A few weeks back the Film Inquiry team vented their rage at the films we felt have undeservedly found a home in the good graces of both critics and audiences. This week, as we gear up for the good nature and cheer of the holidays, we thought we would go the other way and make cases for those films which though finding little love upon their theatrical releases, have managed to make themselves comfy in the warmth of our hearts.
It doesn’t matter that critics, audiences and the film culture at large more or less forgot about these films the week after they were released, we know that everyone else is just making a terrible misassessment of work that is of undeniable quality. There’s no need to argue, critics just don’t understand. But you do, don’t you?
Alex Lines – Mystery Men (1999)
dir. Kinka Usher
As a child, I had a horrible taste in films. My top three films were Roland Emmerich‘s Godzilla, Wild Wild West and Mystery Men. As I grew up and got into films, I quickly realised how awful Godzilla was, still appreciate Wild Wild West despite how weird it is but I still love Mystery Men. It’ s the epitome of 90’s cinema – music video-like experimentation, over-inflated budgets on big screen reboots (others included Dragnet, The Avengers and the Beverly Hillbillies), including pop culture music in order to sell the soundtrack and shoehorning ‘hot-at-the-moment’ celebrities.
Loosely based on the cult comic book series Flaming Carrot Comics by Bob Burden, the film follows a group of sub-par superheroes who are desperate to save the day. In the crowded city of Champion City, Captain Amazing, a Batman-like figure (due to his bachelor alter ego), has finally kept the city safe for a long period of time. Due to his continuing sponsorship and increasing boredom, Captain Amazing decides to release his most favourite antagonist – Casanova Frankenstein (Geoffrey Rush) so he can recapture him and boost his popularity again.
When Frankenstein uses this plan to his advantage and the city is legitimately in danger, the “Mystery Men” gang are forced to save Champion City. The initial Mystery Me, made up of Mr. Furious (Ben Stiller), an angry guy with no powers at all, The Blue Raja (Hank Azaria) who uses cutlery as his weaponry and The Shoveler (William H. Macy), a family man who wields a shovel as his main weapon. Together they eventually meet an array of other heroes, such as The Bowler (Janeane Garofalo), Invisible Boy (Kel Mitchell) and The Spleen (Paul Reubens, whose farting antics are still the weakest point of the film).
Mystery Men bombed critically and commercially upon its release, with many of its cast members, including Ben Stiller, openly discussing their regret for doing the film. This film would be welcomed with much wider arms nowadays, with superheroes dominating the current cinematic landscape. Its lampooning of the superhero genre still works today and behind the film’s crazy cinematography and Smash Mouth soundtrack, it has a genuine heart. The main trio each have individual character arcs which grow organically, culminating in a “attack the castle” finale which goes completely insane in the best way.
The 90’s were a weird time in filmmaking, as the independent scene was on the rise again and better CGI made filmmakers escape the mistakes that the 80’s produced. Due to the rise of home video, experimentation was on the rise, with new techniques with colour palettes, cinematography and editing leading to a revolution of different styles that, much like the 80’s, seems quite cheesy and over the top by today’s standards. Mystery Men is a fine example of this, but the film’s lovable characters, relevant satire and willingness to do something different make this such an endearing blockbuster, that is a sad shame that it didn’t do better.
Alistair Ryder – Step Brothers (2008)
dir. Adam McKay
Whenever I see a film I have been led to believe is awful, finding myself shocked and slightly embarrassed at having enjoyed it so much, I never feel the need to defend my liking of it. After all, I can perfectly understand why somebody would take against a film as structurally messy and thematically on the nose as Chappie, to name a recent example of a movie I’m ashamed to have enjoyed.
When Step Brothers was released in 2008, I was 14, the ideal age to watch a film so fantastically lowbrow and uproariously dumb – instead of it becoming a guilty pleasure or a film I’m ashamed to have used to like in the intervening years, I will still happily cite Step Brothers as one of the funniest American comedies of this century. Its 55% Rotten Tomatoes rating may mean it is only narrowly reviled, but considering our editor-in-chief has a long-standing dislike of Will Ferrell, this seems like the perfect film to stand up for and defend regardless.
