The Broadway Melody** (1929)

This is the second film and first ‘talkie’ to win Best Picture at the Oscars. Though skepticism and scandal surrounds its Oscar win, no one can deny that The Broadway Melody is a charming film that’s a feast for the eyes and ears.

Harriet “Hank” Mahoney and her sister Queenie are a vaudeville act in the Mid-West. Hank’s boyfriend Eddie writes a snappy number that gets the attention of a big-wig Broadway producer. Eddie convinces the girls to head to New York, assuring them that he’ll find a way to get them into the production. Hank and Queenie discover what it’s like to audition for the big time and what it takes to keep your spot once you’ve got it.

Eddie slowly grows cold for Hank and sweet for Queenie but the younger sister refuses to break her sister’s heart and begins dating a New York playboy. It doesn’t hurt that the show is a hit and Queenie is a rising star either. Rather than giving into the vices of the big city, Hank fights against them in an effort to keep Queenie and Eddie from making mistakes they’ll all regret.

Film snobs like to thumb their noses at this film. They believe the reasons it won Best Picture are because the 1929 crop of nominees were nothing but weak films as a result from studios scrambling to embrace the incorporation of sound and because the film’s producer Louis B. Mayer (the third ‘M’ in MGM) was the vote supervisor for the Oscars.

To be fair, this is the first film from 1929 that I’ve ever seen, so I have no true basis for comparison. And it’s true that The Broadway Melody pales in comparison to the scope of the inaugural winner Wings, but that doesn’t change the fact that this honestly looks like an Oscar-winning movie. Where Wings was an example of what location shooting and technical daring can do, The Broadway Melody triumphs in showcasing the virtues of the studio system.

Lavish costumes, dazzling sets and oozing with charm, this film really makes the most of its budget. The musical numbers are very clearly overdubbed but there’s no harm in that (what movie-musical doesn’t feature overdubbing anymore?). The concept of the ‘backstage’ musical and movie were probably nothing new with this film but it’s the first to do so in full sound. If you take the proper context into consideration, The Broadway Melody elevates this now-clichéd concept to new heights with the sound, music and very detailed sets.

The story, though tame by today’s standards, is appreciable. Hank is willing to make sacrifices to ensure her sister’s happiness and Queenie shows that even a star-eyed newcomer to the big city can maintain some semblance of morality. You can say all you want about ‘old-fashioned morals,’ but common sense never goes out of style.

The Broadway Melody may be almost pure confection but it sure tastes sweet. It may not rank among the best films to win Best Picture but, for what it was at the time, the honor makes complete sense. It’s not a crying shame that this film has largely been forgotten about (though fans of Singin’ in the Rain will find this is the source for several of that film’s numbers) but if you should have the opportunity to watch this little gem, please do so.

RATING: 3.75 out of 5

Bowfinger (1999)

Who doesn’t love taking a few shots at Hollywood every now and then? The film industry is full of frauds, egomaniacs and naïve fools. Comedic legend Steve Martin manages to wrap all of these industry archetypes into an amusing tale about a bunch of wannabes desperate fulfill their misguided dreams of breaking into the big time.

Bobby Bowfinger (Steve Martin) is trying to launch a career as a film producer. He’s been working at achieving his dream for years but has only managed to save a paltry $2,184 to pay for production. A studio executive gets Bowfinger’s hopes up by saying that he’ll distribute the film if Bowfinger can get Hollywood mega-star Kit Ramsey as the lead. When Ramsey refuses to work on such a low-budget production, Bowfinger is crushed but he doesn’t give up.

Taking the half-baked script, written by an accountant, and a team of overzealous and under-skilled actors, Bowfinger plots to make the film guerilla style- his actors and camera crew will ambush Kit Ramsey in and around Hollywood to get the shots they need while also having him as the unknowing star of their production. Bowfinger has the rest of the cast thinking that Ramsey knows what is going on and is merely ‘method acting’ to portray his confusion. Unfortunately, Ramsey is a seriously paranoid member of the MindHead cult- a connection that seriously jeopardizes the production.

