p r e f e r r e d r e v i e w e r s :
 |
 |
|
You haven't selected any preferred reviewers. To learn more about customizing your experience, click here.
|
|
|
 |
 |
o t h e r r e v i e w e r s :
|
|
|
chris_gibbs [ 3.0 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
A separated, glamorous, Hollywood couple must pretend to reunite for a press junket of the last movie that they ever shot together. Kewl...now I only wish that I could pretend never to have seen this movie...
Trite, unfunny, boring and a waste of everyone's talent. How a premise with such zest and bite can turn into a movie that doesn't feature any chemistry, any real laughs, any surprises or any spice is beyond me. How Julia Roberts is used solely as a "puppy dog" character, puttering around in the background while we endure the complete bitchiness of Zeta-Jones' character, who is not one bit funny or romantic (two ideal ingredients in a "romantic comedy"), is also beyond me. And why they chose John Cusack, a great, quirky actor in his own right, to play the most bland, uninteresting and unfetching character (with zero chemistry with either of his leads) is further more, beyond me. And to anybody who decided that this project was "funny" enough to greenlight featuring the talents mentioned above, along with Billy Crystal, Christopher Walker, Seth Green and Stanley Tucci...well, what can I say...I just don't have the words. So is this the worst movie that I've seen all year? No. But it definitely sucks and it's basically because...well, it's just not funny. And for the record, allow me to state a few more problems with it. It starts off slow, it's got no energy, it doesn't engage you with any of its characters (Julia barely gets somewhat interesting in the film, everyone else...lame!), it utilizes way too many flashbacks to move the story forward, it's utterly predictable, standard, routine, see-through and uninteresting as a plot and it just sits there on the screen, big and ugly, waiting...waiting for you to laugh or find something in it that is amusing.
And then Hank Azaria shows up...aaaaaah, the film's savior (mind you, some might be offended by his exaggeration of a stereotype, but that's another story altogether). But when an experienced "voice" actor upstages all of the main stars in a summer "blockbuster" romantic comedy with an over-the-top Antonio Banderas accent, damn dude...your film's in trouble!! Rent this movie on video just to see what went wrong yourself. The references to Ricky Ricardo and Senor Wences (huh!?), the idio-plot points like when one of the characters goes on the roof to stretch his arms out and relax, but everyone believes that he's going to kill himself (hardy-har-har) and the cheap way of getting the audience to leave the theater laughing by bringing back a ball-sniffing dog that has no place being in the location at the end of the movie, well...I could go on. But I won't because I do still respect all of the actors in this film and actually did laugh at Azaria, Green and Tucci's antics from time to time (ironic, eh...what about the leads, dammit!) and liked the premise behind the film (before I saw the finished product, of course). A dud all the way around.
BTW, all the talk about this film was that Julia Roberts was to be in a fat suit for one scene (her character is supposed to have lost 60 pounds), so when the scene finally came, I did get a little excited about what it might look like and then...well, it basically just looked like Julia Roberts in a fat suit! Ugh. I think I'm gonna start drinking again after this lame-ass movie. C'mon Hollywood, enough with the crud!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
shanster [ 5.5 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
Barely passable as a comedy. Nice collection of stars, but very little interesting and funny stuff. Billy Crystal - Old comedians don't die, they just get stupid and make lame movies despite everyone's recommendation that they just fade away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
astrosheil [ 6.5 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
Now I liked this movie. It's not a great movie but it kept me entertained during the recent heat wave. I thought the critics were too hard on a good escapist chick flick that made a humid evening close to 95 degrees here fly by.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DokBrowne [ 5.5 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
This is the part where I gush over Seth Green, who I love even more than Matthew Lillard, except he's employed to less effect than the entire cast of The Thin Red Line. So whatever, instead I'll talk about the movie...I guess. Psshh
I'm confused. It was supposed to satirize Hollywood, but then it suddenly ended with a rushed happy conclusion. Gwen never really gets her much-deserved comeuppance, nor does she, unlike Cusack, develop throughout the course of the movie to demonstrate at least one sympathetic trait. She's almost as evil as the Stanley Tucci producer, who to me was the best character, because at least he wasn't so on-the-fence. We knew exactly that he was a total jerk, and Tucci sells the role with this fierce, rabid mania that shows he's probably paid attention to the real producers for whom he's worked over the years. The darkest scene in the movie takes place at a bar where Crystal is mulling over the damage he’s done to his supposed friends Cusack and Catherine Zeta-Jones (and that’s another issue that could use some clarity: why does Crystal sabotage the both of them, and makes exasperated faces about having to deal with them, and then alternately play matchmaker to Cusack and Julia Roberts, and act as the voice of reason in both his and Zeta-Jones’s lives? Good or bad, which is it?). Anyway, along comes Tucci to congratulate him on a manipulation well-done, compelling Crystal to crack that maybe he can arrange for them to commit suicide, too. Tucci stops to contemplate that, but then reveals he’s kidding, and then pauses again to give it more thought, and then brushes it off again as just something he’s “joking about, or making notes of, whatever”, he waves his hand dismissively at it. The implications of the producer’s ethics are disturbing, much more so than the rest of Crystal’s “dirt” on his experiences in La-La Land
