Magic Mike (2012)

Yes, I watched this movie. As I will tell anyone, I will watch anything once. I even saw this flick in the theater because my wife and I had a date night and this was the only movie playing that I knew received decent reviews. Save for an obnoxious middle-aged woman cackling behind me and shoving her knee into the back of my seat the entire movie to prevent me from reclining even the slightest bit, I actually had somewhat of a good time taking in Magic Mike.

Mike (Channing Tatum) wants to start his own small business making custom furniture but no one wants to give him a small business loan. Thus he gets by on a number of odd jobs, including performing at the Xquisite Strip Club in Tampa. At his daytime construction job, he befriends Adam (Alex Pettyfer) and eventually gets him a job at Xquisite. The club’s owner (Matthew McConaughey) and the rest of the club performers take a liking to the new guy. As Adam plunges deeper into the world of excess at his fingertips, Mike does his best to watch over him while constantly trying to smooth things over with Adam’s disapproving sister.

As if you had to guess, this film is almost purely a guilty pleasure. Yes, there are plenty of rowdy scenes where buff men spin, strut, and shed themselves of clothing, but this sort of thing can be easily found on the internet for free. In order to get these sorts of antics to the big screen, the filmmakers try to wrap some kind of plot around these moments of debauchery. It’s a fictionalized and (hopefully) sensationalized version of Channing Tatum’s experiences as a male stripper before he made it as an actor.

If I were a betting man, I would be willing to make a very large wager that most of the women who went to see this film went for the strip club scenes. Those women did not go home disappointed, as every scene inside the club possesses tremendous amounts of energy and silly fun. All the ‘story’ elements outside the strip club fall flat because they are both poorly written and acted. It’s easy for a bunch of men to get silly and prance around in their skivvies (though major kudos the actors and choreographers for the ‘dance’ numbers). Acting like a real, convincing human being is hard work.

Even though the story is about Adam and Mike, Matthew McConaughey’s frenetic club owner character steals the show every time he turns up. He is a ruthless businessman, intent on getting rich off bigger and better strip clubs. His obsession with physique, training, and the rules of the game contrast starkly with his cocky ringleader shtick during show time. Here is the only fully formed character in the film. Mike is basically a lunkhead who lacks the ambition to really go out on his own, and Adam is just a brat who finds a way to make life a non-stop party. McConaughey’s Dallas is so real, yet so over the top that you are mesmerized by him.

Having no experience in strip clubs (male or female) myself, one element was an eye-opener. Everyone knows that strip clubs for men serve one purpose: cheap sexual thrills where a man can sink deep into a sea of lust. Interestingly enough, it seems that women go to male strip clubs because it’s a silly bunch of fun. It’s not for the sexuality, but for the social experience. This comes through even with the routines and intentions of the male ‘dancers.’ I’ve seen Showgirls and the difference between the ‘dancing’ at the respective strip clubs cannot be anymore stark. While I find any aspect of the sex industry to be immoral and unnecessary to society, I can take some solace in knowing that the patrons of male strip clubs aren’t likely to be as depraved as those attending so-called “gentlemen’s” clubs.

As for the movie, feel free to watch the whole thing. There is nothing remarkable about any of the technical aspects outside of the performance numbers and the romance sub-plot is boring. You could save yourself some time and fast-forward through these slow parts and have a great time. Forget the forced plot and just imagine that it’s Channing Tatum, Matthew McConaughey, and a bunch of other actors getting silly and mostly naked. It’s lewd and crude, but it’s not a sausage fest, which makes it perfectly acceptable for straight men to watch Magic Mike with their significant other.

RATING: 2.75 out of 5

Toy Story (1995)

A lot of times, animated films are either popular or high in quality. Heck, that can be said about a lot of live-action films too. Disney has been lucky over the years to repeatedly create animated flicks that are both high in quality and popularity. Toy Story continues that magic, be it luck or something else. The first full-length feature computer animated film is not only a crowd-pleaser, but it is also a technical marvel.

Sheriff Woody is Andy’s favorite toy. When his owner is out of the room, Woody and his fellow toys come to life. Being a toy and playing with children is serious business for these toys and every year brings new challenges. On Andy’s birthday, a new toy arrives. Buzz Lightyear is bold, flashy, and quickly replaces Woody as Andy’s favorite. Jealous of being relegated to the toy box instead of Andy’s bedside, Woody takes drastic measures to regain his position in the pecking order. His actions, however, lead Woody on a quest for rescue, survival, and redemption.

Some of you may already be harping on me about how this is a Pixar movie, not a Disney movie. Let me address this first and foremost. Yes, Pixar handled the computer animation, which means they were responsible for all the technical details- animation (colors and textures), direction (“camera” movement and cinematography), and all the special effects (audio and visual). Pixar did a fantastic job in all of these arenas. But, to me, it’s still a Disney film because Disney commissioned it and they held strict supervisory rights over the story. So now, I don’t and will not discuss the Pixar movies as if they exist in their own realm. They are a Disney product.

