Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Ton of DEATH TO SMOOCHY Reviews...

Hey folks, Harry here with three looks at DEATH TO SMOOCHY, both Massawyrm and Quint saw the movie last night, though I haven't heard a peep from either of them this morning... I had a stupid interview that kept me from doing the screening... sissafrassafrishafrasss... Sounds like it was fun. Here ya go....

Hey Harry -

Here in humble 'ol Delaware, we rarely get sneak peaks at anything. The arthouses in Philly are close enough to keep us in touch with some smaller films, but that's about as special as we get. Today I was lucky enough to sneak my way into a free screening of Death to Smoochy at the University of Delaware campus. I liked the film well enough, but there were just enough things lacking to keep this from being another Throw Mama From the Train.

The basic plot is simple: Robin Williams is the beloved yet crooked (and rather insane) Rainbow Randolph, star of his own children's show and front man for many a product. When Randolph gets busted for his crooked schemes, his agent/friend/cospirerer/producer (played modestly well by Jon Stewart, who has his best moments in his first 5 minutes of screen time) frantically looks for a replacement, and finds one in Smoochy the Rhinoceros (played quite well by Edward Norton). Now, Smoochy isn't like all the rest of the soulless bastards involved in kids TV: he's an honest, Ned Flanders-type who honestly wants to help people and not rip them off. This grassroots philosophy sets off a series of events that raise Smoochy's popularity (much to the chagrin of he money-grubbing colleagues), which in turn drives Rainbow Randolph father over the edge. Catherine Keener is in there for the token love interest, but really, all she does is act like a cold bitch one minute, and a hurt and sh! eltered bitch the other moment, and ends up bringing nothing to the film. No doubt because she had little to work with; she was great in Being John Malkovich, and her character does little in this film but create joke fodder.

Writer Adam Resnick (who you don't know from such duds as Cabin Boy) doesn't have the tightest script in the world. He misses so many opportunities for jokes that it's almost laughable, and by focusing mainly on the corporate hypocrisy of the land of childhood TV, we see only one side of what could have been a fuller, more complete (and subsequently funnier) flick. And I'm sorry to say that director Danny DeVito seemed to be lacking in many places as well. I never saw How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days, his most recent work, but I do fondly remember Matilda and Throw Mama From the Train. Unfortunately, this film does not compare with his previous work. Everything seems to lack a bit of polish that combines to make the film ultimately average. The characters, for instance. We never see Rainbow Randolph as the icon of children we're supposed to see him as; we never see him being a dickhead when shielded from the public eye. The film goes on two scenes of ! Randolph before he's thrown down the shitter, and you never really care or sympathize. When he does become a vindictive jackass, he's always so pathetic you feel sorry for him, but you never want to see him regain his spot as the idol of kids. Like I said before, Catherine Keener does nothing but set up jokes and create the obligatory love interest; she doesn't act so much as fill up the screen. Edward Norton does a great job, but again is shown as very one dimensional, with this karma attitude that works for a few jokes and little else. The film moves at a very quick pace, but wastes this speed by never really doing much with the setup. And overall, I felt the design of the film was poor. The sets, costumes, and antics on the many children's shows seen in the movie are trite and unrealistic; again, good for a few laughs, but that's it. New York felt so very small in this films; shots were close and low, few locations were used, and the shots of the city seemed like dirty ol! d stock footage. Devito should have explored the characters more; let us see Rainbow Randolph as actually popular, let us bask and catch our breathes a bit in the depths of Randolph's depression/height of Smoochy's popularity before moving into the hasty plot that brings even more characters out of left field and muddies the waters of allegiances even further. By constantly moving, introducing new characters, killing off these characters, and keeping the frantic pace up, we end up not caring or knowing enough about anyone in the film, and thus are robbed not only of the potential of a good story, but of many surefire chuckles as well.

Overall, I feel that the talent for this film was there, especially in the acting department. But the poor technical aspects (from the script to the editing to the art to the directing) all left me with an uneven film that could have been much, much more. I wanted to really like this film; I wanted to see Robin Williams act like a malicious asshole, and I wanted to see a lot of violence directed toward those sugar cubes deep fried in chocolate sauce that are Barney has-beens. But with such an uneven effort that misses so many opportunities to get good laughs and to do things right, I sadly can only recommend Death to Smoochy if Panic Room doesn't interest you (and to hell with you if it doesn't), or if you've seen Fellowship of the Ring so many times that four extra minutes isn't worth it.

~Dark Bastion

On to JimB's review...

Death to Smoochy review :

I caught a sneak preview of „Death to Smoochy‰ at the Lennox Theatre in Columbus, Ohio tonight and I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised with the outcome.

Having only seen the preview and not really knowing anything about the film other than that it was a dark comedy directed by Danny DeVito, starring Robin Williams and Edward Norton, about killing a purple rhino/dinosaur. Just knowing that was enough for me to want to see it, because haven‚t we all wanted to do the same? And no, not against Dino.