Outside of the films he’s made with director Adam McKay, Ferrell’s filmography can be charitably called “hit and miss”, with emphasis on the latter. After Anchorman, their first cinematic collaboration, Ferrell’s comedies went in either two directions; underdog sports comedies or high-concept romps with no firm footing in reality, ignoring the fact that Ferrell’s overblown shtick is only funny when it has some grounding in a world at least resembling ours.
Step Brothers is the most low-concept comedy he has yet delivered and is therefore his biggest cinematic feat. Roger Ebert criticised the film for being mean-spirited upon release, one of a cavalcade of bad-to-indifferent reviews that greeted it. Yet as destructive as their antics may be, forcing Ferrell and John C. Reilly to play overblown man-child caricatures in a world that forces them to grow up actually forces the movie to have an emotional arc, albeit one of the most transcendentally silly in recent memory.
Most importantly, Step Brothers actually overtakes Anchorman to be the most quotable Ferrell cinematic outing; every incidental line of dialogue becomes hilarious on repeat viewings, a clear success of McKay’s directorial decision to shoot every scene with different improvised lines, choosing only the most successful. Grounded firmly in reality, every single line is weirder and funnier than any in any of his other movies.
Jax Griffin – Bringing Down the House (2003)
dir. Adam Shankman
I am quite unembarrassed to admit that I wholeheartedly love Bringing Down the House. I mean I saw it twice in theatres love it. One of my all time favourite things to do is make people watch it because they will almost assuredly always greet the task with heavy protest, but with 100% success rate all of my victims are converts. I honestly don’t understand the 34% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I don’t think this film makes any claims to be more than it is. It’s popcorn and fun (actually, hilarious), at its centre, there’s a decently heartfelt message, and it somehow tackles race as an issue fairly successfully (and without alienating half the audience).
The pairing of Steve Martin and Queen Latifah works exceptionally well. They are both intelligent comedians and a lot of witty daggers are thrown back and forth, but both can also handle broad comedy – the “be a beast” scene comes to mind. Throw in Eugene Levy and Betty White, and baby, you got a stew going. Jean Smart does a great job playing the ex-wife going through a mid-life crisis (actually a nice twist on the stereotypical male midlife crises we usually see) and Missi Pyle‘s fight scene with Queen Latifah is both epic and funny. Joan Plowright‘s turn as the racist old lady causes the viewer to appropriately squirm and even her character’s small arc is satisfactory.
The only real weak point I’ve ever found in the film is Michael Rosenbaum, who is definitely wearing a wig for the part. That may actually be my real qualm with his part. Could the character not have been bald? Anything is better than an obviously fake wig. Other than that, judge me all you want, but Bringing Down the House is awesome in my book.
Jay Ledbetter – MacGruber (2010)
dir. Jorma Taccone
Comedy is about commitment as much as anything else, and Will Forte is basically the Daniel Day-Lewis of comedy. The guy goes all-in on the ridiculous characters that he creates. He musters up everything he has for every single line he spits out, and plays the title character as straight as Day-Lewis played Abraham Lincoln. If this was a just world, Will Forte would have the leverage in Hollywood to create any comedy he thinks up.
But, alas, MacGruber was received poorly by critics and was a monumental flop at the box office. It was a comedy that was ahead of its time. The weird, over-the-top humor of MacGruber is the way that comedy has been trending over the last five years or so, but the Will Forte comedy was just too much and too fast for mainstream audiences in 2010. Combine that with the horrific track record of Saturday Night Live-inspired films, and you get critics predisposed to panning MacGruber and audiences that aren’t in any hurry to pay money to see it.