Let’s heap some love on this film, shall we? The computer animation shows its age only because Pixar and other animation studios have made massive amounts of progress in adding more intricate textures, patterns, and camera techniques to their arsenal over the years. This takes away none of Toy Story’s magic or beauty.

For a film marketed primarily toward children, this is a remarkably deep and mature story. Jealousy, replacement, and fear of abandonment are heavyweight issues to throw at kids. Presenting these themes through the actions and emotions of toys makes it approachable for kids and palatable for adults. Think about it- would you or your kids want to line up to see a movie about kids dealing with these issues? They tried that with Where the Wild Things Are and audiences were split over it.

Essentially, the filmmakers found a way to transmit these ideas to children and families so as to not overwhelm them with a case of the heavies. It’s brilliant, even though Toy Story’s success ruined animated films for a while. Everyone tried to pump kid flicks with moral lessons for all ages, albeit less effectively. To my knowledge, they’re still doing it.

The characters are flat-out terrific. Tom Hanks gives Woody exactly the right maturity and straight-man factor. Tim Allen’s funny-man shtick works flawlessly when it’s played seriously by Buzz Lightyear. The combination of these two characters alone is comedy gold. Buzz and Woody are surrounded by one of the all-time greatest group of supporting characters for an animated film. A sarcastic piggy bank, an abrasive Mr. Potato Head, a loyal Slinky Dog, a neurotic T-Rex, and a troop of super-serious plastic Army men round out a supporting cast that makes this film a treat for all ages. Is there some non-contextual humor? Yes. Does it bug me this go around? Not so much. The toy characters have an adult-like seriousness that makes it acceptable.

Toy Story is a breezy tale full of sentimentality, heart, and fun. It never lingers over certain themes and never spins the tires on pace. While many imitators followed in its wake, none so far have managed to tell their story with such effortless ease as this film. Clichéd as it sounds, Toy Story is the real deal and has something for the whole family to enjoy.

RATING: 4 out of 5

SECOND HELPINGS: High Noon* (1952)

This is another one of the Original Eleven, the films I watched in my college class that became the foundation of this website. As an 18-year old raised on Star Wars and Indiana Jones, I thought this film was boring. Seeing it again years later, I am reminded of just how immature I was when I first got into this whole rating movies thing.

In my youth, I was completely ignorant to the uniqueness of High Noon’s concept. It probably wasn’t the first film to tell its story as it plays out in real time but that doesn’t matter. Few filmmakers go this route at all, so it is noteworthy when it is done and done as well as it is here. We are given enough time for characters to catch the audience up to speed through exposition and to let us know just how high the stakes are.

My father is a big Clint Eastwood fan, so I grew up watching and appreciating antiheroes. I think this factored heavily in my original rating, because after so many years of cheering on rogues, a dutiful and honorable sheriff doing his job seemed pretty uninteresting. I’m still not much of a cookie-cutter good guy Western fan but I understand now that High Noon is anything but cookie cutter.

Over the years Westerns have been generalized as either rowdy cowboy flicks or simplistic good-vs.-bad yarns. High Noon is a good-vs.-bad yarn but its characters are much more contemplative than characters in other films in the genre at that time. Instead of boldly standing up for justice when no one else will, Will Kane wavers on whether to defend his town or go on his honeymoon, and shows mounting frustration at the cowardice of his friends and fellow townsfolk. Kane’s Quaker bride struggles with Kane’s sense of duty and her strong devotion to pacifism.

The end result is realism that overshadows Kane’s nobility in taking on the gunman descending upon the town. It’s not pretty, and even a bit surprising for a Western, but it is still satisfying. But as much as High Noon can drive post-film conversation, is it really an all-time classic? Just like real life, the film drags on at times before getting to the point. We’re treated to all kinds of thought-provoking conversation but does that make up for what could be argued are rehashed scenes of Kane running around town getting the same disappointing result?

Now that I am older, I can appreciate the novel concept of this film and I enjoy the intelligence it tries to bring to what had largely become a brainless genre. But that’s about it for me. It’s unique and well-made but other than tricky editing to make it all flow as close to real-time as possible, I didn’t notice anything technically remarkable about the film. The acting is good but not emotionally gripping.

Let’s be honest- greatness is in the eye of the beholder. A part of me feels that this film was elevated to greatness by Hollywood and those who went on to be film theory professors because it was made as an allegory to Hollywood’s failure to stand up against Senator Joseph McCarthy and his HUAC and its blacklisting of Hollywood communist sympathizers.

I’m not suggesting that emotional resonance plays second fiddle to technical mastery, but for me to view a film as great, both need to be present in equally high amounts. A film’s greatness is determined by the sum of its parts. No one can impart or bestow greatness upon a film simply by stating that it is an allegory or metaphor for some other worthy struggle. If I came from that era, perhaps this film would mean more because I would be more familiar with its allegorical source. But I am not from that era, and the sum of High Noon’s parts that are timeless film traits (acting, cinematography, etc.) does not suggest greatness. I up my rating but I still don’t buy the hype.

Original Rating: 2.5 out of 5

New Rating: 3.5 out of 5