Dreamgirls (2006)

Based loosely enough on the rise and fall of Diana Ross and the Supremes to avoid a lawsuit, this film tells the tale of a trio of young black women trying to break into the early 60s R&B music scene.

Dreamgirls was originally a Broadway musical and its film adaptation has been a long time coming. The stage show took Broadway by storm in 1981. Thanks to recent successful movie-musicals like Chicago and biopics like Ray and Walk the Line, Dreamgirls finally gets its day in the sun.

Through the first half of the film (the first Act of the show, really) we see the naïve and aspiring Dreamettes go from being not even a blip on anyone’s radar and playing local talent contests, to singing backup for a hit singer and eventually breaking through to the white radio markets on their own. During this process the writers treat us to little doses of history- payola, civil and racial unrest, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and the difficulty for black artists to succeed due to poor copyright protection that allowed white artists to snag a hit from black radio and convert it for a white-friendly audience.

The sizzle and pop of the songs and the excellent set and costume designs made me wonder how on Earth the Academy failed to nominate this film for Best Picture. Then came the second Act.

Actually, the momentum died at the end of the first Act, where Jennifer Hudson’s Effie is disgruntled about no longer being lead vocalist (making Beyonce Knowels the ‘face’ of the group) and her bad attitude has finally cost her a place in the group. She discovers that she is being replaced and throws a diva fit, to which her manager and friends interject by singing their dialogue. Up to this point, all the songs had been performance numbers by the group or other artists, so when they began to unfurl their exposition and dialogue via song, my affection for the film dropped a notch. Sure, this sort of style works in movie-musicals from the 60’s and earlier, but now it just seems cheesy. The Academy fruitballs and the Broadway fruitballs can defend sing-songy exposition all they want, but it just doesn’t jive with me. At least not for contemporary films.

The second Act seems to drag, as Effie manages to drop off the face of the Earth for much of the time, and we are instead tuned into the struggle of the group and of Beyonce’s character. Updates on what Effie’s life has been like since the split are shown, but they don’t add to the roundness of the character. Another major issue with the second Act is the jump in time from the close of Act one. We go from the 60s to the 70s and very little compensation is given for the 8-year leap. Characters look no older and it seems that the filmmakers didn’t even bother trying to do so.

A lot of noise was made about Beyonce’s role in the film and many were buzzing early on about potential Golden Globe and Academy Awards nominations for her. She got nothing, which I find hysterical, because she didn’t deserve any in the first place. Beyonce does a good job playing the innocent, pretty, sweet-sounding singer, because she is one. She’s not an actress, so why did people think she was so great at a part she could play because it was barely a stretch from how she really is? Frankly, she’s forgettable, as Effie is a much more interesting character, and Hudson was rightfully recognized for her astounding performance (take that, American Idol).

Dreamgirls starts off as a tour de force, appealing to the eyes and ears alike. They aim for the fence and come out swinging for the home run, but the story progresses away from the most interesting character, only to bring her back in the final scenes to provide a standard sappy happy ending. It is still a very excellent film, but I can understand why the Academy did not nominate it for Best Picture.

Look for some head-turning performances by Hudson and Eddie Murphy, and a keen eye will spot Steve Urkel himself (Jaleel White) amongst the who’s-who ensemble black cast.

RATING: 3.75 out of 5

Lethal Weapon 4 (1998)

The Lethal Weapon catchphrase “too old for this sh*t” is about as tired as Danny Glover and Mel Gibson look in this film. Riggs and Murtaugh are older- eleven years older than when they paired up in the first installment of this “buddy cop” franchise.

The film adds yet another supporting character with Chris Rock as the fiancé of Murtaugh’s daughter. Rene Russo returns in her role from 3 and is pregnant with Riggs' child. Joe Pesci is back and is, well, Joe Pesci.

The bad guys are Chinese, so we get to see old cops fight kung fu masters (and win!). A bit recycled and repetitive, Lethal Weapon 4 brings the series to a close in a fitting manner. It entertains, but one has to wonder if they really needed to make this one.

RATING: 2.75 out of 5

Lethal Weapon 3 (1992)

Detectives Riggs and Murtaugh have a habit of saying that they’re “too old for this sh*t.” By the end of Lethal Weapon 3, I’m starting to believe them. While it’s still entertaining, most of why this movie works comes from our familiarity with the characters and their quirks.

Joe Pesci returns as a supporting character and Rene Russo joins the party as a government agent. She’s a feisty one, so naturally there’s some sexual tension between her and Riggs. The plot isn’t so memorable, but it’s the further adventures of Riggs and Murtaugh. If you liked the first two, you’re bound to watch this one, right? That’s basically the filmmakers' hopes with Lethal Weapon 3, and they’re more or less right.

RATING: 2.75 out of 5

Lethal Weapon 2 (1989)

Isn’t it annoying when sequels try and go deeper than their predecessor and try tackling some kind of major issue while still providing a similar amount of punch and wit as the first? I think it is.

Fortunately, Lethal Weapon 2 doesn’t get too heavy handed in this common pitfall. The bad guys this time around are South African. This means nothing to the current generation but when this movie was made, South Africa was still operating under apartheid government. The bad guys are white and rather racist, which only makes sense if you are aware of history. Since Detective Murtaugh is black, some interesting point and counterpoint is played out subtly throughout the film which younger viewers won’t understand at all.

Fortunately, the filmmakers reduce this potentially heavy-handed race issue by injecting a new source of humor for the series- Joe Pesci. He plays an annoying little creep named Leo who Riggs and Murtaugh are assigned to protect. Of course, protecting Leo leads them into a larger foray against organized crime and drug lords.

Somewhat predictable, but still entertaining, Lethal Weapon 2 retains enough of the original’s magic to keep you entertained.

RATING: 3 out of 5

Lethal Weapon (1987)

You’ll be hard pressed to find a “Buddy Cop” flick with as much pop and energy as Lethal Weapon. While several cop movies incorporated riveting balances between drama and humor, Lethal Weapon makes the formula work while sharing screen time between two completely different personalities.

In a way, it’s a fish-out-of-water scenario, except that the cops are on their home turf. Their biggest issue is how to trust and deal with each other. Instead of just being a “crazy cop,” Mel Gibson brings depth to his character (Detective Riggs), making us feel compassion for him and justifying some of his antics. On the flip side, Danny Glover (as Detective Murtaugh) presents us with an older man ready to slow down. He’s very believable and very practical.

The relationship and growth each brings to the other really makes the film more than a schlocky stunt-fest like its endless number successors and imitators. Speaking of stunts, the stunt work is nearly seamless and largely believable. The plot is a bit out there, but what should we expect from a cop drama/comedy?

It’s original and creative enough to be heralded as a model for the sub-genre, which has allowed it to enter the cultural consciousness as well. Rightfully hailed as a classic, Lethal Weapon is a ride worth taking.

RATING: 3.5 out of 5