Christopher Walken as the Kubrick-ian director isn't quite weird enough, ironically, because he's portrayed as a nutcase, yet the actual quirks of an obsessive, unpredictable, highly-reputed filmmaker aren't described in much detail. I would've enjoyed more little jabs at that target. Ditto Seth Green, but not his character, the hapless rookie-in-training, who in any other "biting" movie of this ilk would end up taking over Crystal's job at the end and being even more ruthless than his mentor, one of those cyclical ironies like at the end of All About Eve. Instead he's in the background constantly; another thing I expected from his part was maybe to serve as the understated core, the narration. After all, he's the only one with any real innocence. They willingly play his naivete for laughs, but they don't make anything of his novice perspective. It could've been like a Nick Carroway character, or the black guy in Primary Colors. But I guess they decided to make Julia Roberts that person, because she's so gosh darn lovable. And by that I mean she's the Hollywood perception of gosh darn lovable. I'm of the minority who don't quite get it. She's a good actress, but she's not beautiful, and she's not a great actress. She's charming, but so are a lot of women on screen. There's nothing unique about her that warrants the throne on which she overlooks everyone else in the industry. Maybe it's just that she's a nice person, as I've heard (of course, after a movie like this, you start disbelieving any- and everything you know about Hollywood). And that she brings in big grosses, although that brings us back to why she's so popular and important to the viewing public. I'd rather see Marisa Tomei, Christina Ricci, or Sarah Michelle Gellar up there in the untouchable limelight of super-fame. Then again, no, I don't think I would, because Roberts gets all the boring roles now (she's the outspoken love interest or the outspoken feminist or the adorable underdog, etc. etc. nothing exciting about her work anymore). Someone had to play the moral center, and since Joe Roth and his team were already using A-list names, an actress of Julia's caliber was the only way to go. And she's fine. Does the part, pretty convincing, smiles a lot, she knows how. Believe me, though, Seth Green could do it best, especially given his same character, Danny, since there seemed to be a lot more comedy, of the physical and reactive kinds, to him than there was to Julia, all of whose scenes are actually pretty dull compared to the juicier moments when it's just John Cusack, or Billy Crystal, or Stanley Tucci. Now for Catherine Zeta-Jones. I've lost a lot of my Zorro-based love for her over the past year, ever since she married Michael Douglas and became this pseudo-queen in the biz. Before she was just this remarkably beautiful, semi-popular but not overblown, girl who was in almost-blockbusters like Entrapment and The Haunting (Zorro, too), but then she turned into the big news for the tabloids and People Magazine, and I've seen her on Dave and “The Tonight Show” a few times, and she just seems fake, like she's this all-important person who isn't down-to-earth or funny (like, say, George Clooney, or Jon Stewart) or even charismatic (like star giants who pretty much act like star giants but look like good, cool people anyway, like Mel Gibson or Jim Carrey). She's kinda meh. So it's even weirder (in a not-too-good way) watching her play that exact same image in this movie. She's supposed to be a bitch, a living stereotype of the Hollywood egomaniac, and she is, and there's no redemption for at any time, so ultimately she's a rather unpleasant force, and though it must say something complimentary of Zeta-Jones that she plays a part so blatantly satirical of her own real-life status, but it also bridges the gap a little too, unintentionally fostering some of the unflattering notions we the people have about this star. You can say she's a good sport, that no one willing to be so deprecating of their own field could possibly fit the type themselves, but hey, it's gotta come natural to her, playing herself (theoretically), and supposedly it's happened a lot throughout the years, stars looking foolish on screen but actually being pompous asses anyway. I don't know how they do it, though. Which brings me to another fit of confusion: if John Cusack - Eddie - is really so messed-up (early scenes have him praying for the universal strength of flowers, and writing daffy letters to his mom, and being considered a weirdo even by fellow weirdos, and sometimes even seeming mentally out of synch with his surroundings), then how does he pull it together so easily for a press junket? How does he film movies? How does he magically transform into