As amusing as Bowfinger is, there is a problem. Viewers who aren’t keen on the intricacies of Hollywood will miss about half of the comedy in this film. That’s not a huge problem but what most people will see is just the zany antics of a bunch of pathetic wannabes. Just under the surface of what appears to be a screwball comedy lays a foundation of satire, black comedy and a slew of Martin’s own observations after years in the business.

It’s a shame that most people will miss out on some of the details. I’m willing to bet that (aside from the guerilla filmmaking) there is an awful lot of truth about Hollywood in this film. Bowfinger tackles a number of ideas: cult of celebrity status, ageism in Hollywood, tired cliché-ridden genre films, the manipulation of young actors, financing and more. The lampooning of celebrity cult-like groups such as Scientology are the most obvious targets but Martin is a sly writer and knows how to avoid the one-trick pony trap.

This film may just mark the last legitimately funny live-action role Eddie Murphy has played (which is sad considering it’s been 11 years since Bowfinger was released) but he rightfully steals the show. First, his manic paranoia as Kit Ramsey is delightful. His other performance as Kit’s awkward brother Jiff, who the crew uses to film some close-ups, is amusing because it’s the first time we get to see Murphy play a nerdy character without the aid of a fat suit. These two polar opposites are fun to watch.

At times it’s hard to cheer for Bowfinger and his band of misfits because they resort to stalker behavior and Bowfinger himself gives in to some of the evils of Hollywood that have frustrated him in the past. Thank goodness no one has attempted to make a real movie by the same tactics on display here. In the end, just about everyone appreciates a good underdog story, which is what this is.

Funny but sadly forgettable, Bowfinger is one of those gems that are worth dusting off every now and again for a few hearty chuckles. Martin may fill his script with winks and nods to those in the know but there’s a little something for everyone here.

RATING: 3.25 out of 5

Melody Time (1948)

After taking a step forward with Fun and Fancy Free, Walt Disney and his animation team takes a slight step backward by returning to the overstuffed ‘package’ film format. Melody Time has its share of virtues but it can’t escape the stigma of seeming like another Fantasia clone that fails to live up to the achievements of the original.

The film opens reasonably strong with ‘Once Upon a Wintertime,’ a tale of two young people in love on a romp through the winter scenery. The inventive but forgettable ‘Bumble Boogie’ comes next and features a jazz variation of “Flight of the Bumblebee.” Up next is the classic short 'The Legend of Johnny Appleseed.' Most people my age and younger have seen this charming animated tale while growing up and it still has all the charm and magic as the first time you may have seen it.

'Appleseed' is a tough act to follow but 'Little Toot' does well enough in the cleanup spot. It’s about a rambunctious little tugboat and features the signing of the Andrews Sisters. 'Trees' offers a bland recitation of a poem by Alfred Joyce Kilmer. Saving the day is 'Blame it on the Samba,' a wonderfully entertaining short featuring Donald Duck, José Carioca and the crazy Aracuan bird. This reunion from The Three Caballeros is a welcome attraction for me, even though I’ve grown tired of the formulaic structure of these War-era Disney films.

Wrapping up Melody Time is 'Pecos Bill,' a tall tale of the legendary Western characters adventures spun by none other than Roy Rogers. The home video release is cleaned up for political correctness (gone are virtually all depictions of our hero smoking) but the good-natured fun remains. It ends the film on a high note, which is good because anything less than a solid ending would have left audiences frustrated with this re-serving of more of the same.

I don’t mean for this review to come off so negative. The animation is solid, the music is enjoyable and the stories are fine. My beef is that ‘fine’ isn’t good enough for a Disney product. I understand that World War II drained Disney of resources and box office returns tanked but this is the fifth consecutive Disney film to lack a central story line. There is no meat and no growth for characters. All we get are a few splashy colors, fanciful music and short stories. This cheap and easy approach has lost its luster and leaves you longing for the glory days of Snow White, Pinocchio and Bambi.

While Melody Time never tries to be the second coming of Fantasia, it’s impossible not to compare them based on their similar structures. Where Fantasia was a bold and innovative experiment, Melody Time is intentionally formulaic and manufactured. The end product is still worth watching though; it’s just not a main course that you’ll be asking for seconds of.

