm "La Strada" (1954)
Oscar Worthy Politicians (and First Ladies):
8:00 pm "All the King's Men" (1949)
10:00 pm "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" (1939)
12:15 am "The Best Man" (1964)
2:15 am "Abe Lincoln in Illinois" (1940)
4:15 am "Sunrise at Campobello" (1960)
6:45 am "The Gorgeous Hussy" (1936)
I was at 80 seen out of 185, and I had a VERY productive Sunday for my stats, but I've only seen 3 out of Monday's 13: "All the King's Men", "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" and "Abe Lincoln in Illinois" - duh, it's President's Day tomorrow, I just got it. SO now 83 seen out of 198 takes me back down to 41.9%. It looks like I'll be lucky to end up with 42% again, when all is said and done.
THE PLOT: Larry Gigli is assigned by a crime boss to kidnap the brother of a prominent district attorney, and a beautiful woman known only as Ricki is sent to stay with him to make sure he doesn't mess up the job.
AFTER: Now, usually about this time of year, I'd be very burned out on typical Hollywood rom-coms, so anything with a hit-man or a cowboy or a space alien would be welcome indeed, because if nothing else, it represents a change of pace. While I sure could use something different around here, God, not like this. Somehow this is like a weird combination of "Chasing Amy" and "Midnight Run", only without any of the comedy of the first or any action of the latter. So don't say I didn't warn you, this is terrible.
The director is the man behind "Midnight Run", which is one of my favorite films - I don't quite understand how somebody can make that great film and also make this POS, which tries to find its humor in making fun of lesbians, people with mental disabilities, and the misplaced machismo that is Ben Affleck and all the characters he played. You know when he was good? As Batman, because Batman didn't have to talk much. I already miss Batfleck, of course Christian Bale was on point as both Batman and Bruce Wayne, but I don't think Ben was too far behind. Robert Pattinson as Emo Batman I can kind of do without, but the film would still have been pretty good with just about anybody under the cowl. Daredevil didn't say much either, so maybe Ben should get back into superhero movies, just saying.
When I scheduled this film for last year, Affleck and J. Lo were still a couple, for the second time, if I remember right they were engaged in 2003 but called it off, and then she moved on to Marc Anthony and Alex Rodriguez, and he moved on to another Jennifer. But then 20 years after they met while making "Gigli", Bennifer 1 was back on, and they got married in 2022 and divorced in 2024. I really kind of missed that window, didn't I? I had like one chance to watch this film while they were married and I blew it. The relationship in the film is therefore maybe a microcosm of Bennifer's relationship, perhaps both of them - they came together under weird circumstances, they argued a lot before they fell in love, and then perhaps they knew this thing was never going to last.
OK, so the reasons why this film is terrible:
1. Horrible treatment of a gay character. I know it was 2003, and things were different then, but still, COME ON. It's an all-too-common practice of blaming a woman for being a lesbian or bi, because somehow this is an affront to white males, that there are women who don't fawn over them or consider them attractive. You can't hold someone responsible for this, while also saying that it's OK to be gay. You also shouldn't act like this is just a phase, or a temporary thing because she just hasn't met the right man yet, one who can satisfy her. Sure, I know being gay is a complex combination of past history, experiences, opportunities and maybe genetics, but the party line now is that it's not just preference, it's an identity and state of being, not state of mind. So sure, you can try to get somebody to switch, but it's not as easy as the movies suggest.
2. Horrible treatment of a character with a mental disability. For many of the same reasons, you shouldn't have an actor playing someone with Tourette's or autism or whatever this kidnapped brother has. They never really define it, which of course means that the director didn't want to name it or didn't fully understand it, and how can you treat this properly if you don't understand it? No, let's just make a regular actor play it dumb and say a lot of things like he's stupid, while also throwing in a bunch of swear words, those are always funny, right? Hmm, not so much. The actor here does a lot with what little he was given to work with, but this whole part of the plot is very, very unfortunately handled. Basically the other characters just treat Brian like a child, and I know that's not right.
3. The director also didn't want to define Affleck's character, like is he a hit-man or a loan-shark or just a low-level guy who takes orders from the mobbed-up guy he works for? Again, very poorly defined - the thing about organized crime is that it's organized, people have clear roles and it would be great here to know exactly what Mr. Gigli DOES do on a daily basis, I mean he's got to pay the rent somehow, is he getting a cut of the money he shakes down people for? Does he work long hours, are there benefits? Nah, let's just leave it all open and up in the air because putting labels on this sounds a bit like too much work.
4. It's really unclear what the point of all of this is, we know that Brian's brother is somebody, a federal prosecutor of note, but what exactly is kidnapping the brother intended to accomplish? We had a clear goal in "Midnight Run", get the mob accountant to L.A. within a certain period of time, but there's really no goal here, just kidnap the mentally-impaired brother, bring him back to the apartment and...await further instructions? That's not a plan, not a good plot for a movie, that just feels like lack of effort and creativity. OK, it creates a set of circumstances where two people have to share a bed and not have sex, which admittedly is a metaphor for marriage, but it's not helping to advance the movie story to have all this down-time where the characters never GO anywhere.
I know I'm just scratching the surface here, and I'll think of many more reasons why this is terrible and not worth two hours of anyone's time, but really I just want to move on and forget about this. My bonus is that I never, ever, ever have to watch this again or even think about it, I'm done. Note that the director has not made another movie since, maybe he knows what he did and cancelled himself, which would be appropriate punishment. OK, I'll admit there's a few exciting minutes in the film, when Al Pacino shows up, that's the only reason I don't score this any lower. Still, turning a mob movie into a rom-com is like putting chocolate sauce on an onion - just don't do it.
Directed by: Martin Brest (director of "Meet Joe Black")
Also starring Jennifer Lopez (last seen in "Marry Me"), Ben Affleck (last seen in "Deadpool & Wolverine"), Justin Bartha (last seen in "Sweet Girl"), Al Pacino (last seen in "Next Goal Wins"), Lenny Venito (last seen in "The Kitchen"), Missy Crider (last seen in "Frailty"), Christopher Walken (last seen in "Dune: Part Two"), Terrence Camilleri (last seen in "Superman III"), Peter Van Norden (last seen in "The Best of Times"), Alexandra Fatovich (last seen in "All Is Bright"), David Pressman (last heard in "DC League of Super-Pets"), Shelby Fenner (last seen in "Vantage Point"), Robert Silver, David Backus, Luis Alberto Martinez, Todd Giebenhain (last seen in "Babylon"), Brian Sites (last seen in "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines").
RATING: 2 out of 10 ingredients in Tabasco sauce
No comments:
Post a Comment