a fairly normal hero by the end? I presume he's meant to be portrayed as an inherently good-natured guy who's just conflicted and deranged by the overpowering assault of Hollywood stardom, but in the movie it comes off as a crazy guy who's just as phony and annoying as Catherine Zeta-Jones but who inexplicably softens with each new scene. By the end you wonder if it really means anything that he finally (after a single instance of hesitation) got up the nerve to declare his (very recently discovered, not altogether well-established) love for Julia Roberts to his co-workers and to the press. I mean, in that same day he was still leaning off roof edges and laughing twistedly at the embarrassment of others, and even talking shop in that comically pretentious way with Walken the director. So has he changed? Is he better? Does he deserve someone as honest and virtuous and genuine as Julia Roberts? I'm not sure. The only certainty is that his goodness is entirely relative to Catherine Zeta-Jones, who's his flip side antagonist. Without her, he'd probably be just as offensive in the long run. Or perhaps I'm too cynical. Dubious character development aside, Cusack is his usual "quirky" self, which I sometimes like (and do this time). He endows this subtle respectability in Eddie, who seems to openly accept all the spoils and shades of amoral taboo that come with his position (he complains that Zeta-Jones gets the better suite at a hotel, he's extremely rude to others), yet also finds himself disgusted with the theatrics (his conversations with Crystal's publicist highlight this nicely underplayed trait; Crystal tells him something rehearsed or dishonest, like "you were fabulous tonight!" and Cusack will bitterly challenge him to explain how he even did anything to earn that compliment). Cusack can robustly create his characters pretty easily, so you don't need me to elaborate. Billy Crystal - co-writer, producer, and supporting player - clearly has the most invested in the movie, and for a while in the beginning you'd think he's the focus of the story, until we're introduced to Gwen and Eddie and Crystal recedes to sidekick position. Although this doesn't cause any specific drop in the film's quality, I liked watching Crystal...Lee, that's his name. Yeah, I remember it was unusual. There's just something that doesn't jive about Billy Crystal - about anyone in a movie, I'm thinking - named Lee. It's not a compatible name. No ring to it, no suggestion of identity, not fun to say out loud. Hmmm. Anyway, the story of a veteran like Lee stepping back up to the plate to handle an important public deception like this would be - and mostly is, for what attention it's given - more interesting than the Bickersons saga between Gwen and Eddie, as well as the ensuing romance involving Kiki (Roberts). Many of the summaries I've read about America's Sweethearts tout it as the inevitable spoofing of society's obsession with Hollywood couples, particularly with all the recent turmoil (Willis & Moore, Ryan & Quaid, Cruise & Kidman, and biggest of all Tim Burton & Lisa Marie! Can you believe he broke it off to be with Helena Bonham Carter instead?! That heartless home-wrecker). Yet it's not so much a simultaneous expose and exaggeration on the real behind-the-scenes transpirings of celebrity love than it is a broad series of insider jokes about all things Hollywood. There's even the requisite Larry King scene. Like Steve Martin and unlike Robert Altman, the final tone beset by Crystal, co-writer Peter Tolan, and director Joe Roth is one of gentle embrace: c'mon, these stars and industry types are vain, deceitful, and grossly pampered, but deep down they're just like us, and there'll be a happy ending for all (or at least those arbitrarily assigned more good qualities than bad, i.e. Eddie, Kiki, and Lee). I didn't learn anything about how major actors and actresses deal with their own problems off-screen; at least, nothing I haven't learned a trillion times already. Every backstage movie-about-movies emphasizes that everyone is pretending to like everyone else, and no one can be trusted, and it's hopelessly competitive, and producers are cutthroat, and actors are self-involved and cruel, and publicists spew 100% bullshit, and the press are intrusive, merciless, and sadistic, and the "new guy" is a bumbling fool who doesn't know Katherine Hepburn from Audrey, and directors are control freaks, and mistreated assistants are the exact opposite of the stars they tend to (as in, sweet, giving, and not annoying), and in the end, when you turn your back, the other person will roll their eyes at you, no matter how differently they act to your face. Oh, and everyone has a price. See, these are cardinal rules of "incisive", "sharp", "biting", "satirical", "brutally honest", "cold and sardonic", "smart" "black comedies" about the movie industry. I just wish Hollywood would eventually try a new, NON-cynical approach to itself, because the clichés are developing their own clichés. If this keeps up, someday a high-profile auteur will make the ultimate insider movie, where all the legends and superstars will come together to sing a chorus of "We Totally Suck Because We're Evil and Heartless" followed by a big party of laughter and self-congratulating merriment, and then they'll all whip out uzis and horribly murder each other in an orgy of death, irony, and self-inflicted, self-necessitated poetic justice. And then the universe will implode from all the existential twisting and back-flipping. The End.
