Pages

Showing posts with label Rants. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rants. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Hot Tub Time Machine v. Casual Sexism

So, Hot Tub Time Machine. I first heard about this movie on /Film, when all that was knew about the film was the name of the film (and subsequently a little about what the film was about) and who was in it. The title alone had my interest, the shear absurdity of the main conceit tickled me, and the pedigree in terms of casting helped a lot. High Fidelity is a favourite for me, so I knew John Cusack could do comedy, Rob Corddry was always decent, if not charismatic, on the Daily Show, Craig Robinson gets some of the best jokes in The Daily Show, and Clarke Duke was great in the relatively unknown (web?) series Clark and Michael. Long sentence though it may be, I was pretty stoked for the movie.

Is stoked, a word, out of vogue? Is it just a stoner thing now? Sometimes I worry my vocabulary is full on lexical hipster-anachronisms. Full review/rant after the jump.

And I liked the trailer a lot. Well, sort of. I mean, it wasn't hysterical, but there was certainly some quality jokes, and the whole hot tub time machine gimmick looked to be just as ridiculous as the name would suggest. The eighties thing too seemed like a fun way to mine some comedy. I especially liked the red band trailer, like when Robinson declares that it must "be some kinda ... hot tub time machine! *musical cue*", and that he's not crying, it's "just water splashin his face from all the fuckin."

When the movie hit theatres I never really got around to see it because a) I just never got around to it, b) I was reluctant to spend the cash on it, especially since c) it didn't do very well with critics. I basically chalked it up to something to see on DVD.

Then I saw it on DVD. My verdict is that it's a serviceable comedy that flirts with mediocrity. There are funny moments (like the aforementioned bath-sex scene, the way the protagonists discover they are indeed in the '80s, the discussion of time paradoxes, and the one armed man shtick), enjoyable moments (Robinson's musical performance), and some decent comedic performances from the actors (Robinson and Duke particularly shine in contrast to the inoffensive Cusack and Corddry). I was also amused how if you take away the Hot Tub Time Travelin', Cusack's bit in the movie is essentially an obligatory Cusack role (see Serendipity, I guess). What did piss me off about Hot Tub, was the unnecessary and ignorant sexism that exists in the film.

I'm not even talking about the almost eventual sexism that occurs in most comedies that star a bunch of men, or even a bromance. I've come to accept this issue in some sense as a result of many male comedy writer's inability to write real female characters, or the tendency for these films to cater to their audience's (other males) or even their character's gaze on the female as a sexual object. By accept, in no way do I condone. It's shitty, but it's sadly the usual.

Yeah, so near the beginning of Hot Tub, where our troop first arrives at their weekend resort, Robinson asks the manager about reservations and tries to hide that he has a shared last name with his wife, in that he is Nick Webber-Agnew. Corddry upon hearing his shared name mocks him, and continues to do so throughout the film since hyphenizing his name has emasculated XX. This alone is fairly insulting, since although it is the most obnoxious character is that voices this mockery, Robinson himself never owns the hyphenization, indeed seems to admit that it wasn't his choice, or wouldn't have done so given the opportunity (i.e. balls), to take her name into his.

For more on this I'm going into spoiler territory. Here after, there be monsters.

So, later in the film we realize that Robinson's wife has actually cheated on him and that he knows she has but she doesn't know he knows (it's okay if you need to read that a few times, I'm not the most clear writer at times). And this tears him up inside, because he loves her and doesn't want to leave her but she's emasculated him. No wait! she's cuckolded him. Heh, don't get to use that word too often.

Further, thematically the whole movie basically provides the three adult characters (XX wasn't alive in the 80's) an opportunity to fix the mistakes they made this particular weekend in the '80's that apparently sent all their lives into the shittier (although it seems like their lives went into the shitter because they were essentially shitheads or losers, not because they all made some simple blunder this particular weekend, but whatever) and so Robinson gets an opportunity to kick off, rather than end, his musical career during his performance that weekend. Then, when we see him return to the present day, or rather the fixed present, i.e. the better life, he has a record label as a successful producer, a record label that proudly displays his surname, and only his surname. And when he speaks to his wife, who no longer has cheated on him, we discover that he has not hyphenized his name. He is just Nick Webber, a real man. In this ideal world, Robinson hasn't had none of that pussy taking your wife's surname faggotry.

Seriously? So, Robinson's character arc shows him regaining his masculinity from his wife, as symbolized in the hyphenization of his last name. Our lesson apparently: taking your wife's name is to be a cuckold. Awesome.

I'm sorry, but it's actually fairly forward-thinking to take part of your partner's name into yours. I mean, I think we've gotten passed the point where marriage means a woman belongs to a man, the whole legalized prostitution thing. Fuck, some people even make new names together, like they are two equal parts to a marriage. Call them crazy, I know.

SPOILERS END!!!