The film starts with Rainbow Randolph Smiley, played by Williams, being arrested for taking a bribe from undercover police. A bribe to get a couple‚s son to sit next to him on camera during his show. He is thrown out of show-business and is quickly replaced by Smoochy the rhino, played by Norton. Smoochy quickly becomes the kid‚s favorite TV star, and thus begins the film‚s premise of why Rainbow Randolph wants his revenge against Smoochy.

Williams was very convincing in this role and was very funny in most of his scenes. Sometimes he was almost too convincing. His actions were sometimes reminiscent of the way he acts in interviews on Leno and Letterman. I wonder sometimes, if he is actually a little crazy. You could tell a lot of improvisation was used, and perhaps in Williams‚ case, a little too much. Overall, I really liked his performance, and some of his scenes were laugh-out-loud funny while there were others that were just annoying.

I was expecting to hate Norton‚s character, being the dinosaur and all, but his nice guy approach was the perfect balance between him and Williams. Over the past few years, Edward Norton has continually proven himself over and over that he is a great actor, and this performance is no exception. There is a subplot between him and actress, Catherine Keener, that I thought could ruin the film, but it worked very well. It is an over the top love/hate relationship, comparable to a warped version of Han Solo and Princess Leia‚s.

I have never watched the Barney show, but from what I have seen of him in toy commercials and what not, I know enough to hate him for annoying me in that short amount of time. I feel sorry for parents who have to watch and listen to that, and this movie, I believe, was made for them. It is also a slap in the face to the networks and companies for over-capitalizing on children, the way Pokemon and Barney and yes even Star Wars have done in the past.

If you are in the mood for a dark comedy, that has a little violence and a lot of profanity aimed at intolerable Children‚s TV shows, then this is definitely for you.

JimB‚s grade : B+

Here's Miker

Harry,

First time reviewer. I was supposed to meet Capone today at Pipers Alley but he stood me up. I'm alright. Standing in the lobby was this chick with a stack of press kits. I look at her. She looks at me. I say are you giving those out. She says yes. But what college do I goto. I tell her Columbia College and she tells me her name, Jill, while handing me a press kit. She tells me so and so will contact me and now I have my first press kit in my life. She thinks I'm press when I'm really not. So I might as well write this review and earn my press kit. When I hit rock bottom, I will still have this press kit that I can sell for a few dollars more. So I'm sitting in the theater with this other friend of mine and this guy, Freak, from the Mancow radio show has t-shirts tied into densly packed cannonballs that he chucks at people just asking for it. He even attempts pitching one through the open window of the projection booth but hits a speaker instead. How many more times will he fail to get it in...he always does this. The movie starts.

This is a really funny movie, if your sitting in the right audience. There will always be those forcing a hearty laugh at the subtle humor, when it is subtle. These exagerating laughers will sound off before you have a chance to laugh and will make you think twice about laughing. If you have enough time to think twice about it, its better if you don't. Everyone will know that you are trying to let the whole theater know that you're sense of humor is better tuned then the rest of the people there, even if it isn't.

But this is a funny movie. The press kit tells me that Edward Norton shed tears as he read the script two o'clock in the morning, cause it was just that funny. I doubt it is that same script that made it to the screen but most of it is there, in spirit. The film's about corruption in the field of children's programming. Robin Williams plays his first stalker role in his recent trilogy of stalkers. Insomnia and One Hour Photo are his other stalker films. I know, I know...he's not a stalker in Insomnia but you get the idea. His character is Rainbow Randolph who gets busted taking bribes to insure certain children will get to sit on his lap during his show. What does this say about the Bozo show where parents had to reserve tickets for their children before they were even concieved? The network replaces Randolph with a new and earnest Smoochy the Rhino, The Mr. Smith of costume characters in the Washington D.C. of time slots. Randolph stalks Smoochy as Randolph(Sheldon Mopes) Forest Gumps his way up the television corporate ladder. This is a dark comedy folks. The "getting laid after the movie" factor is low but you know what, if you know you're not gonna get laid anyway and want something funny to go watch, see this movie...with the right audience. However, I can see this movie coming out and thousands making such declarative statements such as "I'll wait until its on Video." Don't. It won't be worth it then. This film requires the attention that it deserves from its audience sitting in side of an auditorium.

I'm glad to see where Robin Williams is going with his acting. You can still feel the old Robin Williams inside of him but almost positive that One Hour Photo will solve that. Edward Norton, well his brilliance comes from playing his character straight but I often wonder, will he ever attach himself to material better than Fight Club? Is there such material out there? I'm not asking him to repeat himself but I believe that he is coming across what young Eddie Furlong had to deal with. After Terminator 2, even though that must've been the dream gig for Furlong, he must've know that it will be some time before a better job comes along. I'm afraid we've seen the best of Norton only because there is no more material that can stretch him. I watched this movie through a different filter though. Maybe Edward Norton did this movie for the job but Jack (or Tyler if you like) would star in this movie for the subversive fun of it. Good job, sir.

Harry, you can call me Miker.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus