The Button Down Blog

I love SpongeBob. I really, really do. Like, a lot. So much so that I’ve added his name to my spell check dictionary. So much so that I have a Patrick coffee mug that I bought for double retail at King’s Island last year, and I don’t even drink coffee.

So it was with great hesitation that I put The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie in my DVD player. The transition from 15-minute TV cartoon to 90-minute cartoon movie with multiple story arcs and everything seemed insurmountable. Ninety minutes later, I was so glad that Stephen Hillenburg and the Nickelodeon people pulled it off.

The first thing they did right was give us situations that were somewhat familiar but expanded enough as to be new. For example, Mr Krabs’s rejection of SpongeBob led not just to the standard mopeyness, but to a big drinking bin– I mean ice cream eating binge with Patrick, complete with a drunken confrontation (above, and by far my favorite scene in the film) the next morning.

At the same time, Plankton (below), along with his computer wife (Karen), begins Plan Z to get the secret Krabby Patty formula and take over the world. It’s a diabolical and complicated scheme that is mind-boggling in its fiendishness, beginning with framing Mr. Krabs for the theft of King Neptune’s crown. SpongeBob’s previously mentioned confrontation with Mr. Krabs leads to a quest for King Neptune’s crown, and he and Patrick hit the road to Shell City.

All the citizens from Bikini Bottom are here, some with teeny tiny roles. I wish Sandy Cheeks and Mrs. Puff had had more than the one line, but it was smart to trim the cast a bit to keep the story focused. (Gary is my favorite, so I was glad he was there even a little bit.) There were several nice guest voices and cameos in the film. Jeffrey Tambor and Scarlett Johansson guest as King Neptune and his daughter Mindy, plus Alec Baldwin as Dennis, Plankton’s hitman.

Somehow I hadn’t heard that David Hasselhoff was in The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie, so it was a total surprise when he came running down the beach. It’s a great self-effacing performance, though I will say that we got a bit closer to his hairy legs than I ever intended to get. Kudos to Hasselhoff for being willing to poke fun at his image.

I was struck by how well put together The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie is, with the storylines crossing over each other several times. Each part addresses SpongeBob’s struggle to be recognized as a man and not a kid, and if you know anything about SpongeBob, you know that that’s an uphill battle.

As I said at the top of the page, it would have been easy to get this wrong. How wonderful that they put some thought into it and turned out a good buddy/road trip movie that actually moves the characters along a little and doesn’t return everybody to square one at the end. It’s true to the source material but breaks them out of their molds a little. The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie is a great flick, one that I’ll be watching again and again.

Lots of buzz in the last year for this film. Juno is the story of a 16-year-old girl (Juno) and the effect her pregnancy has on her life. We get to know Juno’s family, friends, and the couple who will adopt her baby.

With an armful of glowing reviews and award nominations, Juno went into my DVD player with the weight of my high expectations. The good news is that some of them were met. The bad news is that some weren’t. Let’s address the bad news first.

First up is the faux-stop-animation title sequence. I LOVED the feel of the them. They were a great way to set a tone for Juno, but much as I did when I watched [cref 185], I felt that they could have been used to greater effect. We got the hand-drawn heading of the sections, but I expected that Juno or Paulie would be an artist, making the drawings more relevant.

A bigger problem was 20 minutes of “Hey, look how quirky and in your face Juno is! She’s quirky, isn’t she? ISN’T SHE!?!” that started the film. Honestly, it was so over-the-top with the hamburger phone and the hoodie and the shiznit-remarking and the pipe and the moving the recliner and . . . I wanted to punch somebody. They just tried way too hard, even down to her name. Fortunately, after the first twenty minutes they eased up a little bit and the film got exponentially better.

Once we get past the set up of super-quirky Juno, the film really takes off. Ellen Page (above, with baby’ daddy Michael Cera) is quite talented, and ably heads the cast. Her transition from pre-pregnancy childhood to maturity is flawed, making it more real than I’ve grown to expect from most films. Writer Diablo Cody presents Juno with choices and decisions that aren’t neat and tidy, then explores some of the effects of those decisions.

One avenue that I wish had been explored more fully was Paulie Bleeker’s reaction to the news of Juno’s pregnancy. He just kind of goes along with whatever decisions Juno makes and doesn’t really give it much more thought. As always, I wish Cera had more to do in Juno.

On the other hand, by leaving Paulie’s point of view unaddressed, the film stays firmly focused on the female character, a phenomenon that’s sadly under-represented in cinema.