So Crystal brings nary an insight to the table. He can at least sculpt a funny punchline, and the movie coasts along with an array of decent, if not brilliant, laughs. I myself barely chuckled at all, but I was able to appreciate most of it. "60 pounds? That's a Backstreet Boy," Crystal kids, and I stare blankly at the screen, clapping and hooting only in the far back corner of my mind, because I really hate boy bands. "So, what have you written?" Alan Arkin the nurturing guru asks of a rehabilitating Cusack, who then reads: "'Dear Mom, fuck you.'" and then looks expectantly back up at Arkin. Cusack delivers the line in a funny way, and it was probably the only out-loud laughter I experienced. Because I like profanity, and humor derived from usurping the viewer's expectations. It's trademark "Simpsons" comedy. But the rest of the movie is peppered with more conventional material, none of which is bad, but little of which is solid entertainment. Wait, I take that back. There is one case of failed wackiness, and 'tis, to my surprise and dismay, Hank Azaria, this generation's Man of 1000 Accents (aka the previous generation's Robin Williams). The surprise isn't that Azaria once again acts almost entirely with his voice (an accent, of course, this time some sort of Latin), but that he incessantly recalls the similarly flamboyant, Latin-accented houseboy he played six years ago in The Birdcage (with Robin Williams!). I didn't find that movie, nor his cartoonish ways, very amusing, and here he strikes the same wrong notes. His accent isn't convincing when he actually pronounces "junket" as "honket", and it lacks the rich, textured flow of his better voices, like as the fey Brit in Mystery Men, or anyone from the entire "Simpsons" gamut, from Apu and Duffman to Chief Wiggum and Professor Frink. He also does a great pirate (Captain McCallister), surfer dude (Snake), Mike Tyson (Drederick Tatum), adult Milhouse (Kirk), Mexican (Bumblebee Man), slack-jawed yokel (Cletus), and a Pee-Wee Herman variation (Dr. Nick). Probably a million more I would never imagine, too. But for once he doesn't measure up, and to jam my finger in the wound, his character is also predictable (he's jealous and insecure about penis size) and useless
Of the bunch, Crystal and Cusack are the trump cards, having the best characters with the funniest bits. Lee and Eddie, respectively, are far from the plum roles of these gentlemens' careers (Crystal with City Slickers, When Harry Met Sally, and his outstandingly funny and touching vocal work for Monster's Inc., Cusack with "Say Anything" and "High Fidelity"), and as is the case with most top-drawer talent, they stick close to their carved-out personalities (Crystal's is kvetching stand-up, Cusack's is offbeat). But they're the first reasons I'd give for why someone should see America's Sweethearts. Crystal doesn't have a rewarding reputation, despite how perfectly he can command an Oscar ceremony, plus his rounded assortment of talents (writing, directing, and producing on top of acting), and the many well-remembered credits on his resume. I'm sad to see him not living up to expectations with this indulgent yet soft-core satire, but it's worth a cursory viewing, if for no other reason than to see Seth Green in glasses with a shaved head. What a hottie. The photography and colors are lush, often a glowing orange (most of the story takes place at a desert getaway), and the pace is brisk to match the lightweight dialogue and slapstick, allowing for few lulls. Since I'm not a glutton for stress and disturbance, I'd probably prefer seeing America's Sweethearts to The Player, a much more delicious, thematically-stronger treat, but one that's too dark for comfortable repeat viewings. It drags you down with its heavy cynicism and bleak musings on the industry, and I'm more of an upbeat guy, unlikely as it seems based on my predominantly negative attitude during movie reviews, so the easy caricaturing, brightly lit, cautiously optimistic, more friendly-cast Hollywood as interpreted by Billy Crystal, a lot like his fellow, sometime-auteur comedian Steve Martin's Bowfinger (another better self-aware film), is a setting I'd rather escape to for a couple hours
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jeff_v [ 4.0 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
Standard-issue star vehicle without a shred of ingenuity or real feeling. Sporadically funny (at least Christopher Walken can be counted on to liven things up), but ultimately tiresome. It would have been more interesting if the film within this film were the style in which this actual film were done. But then, Hollywood has this thing against reality...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Love_Spoon [ 6.0 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
I'll be painfully blunt and start out by saying that America's Sweethearts was a film that my wife wanted to see. During our New Year's trip to Utah (we live in Massachusetts), we stopped in at the local video store to rent something, saw this, and decided to rent it. Took it up to pay for it, and we were pleasantly surprised when the clerk said, (even though we haven't lived there for 11 months) "This is your free one!" Very cool. Anyway, the film itself turned out somewhat better than I expected. It's cute and somewhat clever, with a happy ending. It's got some talent and some laughs, so it wasn't all bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Weighted Rating | : 5.9 |
| No. Ratings | : 14 | |
| No. Reviews | : 8 | |
|
|
|
|