RATING: 3.25 out of 5

Fun and Fancy Free (1947)

After three consecutive ‘package’ films featuring multiple shorts, Walt Disney pulls his animators together for a more concentrated production. Instead of half a dozen or more shorts, we are given just two stories. While still technically a short, each component is much longer that what the recent Disney collections offered. While this is a welcome breath of fresh air, Fun and Fancy Free is also not quite the one-two punch Disney may have been gunning for.

Fun and Fancy Free opens with a song by Jiminy Cricket, who wanders into the living room of a house. There he finds two sad looking toys and decides to cheer them up with a story. While looking for a book to read, he discovers a story on record titled ‘Bongo.’ Narrated by Dinah Shore, ‘Bongo’ is the story of a circus bear who finds himself lost in the wild. After meeting some of the local bears, Bongo falls in love with a young female, drawing the ire of one of her hopeful suitors. Both bears vie for her attention and affection.

After finishing the tale of Bongo, Jiminy heads over to a little girl’s birthday party. This segment is live-action footage, where ventriloquist Edgar Bergen and his dummies Charlie Parker and Mortimer Snerd are the entertainment. Bergen springs into the story of Jack and the Beanstalk, only the audience is treated to the animated tale of ‘Mickey and the Beanstalk.’ Mickey, Donald and Goofy take on Willie the Giant in order to restore peace and prosperity to their valley.

As entertaining as the last few ensemble films had been for Disney, the formula was getting stale. Films like Make Mine Music and The Three Caballeros contained segments that were hit-or-miss in nature. This, in conjunction with the fact that they don’t focus on a popular story like Disney’s early works, is almost certainly why these so-called ‘package’ films aren’t remembered or loved as dearly as the full-length, one-story films.

Fun and Fancy Free takes a step in the right direction by tackling two longer short stories. This gives the audience more substance to latch onto. It’s also clear that it afforded Disney’s animators more time to focus on their work. Both ‘Bongo’ and ‘Mickey and the Beanstalk’ have more detailed animation, even though it doesn’t quite compare with Disney’s early films.

‘Bongo’ isn’t a very memorable tale but it is cute and something kids will enjoy. ‘Mickey and the Beanstalk’ is something of a Disney classic. It has been repackaged and the narration altered several different times. I recall watching this on a Mickey Mouse VHS collection as a child and loving it. It still has a magical charm that thrills the imagination. Seeing it with the original narration is interesting because Edgar Bergen and his dummy friends add commentary to the on-screen action that is often times amusing.

‘Mickey and the Beanstalk’ is the better of the two shorts in this film but ‘Bongo’ still gets the job done. Taken separately, the ratings would be quite differently. As a sum of its parts though, Fun and Fancy Free under-performs ever so slightly.

RATING: 3.25 out of 5

Minority Report (2002)

It’s difficult to make a summer blockbuster film capable of making audiences think. The summer months are typically reserved for big-budget franchises, goofy comedies, cheeky action films and sappy chick flicks. Minority Report is one of those rare summer releases that has the ability to give its core audience exactly what it wants while daring to add a dash of maturity and philosophical intrigue.

Set in 2054, the film focuses on the Department of Precrime, a highly specialized task force that has eliminated virtually all murders in Washington D.C. and its suburbs. Using three mutated humans with precognitive abilities, the Department of Precrime is able to see when and where murders will occur and stop them before they happen. In a matter of weeks, the US Department of Justice is planning to take the Precrime method and expand it to a national level.

Tom Cruise plays John Anderton, chief of Precrime. Despite the success of the program, he is a troubled man. Years before, his son was abducted right out from under his nose, never to be found. Since then, his obsession with Precrime killed his marriage and he is secretly addicted to psychoactive drugs. As if it isn’t bad enough that Anderton has skeptical DOJ officers poking around the department on a daily basis, the trio of precogs throw him for a loop when they predict that he will murder someone in a few days.

