Rating: 9/20
Plot: Popular kiddie show host Rainbow Randolph is fired after an embarrassing arrest, and a nobody--Smoochy the Rhino--replaces him. Sheldon, the actor in that rhino suit, learns the disturbing truths about the ins and outs of kiddie show business while Randolph does what he can to get his old job back.
On paper, this should be my kind of movie. You got an impressive ensemble of little people actors, grown men wearing animal costumes, and humor that's about as dark as humor gets. It's got a good cast, too. I almost always like Edward Norton, and he's good here with an all-in, enthusiastic performance as the idealistically pure entertainer. He was also gluten free before it was cool. Robin Williams does his Robin Williams thing although there are times when it doesn't really seem like his heart's completely in it. I love seeing Catherine Keener, and Jon Stewart and director DeVito are fine with what they do here. Oh, and Harvey Fierstein, a guy with a body almost as rockin' as mine, is also in this thing. So is Danny Woodburn, a great little person actor. The movie's colorful, has a few songs, and is really fast paced. And the soundtrack uses Yma Sumac--twice! And a fun reference to Nazis, complete with a "Heil Smoochy!" And penis gags. Unfortunately, I just don't think all the parts add up to much of anything. The movie sort of unravels early on and then continues unraveling, and although there are some ideas that are mildly humorous, there are a lot more ideas that just don't work at all. There are times when an idea might have even been pretty good, but they proceed to beat the viewer into submission with it. The best example is a phallic cookie gag where Norton tries to call them a rocket ship. I think the gag should have ended there, but Williams screeches, "What are you--blind? It's a cock!" and then follows it with about thirty penis puns. You just want to say, "OK, Movie. I get it. Let's move on." But then you realize you're talking to a movie. The musical numbers--a "Get you off the smack" song sung to the tune of "Coming Round the Mountain" or a Rainbow Randolph song with the line "One might say grass while the others says snatch?" (I think)--are the types of things you'd expect to see and not laugh at on a television sketch comedy show. And after a while, almost every single line coming from any of these characters just seems disingenuous. It takes a wacky premise that--again--should work on paper, and deflates it.
It's not all terrible, at least as not as terrible as I remembered. There's a nice song that is heavy on the Jew's harp, one of the most underrated instruments. Michael Rispoli's pretty good as brain-damaged ex-boxer Spinner Dunn. Robin Williams does this little celebratory dance at one point that's probably one of the most notable moments of his career. There's a great little rambling bum performance by a guy named Richard Hamilton, and somebody at one point says, "Don't get me wrong--I'm not literally comparing Captain Kangaroo to Jesus Christ," the type of thing I wish I could find a context to quote. And character actor Vincent Schiavelli shines as Buggy Ding Dong with a great first line--"Excuse me if I smell like piss."--and a enigmatic but interesting last one--"I never saw Venice." I really almost enjoyed the movie any time he was on the screen. Well, except for the big climax which was just a bunch of silliness.
And then there's the great work from former Billy Curtis nominee Danny Woodburn, a guy who's had a lot of interesting roles including Mickey, Kramer's little friend in several episodes of Seinfeld, and a great little performance in Watchmen. He also contributed to one of the worst movies ever--Jingle All the Way--so his career hasn't been all good. The other Rhinettes/Krinkle Kids? Colin Moult, Nikolai Tichtchenko, and Christy McGinity didn't really do anything else, but Martin Klebba has had a nice career. He's been in Pirates movies, visited Oz (the recent CGI one), was on 8 episodes of Scrubs, and played "Dancing Yosemite Sam." He's actually got 77 credits since 2001 which is pretty close to Eric Roberts territory. And Tanya Banks, known more for stunts perhaps, is part of the human xylophone in The Dark Backward.
Anyway, I've seen this movie twice now, and it's not worth watching twice. It's probably barely worth watching once.
I thought it was better than a 9...I just thought that it had a weird feel because of the characterization of everyone. The characters are so broad (especially Norton's). I definitely think William's signed on thinking it would be something it didn't turn out to be. That, I think lies at the fault of DeVito. Maybe it was budget, maybe it was that he didn't really know how to make a "dark" comedy...I don't know...it all just felt awkward at times.