But it’s so great! Val Kilmer plays a supervillain named Dieter Von Cunth and acts his ass off in the role! I’m pretty sure the writers and director of the film were trolling Ryan Phillippe the whole time, because he totally doesn’t seem to realize he is in a comedy. Don’t be fooled by the SNL skits from which the movie gets its name, this is not a MacGyver parody as much as it is a broader come-up of 80’s action movies. Forte is a man from the 80’s stuck into the modern world.
The film is sharply written with jokes within jokes that some people may not even notice, but lovers of this new age of comedy will appreciate immensely. It isn’t afraid to go for the crass humor, either. It has, perhaps, the two funniest sex scenes in the history of cinema (although Team America: World Police might have something to say on that front) and a final scene of comedic violence that will leave you in tears. As far as pure comedy goes, this is one of the best films of the new millennium. Screw the haters, I will defend this to my grave. I will show my grandkids this movie. Unfortunately, it seems that the MacGruber series is dead, but long live MacGruber.
Arlin Golden – Pootie Tang (2001)
dir. Louis C.K.
Somehow, Pootie Tang seemed doomed before it even premiered. I saw the film opening day in the summer of 2001, and my group of friends and I shared the Friday night theater with one other couple, and they left midway through the screening. Roger Ebert panned the film in a legendary 1/2 star review that attacked its very conception. Even the film’s director has all but disowned it, claiming that control was wrested away from him and his vision was diluted by the studio. However, there is so much quality left over from this “watered down” effort that if C.K. had actually had final cut on Pootie Tang it probably would have won an Oscar.
Pootie Tang‘s eponymous hero is a man of the people, part superhero, part musician, and all cultural icon; think Jim Kelly meets Shaft, with a little of Damon Wayan‘s Blankman thrown in. The film finds him at the height of his prowess only to be taken down by the evil LecterCorp via a series of likeness infringements that discredit his good (nay, great) name. It is then up to him and his belt to find redemption in the public eye.
Yet despite all it had going against it, from lack of studio promotion to a more or less generic plot, Pootie Tang succeeds. Hell, Pootie Tang triumphs. For one thing, the cast is stacked with talent, from The Wire alums Reg E. Cathey and J.D. Williams to Wanda Sykes and a breakout performance from J.B. Smoove, not to mention a flawlessly deadpan came from sports broadcasting legend Bob Costas. All of them commit fully to this absurd reality scored by Zapp and Erykah Badu, but the film’s surrealist humor is what really make sit a notable piece of early 21st century comic art.
Little is offered for explanation as to how a string of gorilla attacks plagued a mid-west steel mill, how a song that might as well have been produced by John Cage could be a chart-topping pop hit or even why the main character speaks in an unintelligible language that everyone readily understands, but no explanation is necessary. Pootie Tang trusts its audience to accept its strange world as it is and revel in its silliness.
In the years since its initial release, the film has been inevitable rediscovered as Louis C.K. became the Woody Allen of a our times, but even those seeking to illuminate the film’s merits can’t seem but help knocking it as a “dumb” film, as if it’s meant to be compared to Citizen Kane. Though it’s far from a perfect film, the overall feel of the film can fairly be described as disjointed, I would argue against anyone calling it less than terrific, and think it has far better stood the test of time than some of its comedy contemporaries that were more lauded upon release. The dialogue is on point, the individual scenes are conceived and executed brilliantly, and the little comedic touches throughout could only result from a fun and vibrant production. I might add, I really love Pootie Tang, too.
Wasn’t it interesting to note that all of our picks were comedies? Critics critics critics, what is it about them that makes them so closed to laughter? If nothing else, I hope this list is endemic of a softening of snobbery among a new generation of film critics, as well as a modern acknowledgement of the artistry inherent in comedy, a genre that continues to be snubbed and belittled to this day. Until next time, don’t believe the hype and keep on chucklin’.
What film do you feel has unjustly attracted the ire of the critical establishment?
Does content like this matter to you?
Become a Member and support film journalism. Unlock access to all of Film Inquiry`s great articles. Join a community of like-minded readers who are passionate about cinema - get access to our private members Network, give back to independent filmmakers, and more.