Anderton doesn’t know the man he is supposed to murder but, in the world of Precrime, that doesn’t matter one bit. Anderton attempts to hide the precogs’ vision long enough for him to escape Precrime headquarters. Once the prediction is discovered, the film becomes a wild cat-and-mouse game as Anderton uses his knowledge of Precrime tactics and technology to evade capture, all the while trying to figure out why he is going to murder someone he doesn’t even know.

The filmmakers could have simply stopped with the manhunt storyline and still ended with a similar conclusion. Thankfully, they did not. Instead of a generic, sci-fi chase flick, the writers and director Steven Spielberg expand upon the philosophical musings and paranoia of Phillip K. Dick’s original short story.

Instead of characters simply questioning the merits of Precrime, we get to see the process breakdown before our eyes. The audience isn’t treated like a bunch of children. We don’t get ‘Sunday School’ answers here. Rather, characters discuss the pros and cons of using precognition to prevent crime like thinking adults. This allows the audience to consider the heady concepts of free will versus determinism after the on-screen conversations stop and the action picks up.

One of the unique aspects of the film is how restrained Spielberg is with his depiction of the near-future. Instead of teleporters and outlandish clothing, most of 2054 looks like it does now. Sure, there are futuristic-looking cars that flow along magnetic roads and the police use non-lethal, charged-air blasters instead of guns with bullets but Minority Report gives us a future built on the present instead of one that has completely overtaken it.

Anderton finds ways to work around the technology of the future, which goes to show that all the gadgetry in the world is no match for human determination. The most dangerous challenge comes in the form of iris scanners set up across the entire city. These scanners help police track down the movements of suspects as well as advertisers pitch products specifically to individuals. The scanners are impossible to avoid, leading Anderton to take drastic steps to avoid detection (this also leads up to an intense scene where he is cornered by iris scanning robot spiders). This technology is especially creepy now that it is actually going to be used for these very purposes in real life.

Less than ten years later, some of the effects already look dated but that is almost to be expected with the rapid improvement of CGI and motion capture. The overuse of digital grading to sap some of the saturation and vibrancy from the color palette seems silly to me but it does help match the bleakness of Anderton’s dilemma, which Cruise puts all of his effort into. In fact, most of the cast do a terrific job of making their characters, and this future world, seem believable.

I won’t deny that this film runs a little long. As much as I enjoy the philosophical arguments, the intricate murder mystery and the fantastically choreographed action sequences, the nearly two and a half hour run time wears on you come the third reel. Some will feel just as exhausted as Anderton does by the time the film begins wrapping things up. This will turn some viewers off, especially if they aren’t as interested in sci-fi thrillers as the intended audience but those who have the patience, nerves and determination to see Minority Report through to the end will be rewarded.

The big question asked by this film is ‘Can the future be changed?’ You’ll have to watch this one to find out.

RATING: 3.75 out of 5

The Mummy Returns (2001)

Despite a satisfying conclusion to The Mummy, the film made a ton of money and, these days, that means a sequel. How exactly does one create a follow-up to a film that saw the titular antagonist destroyed in the end? Psh! Nothing a little ret-conning and distraction can’t fix.

Main characters Rick and Evelyn O’Connell (Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz) are now married and have a son. While exploring a pyramid, they find the Bracelet of Anubis, which contains both the location of the oasis of Ahm Shere and the power to unleash the Scorpion King and his legion of monstrous warriors upon the earth. Naturally, Rick and Evelyn’s son puts the bracelet on out of curiosity, setting in motion a week-long countdown to potential doomsday.

Little Alex O’Connell is abducted by an Egyptian cult who have also somehow managed to resurrect Imhotep, the evil mummy from the first film. The cult wants to use Imhotep’s restored powers to defeat the Scorpion King so they can control the Army of Anubis. This leaves Rick and Evelyn one week to find the oasis of Ahm Shere, rescue their son from imminent death and defeat the Scorpion King and Imhotep before either can conquer the world.