I also liked Jennifer Garner’s and Jason Bateman’s performances (above) in Juno as Vanessa and Mark Loring, the couple who wanted to adopt Juno’s baby. Looking back at it, it’s pretty obvious from the beginning that their situation was something less than the perfection that they tried to project with their McMansion (Thank you to director Jason Reitman for including that. I hate those stupid houses, devoid of any life or character.).

It was sad to watch Mark realize that he was living the wrong life, and to watch Vanessa try to convince him to hold it together. Juno’s final solution surprised me, and I’m not sure if I agree with it in general, but in her case, it was the right decision. One stellar piece of direction showed up in that section, specifically when Juno pulled off the highway.

So overall, Juno is a good film. Not Oscar-worthy, but good. I’m not sure why it got the Oscar nominations, other than possibly for the scene I just mentioned. Whatever the reason, I’m glad a film like this got some extra attention, if for no other reason than to get me to see it.

Fair warning: This will be a rough review. All I ask is that you at least read the last sentence before you start sending me hate mail.

The Neverending Story SUCKS. It’s the suckiest suck that ever sucked. There are just so many problems and unanswered questions that I don’t know where to begin. Let’s start off with Bastion’s dad, played by TV’s Gerald McRaney. Am I supposed to want to punch him? The boy’s mother JUST DIED and he’s being a total dick to him! Give the kid a break, Major Dad!

That creepy guy in the bookstore– what was up with him? I mean, I get that he wanted Bastion to take the book, but who was he? Did he have some other purpose? If so, what was it? And if not, if he was just hanging out until some downtrodden kid who was being chased by bullies who also likes to read happened to stop in without parental supervision . . . man, I don’t think I could handle that.

Why does the school have a big attic that’s so easy to break into? Bastion knew right where to look for the key to the attic, so is this his regular thing? Why would the attic of a school, which I have enough of a problem with anyway, have a big mattress in it? Why did nobody notice that Bastion never showed up to class?

Okay, on to The Neverending Story within The Neverending Story. We start out meeting a small group of characters who are introduced and treated like they will be major characters, then . . . nothing. The bat guy and the snail rider just disappear for the rest of the movie after being given fifteen minutes of introduction! We’re quickly escorted to the Department of Moving Things Along, where we find out about the Empress being sick or whatever and how the world going to die unless Atreyu goes on this big quest and blah blah blah.

We meet Atreyu (above, on his dog-dragon thing) who manages to get his horse killed on the way to the wise old sneezing turtle who serves no purpose whatsoever. Atreyu meets the dog-dragon thing and some green-screened in miniature people who bicker about magic. They, of course, disappear after Atreyu heads for the statues that shoot lasers out of their eyes (below, sponsored by Jugs magazine. You’re welcome, boys!), which you’d think would be an exciting scene, but not in The Neverending Story! No sir!

It’s clear that the producers were going for a Lord of the Rings type film with the big multi-stage quest and lessons to help Bastion with his feelings and such, but it just failed on every single level. For one thing, it’s lacking in any resolution. The big ending is that Bastion gives the oddly-lipped Empress a new name (which reminds me, what is the Empress’s new name? The Internet tells me that it’s “Moonchild” but I can’t for the life of me figure out why Bastion would name her that.), saving the world and becoming its god, in the process erasing everything that I just suffered through. Guh?!?

And then Bastion uses his newfound authority to hunt down and exact revenge on the bullies who were chasing him when he hid in creepy guy’s bookstore. I–

. . .

Y’know, I’d've totally dug this movie when I was ten.

Seven Years in Tibet is one of those films that I kind of knew I’d enjoy but just never got around to watching. There are a couple of reasons, chief among them being the running time. Clocking in at two hours 16 minutes, it’s a pretty hefty commitment and there always seemed to be something else to do.

Not anymore, though, eh? Here are a few thoughts on the film.

The film is based on the “true” experiences of Heinrich Harrer (Brad Pitt, above), a self-centered Austrian mountaineer and his adventures through being taken as a Prisoner of War at the beginning of WWII, escape from the POW camp, and eventual relocation to Tibet and kinship with the young Dalai Lama.

There was a lot of set up in Seven Years in Tibet; more than most films. I’m sure that part of the reason for this is the film’s basis on true events, but the first hour or so of the film dragged quite a bit as we got to know Harrer and other characters. After 30 minutes, I couldn’t help but feel like the director went a bit overboard on the backstory. I only need to be shown that Harrer’s a jerk so many times, you know?