While, I don't think the writers (or I wouldn't accuse them of such just out of giving the benefit of the doubt) meant to admonish the hypenizing of a males name, the way they have used it as a symbol of Robinson's emasculation is touch of bigotry I don't think serves the flick well.

In Summation: Hot Tub Time Machine is decent enough. It is like The Hangover in that it is underwhelming despite some good comedic performances, and scrapes by in the three out of five gulf of a little better than bad. However, it is pretty damn sexist. But a lot of its audience won't really see it as such, which really irks me. People will laugh at the jokes and buy the hyphenizing as a symbol of emasculation, without recognizing how insulting this is to women, to equality. So in this way, Hot Tub propagates a backwards idea of gender politics, which isn't cool, and makes it far worse than a 3/5 really, since in the act of reviewing I shouldn't have to set aside issues of sexism to assign an objective grade.

Bah.

I've written Stargate Fan Fiction.

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Star Wars S(h)itcom

Seriously!?

Apparently they're making a Star Wars sitcom. From the Variety article:
Daytime Emmy and Gemini Award-winner Jennifer Hill ("The Backyardians") will produce with Todd Grimes ("Back at the Barnyard") directing. Brendan Hay ("The Daily Show") will be among the writers and Seth Green and Matthew Senreich, creators and executive producers of "Robot Chicken," will have "creative involvement.
Man, this is such a dumb idea, I don't care who's involved. I read a bunch of the comments after the article on /Film (where I initially learned about this development) and not enough people are waving their hands wildly in the air and screaming for this to not happen. Let's examine why this is a bad idea shall we?

Robot Chicken's Star Wars parodies are funny. The Family Guy parodies are also funny (though I begrudgingly admit it). Spaceballs is also funny. Alright, lots and lots of Star Wars parodies are funny. AND!, Star Wars itself is funny. But a dedicated Star Wars sitcom, will not be funny:

  1. Parodies are parodies. All of the Star Wars parodies mock Star Wars. Yes, they embrace the source material, usually with love (especially in the case of the Robot Chicken dudes) but they are still irreverent. These parodies extend characters and ideas from the show into absurd places, that cannot be cannon.
  2. This is a sitcom. Sitcoms are not sketches like Robot Chicken has excelled at in terms of their Star Wars humour. Family Guy and Spaceballs tell a story, but they tell the same fucking story as Star Wars. Are we suddenly going to break off and have Han and Leia living on Coruscant, with Chewie dropping by as the obligatory, racist depiction of a minority neighbour? How is this going to be structured? I can't express how little I think of the idea of a situational comedy starring Star Wars characters, or in the Star Wars universe. Anytime I think of something amusing, it's because of irreverence, and it would not be congenial humour, the sort of humour sitcoms are based on.
  3. Isolated instances. All the Star Wars comedies I can think of do their funny and then end. They're all specials, not long running shows. This is important for two reasons. A) the humour doesn't outstay its welcome. Parody is something that is difficult to sustain. Many would say Colbert has done it (I don't watch it myself because I've grown a little tired of the parody), but I think as a general rule, parody itself does not lend itself to longevity. The novelty of the superiority humour dwindles, and you're left with the same joke: isn't x silly? B) You're going to run out of jokes. Wait, you can't really run out of jokes, because they are like invention (inventio!), but the writers for this show are going to find difficulty mining for humour after a while. How many jokes can you do about the Millennium Falcon failing? And with Star Wars, let me tell you, the writers are going to need to be uber careful not to get too obscure because as a Star Wars comedy, they are already flirting with a small viewership.
  4. Finally, is this for adult or kids. Star Wars has become progressively more and more childish. The original material was entertaining for all ages but as the movies went they skewed towards juvenile audiences. This is no more clear than in consideration of the humour. If you've watched the movies, you know it to be true. So, if the humour is for kids, I really don't want to watch a dumb, racist, and homophobic Star Wars saturday-morning-cartoon. I doubt its going to be adult-centric, since how do you suddenly tell the majority of your audience (ie kids) that this Star Wars isn't for you. So I imagine it would be in the middle, like a sitcom, and I seriously doubt that Star Wars can walk the line between adult and childish humour, all the while refraining from irreverency.
I think my problem(s) come down to this: a Star Wars comedy will necessarily be irreverent, and irreverent isn't funny when it's done by the people that own the source material. That statement may not be true in general, but I'm damn sure it's true of George Lucas. I don't want to watch George Lucas make fun of his own material. He has taken his shit seriously for so fucking long that for him to suddenly find some levity in his creation would be down right insulting. Where was levity when you refused to release the original cuts on DVD because they weren't your vision. Where was levity when you sued all the people you sued for stupid shit and/or stopped them from releasing their own stupid version of a Star Wars thing? I mean, you can't just one day stop taking yourself and your Star Wars seriously because it'll make you a couple of buck and not expect to look like a douche.

This show will suck because either it will be a bland generic sitcom with Star Wars template overtop masking the bland genericness, or it will be irreverant, possibly good for a bit, and a perfect example as to why I libel George Lucas.

Douche!