If this sounds like an awful lot of action for two-hour movie, you’re right. The Mummy Returns is quite relentless in bombarding you with fight scenes and special effects pieces while also yanking you from scene to scene with a pace that, once it picks up, never drops back a gear. Despite all the seeming complexities and rapid flow, the film is still pretty easy to follow. It’s a journey from Point A to Point B in the hopes of stopping Bad Guy #1 and Bad Guy #2 from succeeding. Despite this fairly easy setup, there are some elements of the film that don’t make a lot of sense.

For instance, was it really necessary to bring Imhotep back for the sequel? From a marketing standpoint, it makes perfect sense to bring back the cold, evil villain, especially since they chose The Mummy Returns as the title. Without the reemergence of Imhotep, one could argue that the film would have no reason to exist as titled. The problem is that, at the end of The Mummy, he was made mortal and stripped of his powers. How exactly does the Egyptian cult restore all of these things for Imhotep? This is never explained. We’re just told that he’s back and bad as ever. It seems to be the filmmakers’ hopes that we will be too distracted by all the action to ponder such things.

The Mummy Returns also relies on significantly more CGI and special effects than its predecessor. Universal Pictures only sank an extra $18 million into the sequel’s budget and, considering they had to up their stars’ salaries, it's clear they didn’t pull enough out of the piggy bank. As ambitious as some of the scenes try to be, their ambition is undone by weak looking effects. Sometimes it’s only a matter of a monster warrior looking flat or just a tad too fake. Other times, like in the case of the emergence of the Scorpion King from his chamber, it is impossible to suspend disbelief because the visuals are terrible.

It was the zombie pygmy mummies that killed it for me though. Dozens, if not hundreds of these odd and horribly fake looking things dwell in the lush oasis of Ahm Shere and protect the temple of the Scorpion King. The filmmakers try to use them as fearsome adversaries and a comedic device at the same time. Due to this, they come across as too goofy to be taken as real threat, no matter how many people they end up killing. The Mummy had its goofy moments and so does this film but the zombie pygmy mummies cross a line that's better left uncrossed.

Fans of the first film will easily enjoy this sequel and there are plenty of references to events and artifacts from the predecessor to draw a knowing smile from Mummy devotees. For the rest of us, this will still entertain but the continuing adventures of Rick O’Connell don’t satisfy quite like the first time. While it’s still harmless popcorn adventure fun, The Mummy Returns starts to descend into ‘dumb’ territory, which is never good.

RATING: 2.25 out of 5

Pee-wee's Big Adventure (1985)

Who knew that the story of a stolen bike would be able to turn its man-child main character into a household name and launch its director from ‘up-and-coming’ status to Hollywood’s must-have man? Much like the star of the film himself, Pee-wee’s Big Adventure is the kind of film that defies the odds and captures the hearts and minds of a select, devoted audience.

Pee-wee Herman, a grown man with the heart and demeanor of a child, loves his bicycle. His neighbor Francis, another adult with childlike tendencies, wants Pee-wee’s bike but can’t have it. One day, Francis manages to steal the bike without being seen, crushing Pee-wee’s heart. No one seems to care about something as minor as a stolen bike but Pee-wee is determined to get his bike back. Seeing Pee-wee’s unending devotion for his bike, Francis wisely sells it so he won’t get in trouble.

After consulting a psychic who feeds him a bunch of bull, Pee-wee sets off on a wild and weird journey across the USA for his beloved bike. This trip takes him to Texas and all the way to California. Along the way he encounters a number of colorful and oddball characters every bit as unique as Pee-wee himself.

Pee-wee Herman lives in his own world. While he interacts with the real world on a daily basis, Pee-wee and reality are like oil and water. Half of the humor found in this film comes from how the barrage of supporting characters react to Pee-wee’s mannerisms and antics. This is a rare feat for a comedy accomplished most successfully in films like The Jerk and Borat. A lot of comedians would like to think themselves capable of crafting such a character but the cream always rises to the top.

That’s not to say that Pee-wee is a triumph as a character. Perhaps it is because I grew up with Pee-wee Herman and his quirks as a part of my cultural lexicon but the character begins to get annoying after a while. Seeing him for a few minutes on a Saturday morning TV show is one thing. Much like the numerous Saturday Night Live skits turned into movies, 90 minutes of Pee-wee may prove to be more than some can handle.