Once the film gets going, though, it hits a nice stride. Harrer’s once-uneasy friendship with fellow mountaineer Peter Aufschnaiter (played by David Thewlis, above with costar Lhakpa Tsamchoe) deepens as the two become settled into their lives in Lhasa and Harrer begins to regret decisions that he’s made. The scenes of them vying for the same woman’s attention are quite touching.

At the same time, a Tibetan politician played by B. D. Wong (It took me forever to figure out where I recognized him from. He plays the psychiatrist on Law & Order: SVU.) befriends the two, and the seed for ultimate betrayal is sown. The plot points there are pretty clearly telegraphed, but we all know how it turns out anyway. Besides, that B-story is only background for the real focus of Seven Years in Tibet.

The centerpiece of the film is Harrer’s friendship with the 14-year-old Dalai Lama (played by Jamyang Jamtsho Wangchuk, pictured above with Brad Pitt). It’s a charming story of the young spiritual leader who needs a friend and the outsider who needs to man up. There’s some nice character development for Harrer, and it was nice to see the fragility of the young man while he struggled with his venerated status.

Overall, Seven Years in Tibet is a good, though somewhat flawed film. Nice direction by Jean-Jacques Annaud, but it could have used a good editor to cut another half hour off the top. Brad Pitt turns in a good performance, but I kind of wish they’d left the tag off the end, instead ending with Harrer’s departure from Tibet. And I wish they’d given him a more period-recognizable haircut rather than the floppy ‘do pictured above.

If not that they could at least have kept him from growing that horrible goatee at the end. Blech. Note to Brad: You’re pretty. Very pretty. Don’t mess it up with bad facial hair.

I found Across the Tracks for $3 at a used DVD store. Clearly this couldn’t be a good movie, because it was, you know, on sale for three bucks. But I like Rick Schroder and I like Brad Pitt, and crappy 90s movies are fun to watch sometimes, so I figured I may as well give it a shot.

The movie was an interesting look at Rick Schroder as he broke away from the child actor thing, and at Brad Pitt before he was BRAD PITT! A serviceable job by both, but nothing worth writing home about.

As for the movie, it’s very After School Special. All the standard plot points and the warm fuzzy ending where Everything Works Out™. The biggest trouble was that it didn’t know who it was about. The first half seemed to be Schroder’s, but somewhere in the middle it switched to Pitt. In the end, it was kind of a mess with a couple decent scenes mixed in.

Marketing-wise, I feel kind of bad for Rick Schroder. Here’s a progression of the VHS/DVD covers. Watch as Rick disappears altogether as Brad becomes more popular.

Anyway, was it worth $3? Eh. Sure.

Ringing endorsement, I know.

I’m not exactly a prude, you know. I like a bawdy joke as much as the next guy, and swearing in a movie doesn’t really scare me off. I’m certainly not one of those “You say the F-word too much” people. The 40-Year-Old Virgin, Clerks, Space Balls, the Naked Gun flicks, they’re all fairly high on my favorite comedies list.

What I’m trying to say is that I’m not opposed to filth humor in movies. I just expect there to be more than filth. Sadly, Judd Apatow and Seth Rogen didn’t take my proclivities into consideration when they made Superbad.

The film starts out with a way cool 1970s-esque title sequence that totally rocked my world. If only they had taken it somewhere other than to fake out the audience in the first scene. I’d've loved some groovy interstitials here and there throughout the movie. It would’ve given the film a bit more of a stylistic identity.

From the title sequence, we go to a porn joke. Then another porn joke. Then a MILF joke followed quickly by dick joke, dick joke, vagina joke, porn joke, blowjob joke, porn joke again . . . You get the point.

Maybe I feel so let down by Superbad because I went into it with such high expectations. As a fan of the late lamented series Arrested Development, I was excited to see Michael Cera working again. One of the greats of his generation, he has terrific comic timing, and from what I’ve seen and heard, he’s darn good with the improv. Here, though, he takes a back seat to Jonah Hill, often playing the straight man.

And I was looking forward to Jonah Hill, too. He had a (very) small part in The 40-Year-Old Virgin, and apparently his star has been on the rise since. I’m not sure I buy him as an 18-year-old, but I can get over that. There’s also Seth Rogan and a couple other recognizable faces (Joe Lo Truglio makes a brief but awesome appearance, pictured above if you click the picture), making this a can’t-miss cast.

I wish. Boy do I wish.