ReplyDeleteReasons why I think this movie lives above a 10:
1. The story is superior and the idea alone deserves to resonate beyond a 9. I don't know who originated the idea, but the script and directing overshadowed what was a brilliant idea.
2. I thought Williams was damn good. It was no Oscar-worthy performance, but it reminded me of some of his stand up. He got to be physical and he got to sound like himself. It was a great role for him.
3. The jokes that worked, really worked. I definitely see problems in some of the jabs and beats, but I laughed at a lot of what I saw. I didn't think it was void of comedy. It meant to be funny, and it was. It did its job.
4. The supporting cast was tops. I can't remember all of the character actors' names, but you mentioned them being good, and I agree. I love to love auxiliary characters. They give depth to the world of the film.
Still, I'm with you on the let-down. I had higher hopes for it, too. Still, he's a director who makes interesting choices...even to a fault.
I'd put it in the "interesting failure" category, and a lot of times I like those kinds of movies. It does take some chances.
ReplyDeleteI don't hate this as much as my brother, by the way. I can't remember if he said it was his "least favorite movie" or "the worst movie ever" but it was one of those. My wife, however, liked it when we all saw it together many many many years ago. She had no interest in watching it with me this time though.
this isnt the worst movie ever but, it is right up there with "what about bob?".
ReplyDeletea talking cat!?! is technically worse but it didnt have the money "cast" etc. these comedies that aren't funny are my least favorite of all.
you cant give a movie a 10 based on a "superior story" which this didnt have. robin williams almost always makes a movie worse.( i cant think of anything i like him in). he had little regard for direction or script(seemingly). he just did that annoying robin williams thing except in his serious roles where it was more subdued(similar to jim carrey. when you start mentioning how good of a cast it had this is usually follows "but". a "good" cast is a quick way to a horrible movie.
yet another comedy that isnt funny, has nothing intellegent to say, or anything pretty to look at. budget was spent on a bunch of overrated actors. at least shakes the clown had to be somewhat creative because of its budget limitations(and still had robin williams). i need to research this one. i want to be able to say the smoochy costume cost more than shakes cost to make.
shakes was a 1.4 million dollar budget. death to smoochy was a 50 million dollar budget. that means worthless actors were paid more for this abortion of a film than bobcat had to work with for a whole movie.
ReplyDeleteamericans need to stop being so desperate for "entertainment" that they will pay to watch this crap. do americans really think actors are that much better than you.
i for one refuse to help buy their multimillion dollar homes.
rant done.
I love how angry 'Death to Smoochy' makes you...
ReplyDeleteWhen I personally mention "good cast," I'm probably talking more about actors and actresses that I enjoy watching. So I don't think that would be a quick way to a horrible movie. I like the performers in this fine, even Williams. They're not the problem. The problem is the execution of an idea that isn't as bad as you think it is and a terribly unfunny script. They had nothing to work with. Give the best carpenter who ever lived a thousand pounds of cardboard and a hundred paper clips, and you won't end up liking the house he builds you.
Surely you like Robin Williams in some things.
movies like this make me angry. like anything adam sandler is in. they are garbage and because americans are stupid and easily entertained they spend $20+ seeing this crap. rich get richer and adam sandler lives in a 20million dollar home and has no fucking talent.
ReplyDeletere:robin williams i really dont like all those serious films he is in. being dead he can't make anymore crappy movies. robin williams is just a human being i dont like. i dont like him as a human.
my comments about a good cast was in regards to something josh said. it is usually meant in a sense of "i recognised a bunch of names in this" i liked the cast in shakes but i wouldn't call it a "good cast".
i like your carpenter analogy.
i've been off my meds.
But everything I've read about Robin Williams makes it seem like he was a wonderful human being.
ReplyDeleteI actually wouldn't lump this in with Adam Sandler's oeuvre. I don't really feel like defending it too much because I don't like the movie at all, but there was an attempt at an original idea and all, and it's a lot more intelligent than anything Sandler's been involved with except for Punch Drunk Love. The problem with this wasn't the idea--it was the clumsy execution. Blame Danny DeVito.