Credit has to be given to Paul Reubens for always giving Pee-wee 110%. It has to be physically and mentally exhausting to make a character as quirky as Pee-wee Herman. Reubens must have tapped into some kind of secret inner-strength to find the manic energy necessary to bring Pee-wee to life. Love for the character simply can’t be enough.

Aside from a number of neat set locations and visual allusions to other films, there isn’t much to be wowed by in this film. The story is quirky but straightforward. The aesthetics are interesting but nothing compared to the gothic flavor that would consume much of director Tim Burton’s later work. As long as a few corny antics and goofy gags will suffice in a comedy, Pee-wee’s Big Adventure may just be your thing.

While it is undeniably an interesting blend of innocent and adult humor, this film ultimately isn’t my thing. Pee-wee definitely has his moments of genuine humor and you would have a hard time not laughing at least once during this film, there is a reason why Pee-wee’s Big Adventure has a cult following. It may have something for everyone but it’s almost entirely a guilty pleasure kind of film.

RATING: 2.75 out of 5

Ghost* (1990)

Anytime I watch a popular romance film I approach it with trepidation. Films under the label of ‘romance’ are usually chick flicks in disguise anymore. If you’ve looked through the films I’ve rated in the past, you know that chick flicks and I do not get along. So when a film is listed interchangeably as a romance and a chick flick, I get really worried that I’m about to waste my time. Thank goodness that Ghost does not live up (or should I say down?) to its chick flick label.

Sam Wheat (Patrick Swayze) is a banker for a large company in New York. His artist girlfriend, Molly Jensen (Demi Moore), lives with him in a posh apartment. Life is beautiful and perfect until Sam spots some troubling discrepancies on a few accounts. A few days later Sam and Molly get mugged and Sam is killed. Only, Sam’s spirit sticks around.

Helping him work through his unfinished business are a creepy subway ghost, who shows Sam how to interact with objects, and a scam artist posing as a medium named Oda Mae Brown (Whoopi Goldberg), who is surprised to discover that she really does have the gift. While working through his anger and emotions, Sam learns that his death was not a random crime. With the help of Oda Mae, Sam must work to thwart a greedy, former co-worker at embezzling money and hurting Molly.

Interestingly enough, there is more drama, comedy and suspense in Ghost than romance. You could probably argue that this film’s primary labeling as a romance is a misnomer but I don’t see any need to do so. If nothing else, Ghost is the kind of romance film that elevates the bar for the genre. More romantic comedies should strive for the kind of genre blending on display here rather than taking the easy way out with ticket-selling clichés and second-rate actors.

Of the main characters, Demi Moore is the weakest link but it’s not entirely her fault. Molly is written as a pretty face and a victim. While Demi Moore’s acting chops are debatable, she does what is needed of her character. Patrick Swayze, however, is fantastic as Sam. When he’s not wide-eyed with wonder, panic or impatience, he is vengefully or ponderingly scowling. His transition from newbie ghost to fully-functioning poltergeist is believable and the rules and abilities laid out for Sam and his deceased brethren are easy to digest.

The undeniable scene-stealer of this film is Whoopi Goldberg. She hits every mark, every punch line and every facial expression perfectly. When she’s interacting with nothing or interacting with Patrick Swayze while pretending to be unable to see him, her performance is immaculate. No wonder they gave her an Oscar for this role! She is funny without forcing it and gaudy without going over the top. Whoopi alone makes this film worth seeing.

The story itself is quite interesting. There have been ghost tales before involving unfinished business but Ghost’s suspense and drama help it stand out. Some ghost flick fans may not like the kinder, gentler approach that Swayze takes but these people need to realize that not all disembodied spirits are out for revenge alone. In many ways, this is a story about a man overcoming a handicap in order to do something important. Maybe classifying death as a handicap is a stretch but without Sam having to learn the ropes of being a ghost, the plot and resolution would be too easy and far too convenient to be enjoyed.

The underlying moral of ‘corporate greed is bad’ is a little cheesy by today’s standards and some may complain that this motive comes right out of left field but let’s keep in mind when this movie was made. The late 80s and early 90s saw a wave of films containing a harsh reaction to the Reagan era of big business and corporate success. Ghost wisely avoids being too preachy on this matter but the subtext is there.

Other than a few dated-looking special effects, Ghost is still able to resonate and move today’s moviegoers. Passion, suspense and intrigue never go out of style. Hopefully this film’s popularity won’t either.

RATING: 3.75 out of 5

The Simpsons Movie (2007)

After years of speculation and rumors, Matt Groening and his team of animators finally gave fans of The Simpsons a full-length feature film. The question on everyone’s collective mind was “Will it be any good?” I would say that the answer to this question is an unenthusiastic ‘yes.’

When the band Green Day is killed by pollution at a lakeside concert, the city of Springfield falls under the watchful eye of the Environmental Protection Agency. The town, driven by Lisa Simpson and an Irish boy she has a crush on, cleans the lake up for good. Until Homer screws everything up that is. After adopting a pig and storing its feces in a backyard silo, Homer needs to get rid of the pig poop. Homer accidentally dumps the load into the lake, making the pollution problem even worse. President Arnold Schwarzenegger (hey, it’s The Simpsons) decides to seal the town inside a giant glass dome.

Springfield discovers Homer’s slop silo in the lake and tries to kill him. Homer and family manage to escape via a secret sinkhole in their backyard. Now outside the dome, they head to Alaska. When the Simpsons learn that the government is going to put a bomb in the dome to destroy Springfield completely, Homer doesn’t care. After all, they did try to kill him. The rest of the family won’t have it and go back to help, leaving Homer on a long and weird path to redemption.

The spirit of The Simpsons lives on in this super-sized, 83-minute film but it never strives to be much more than a cheeky mega-sode. Die-hard fans of the series will eat The Simpsons Movie up with relish and may sing its praises long into the night, but for casual viewers, it’s a little underwhelming.

The good news is that The Simpsons Movie does not look or feel like an episode of The Simpsons. Kudos to the filmmakers for making the film flow like a real film rather than a series of episodes spliced together. There are no fade-to-black transitions where commercial breaks would normally occur (unlike Family Guy Presents Stewie Griffin: The Untold Story). The animators even step things up a notch by adding depth to the characters and their environment.

The bad news is that the content of The Simpsons Movie is barely elevated above what can be expected from the TV show. Die-hard fans will dispute that the show is past its prime but die-hards (regardless of what they support) will almost always make excuses. Nobody can deny that The Simpsons have lost their edge over their now 21-year run on the airwaves. The show’s wit, skewering of American culture and political incorrectness made it an instant hit in 1989 but it no longer remains edgy and relevant in popular culture thanks to the likes of South Park and Family Guy.

That’s not to say that The Simpsons Movie won’t make you laugh. In fact, it will. Just not as often as you would probably like. Viewers who are familiar with the show will get a kick out of all the supporting character cameos (and there are quite a lot of them). The supporting characters who oftentimes add so much to the episodes take a pretty distant back seat, which is a shame, but the nature of the story being told doesn’t require them nearly at all to begin with.

Those who still watch The Simpsons on TV will likely laugh at all the zany antics on display. The show has become more about Homer’s screwball ideas and random acts than lampooning our culture and that continues in the movie. About half of what Homer does is genuinely funny and worth a chuckle at the least. Other times, the gimmicks and punch lines feel forced or trite.

The story itself fails to stand out among some of the show's classic plots but it is large enough in scope to merit the full-length treatment. The conflict and resolution are par for the course for The Simpsons but sometimes the journey from Point A to Point B seems unnecessary or fails to make much sense. This can make it a little hard to enjoy if you’re of the opinion that it’s the journey that matters, not the ending. Then again, this is The Simpsons we’re talking about, so you probably shouldn’t take it too much to heart.

Like any long-in-production film, the hype and expectations certainly contribute to the undoing of this film. While the scope of the plot is bigger, the purpose of the film is no bigger than the purpose of any Simpsons episode. The Simpsons Movie will almost certainly entertain you but I can’t shake the feeling that this overlong and under-funny episode of a film came out ten years too late.

RATING: 3 out of 5

Jesus Christ Superstar (1973)

What happens when a bunch of hippies get together to tell the story of Jesus? The answer is a movie-musical of bizarre proportions. Free-thinking remnants of the hippie culture think it’s groovy. Some Jewish groups claim it is anti-Semitic. Some Christian’s think it is sacrilegious, if not heretical. Some point out Biblical inaccuracies, while others just take it for the fluffy rock opera that it is. For me, Jesus Christ Superstar is simply one of the silliest movies I’ve seen in a long time.

The film begins with a bus loaded with colorful hippies and movie props storming into the Israeli desert. The principle characters step out and start getting into their costumes while others begin assembling lighting equipment and the set. The hippies surround one of their own, handing him a white robe to change into. Suddenly, we are transported to the completed set and the show begins with everyone in character.

The film loosely follows the Gospel of John’s account of Jesus’ last week alive. The focus is largely split between Jesus and Judas. Jesus frustrates his disciples by answering their questions vaguely and intentionally leaving the door open to questioning of his supposed divinity. This eats away at Judas, who thinks Jesus is just a man allowing himself to be caught up in his rising tide of support. Judas grows increasingly worried that Jesus’ rise in popularity and his refusal to quell the fervor of his followers could threaten the safety of Jewish communities under Roman rule.

The Romans, of course, are also growing concerned over this hotshot named Jesus. While he has been advising his followers against launching an uprising against the Romans, Jesus embraces their worship of him as God incarnate. Eventually, Judas and the Romans connect and make arrangements for Jesus’ capture and death.

There is a lot of weird stuff going on in this film. The mishmash between authentic locations and modern prop pieces (20th century army helmets and machine guns on sale in a market?) confounds me. I can see where the filmmakers may be trying to draw a correlation between Roman and modern imperialism but it’s just odd that these few props are the only crossovers to be seen. They stick out like a sore thumb and are visually distracting.

While some of the character choices work out pretty well (Carl Anderson’s Judas is fantastic), others are pretty wretched. Ted Neely looks exactly like the white-washed Eurocentric depiction of Jesus but his singing voice is cringe-inducing. In fact, about half of the cast used in this film cannot sing very well. Between cracking voices and tone-deaf solos, Jesus Christ Superstar is sometimes an exercise in patience and tolerance. I am also yet to find a reason why King Herod walked around in flamboyant modern threads and wearing a neon-colored wig.

I give some slack to the filmmakers for their interpretation of the scripture but some of their decisions rubbed me the wrong way. I didn’t mind the subplot of Jesus possibly having a relationship with Mary Magdalene. It’s always been an interesting theory to me. What I didn’t like was how Jesus was portrayed as progressively losing his grip and patience as events unfold. I can handle challenging Jesus’ divinity because that’s nothing new. But I can’t really get behind Jesus being portrayed as a whiny, emotionally distraught individual.

The whole point of Jesus Christ Superstar is to challenge the millennia-old view that Jesus was in control of what was happening to him the whole time up to his death. Instead of a quiet, knowing attitude, Jesus lashes out at his followers when they continually fail to “get it.” For me, this isn’t the Jesus of the Bible and is where my ability to tolerate artistic liberty ends. The film also fails to show and celebrate the resurrection of Jesus but that shouldn’t surprise you given the film’s intentions.

As a production, though, Jesus Christ Superstar confuses and amuses more than it frustrates. If this is how the scattered remnants of the hippie culture want to view Jesus, so be it. Most of the ‘controversial’ elements are easily forgotten, dismissed or ignored, so there’s no reason to get your shorts in a twist.

What’s left is a colorful, boisterous Bible story filled with good music and mediocre singing. It’s a very unique and odd mishmash of styles and cultures but Jesus Christ Superstar will almost certainly entertain you in some way. Maybe you’ll get into the story itself or maybe you’ll just laugh at the sight of hippies prancing around Jesus. Count me among the latter.

RATING: 2.25 out of 5