Am I just getting old? Could that be it? I’m well outside the demographic, and I was never one of the “Let’s get drunk and screw” kids, so I’m doubly removed. On top of that, Seth (Hill) was so very over-the-top angry all the time, which annoyed me and made me wonder why Evan (Cera) and Jules would even want to be around him in the first place. I think that’s part of the point, but it could’ve been done better.

Another problem was the B-story with McLovin and the two wacky cops (pictured above). There were parts of that story that were funny, but it just kept going until it went past funny to uncomfortably funny to just plain uncomfortable, which I guess is my main problem with the whole movie. There were some funny concepts and funny sequences, but most of the time they kept going after the bit should have ended. It was like a bad episode of Saturday Night Live; they knew they had 90 minutes to fill, and they were going to fill them, funny or not.

It was only made worse by the half-hearted, tacked-on, almost-sentimental ending. What I’m left with is an average film and a below average Judd Apatow film. Then again, I came away from it with a big long list of new slang terms for blowjobs and vaginas.

And once again, the universe achieves balance.

Adapting a book into a film is a tricky business. Stray too far from the source material and you have readers coming at you with torches and pitchforks. Stay too true to the text and you risk having a bad movie; not everything translates, after all. But trying to have it both ways is by far the worst choice. Unfortunately, that’s the choice made when To Kill A Mockingbird was made into a film.

It’s not that there isn’t any good in the film version. To the contrary, some things it does quite well. The problem, I suppose, is that I finished the book less than a week before I saw the film, making it nigh impossible to keep from comparing the two.

What surprises me the most is how much of the film is explicitly about the Robinson trial, while so much of the book isn’t. The gentle changes and seemingly digressive life lessons of the novel can’t be accommodated in a two-hour film, so many of them are excised.

Some of the changes were reasonable and well-considered, such as the deletion of Aunt Alexandra and Miss Rachel and moving the role of Dill’s aunt to Miss Stephanie though I probably would have gotten rid of Dill as well. And painful as it was to lose them, I understand the loss of the trip to Calpurnia’s church, Miss Maudie’s fire, and Christmas at Finch’s Landing. Compressing the entire affair to less than a week makes sense too.

Truth is, I would have probably cut more. As I say, the biggest issue that I have with the film version is that it tries to have it both ways. I would’ve gladly applauded a film that tried to keep the spirit of the novel while creating most of the scenes out of whole cloth.

But in To Kill A Mockingbird, most of the scenes are shown almost verbatim, and that’s a problem. Dialogue that reads well on the page doesn’t always work on the screen, speechifying is more easily hidden when it’s couched within descriptive passages, and some sections, their context removed with other excised scenes, seem out of place and unnecessary. The shooting of the rabid dog comes to mind, as does Scout’s fight on her first day of school.

So the film version of To Kill A Mockingbird pales in comparison with the book. The good news is that it’s not all bad. The film works best when it gets completely away from the book. For example, the scene with Jem sitting in the car outside the Robinson’s home was especially moving. Jem sees a young black boy through the window, both of them knowing that they live in different worlds, when Bob Ewell appears outside the car. It’s a moving moment, one that wouldn’t have worked in print, but is perfectly at home here.

Another moving scene is near the beginning of the film, with Atticus tucking Scout into bed. For the first and final time, the children’s mother is mentioned and Scout, too young to remember her, tries to wrap her head around who this woman was. In a move only possible in cinema, the camera pans from the children’s bedroom window to Atticus sitting on the porch listening to Jem dreamily answer Scout’s questions about their dead mother, his wife. Was she nice? Was she pretty? Did she love us? Did we love her?

The climactic scene presented a special challenge to the film crew. In the book, it wasn’t clear during the fight who attacked the children, or who saved them, or whether Jem was dead or alive. But without Scout’s point of view, the scene could have been hamstrung by giving the audience too much information too soon. Pulling the camera in, showing limbs but not their owners, hearing the sounds of the fight without the visual blow-by-blow effectively ramps up the tension and saves the scene. Very well done.

And then there’s Boo. Put simply, the entire film, warts and all, was worth it to see Robert Duvall shrink into the corner in Jem’s bedroom. A caged animal, hair a disheveled shock of white, the sullen face, the sad eyes. Boo on film is exactly Boo in my head, and that doesn’t happen often. Hard to believe that this was Duvall’s first major role on the big screen.

And so the film ends, as does the review. Overall, it’s a good film. Not as good as it could have been, not as good as the book, and not as good as some people say, but good enough that I’ll be seeing it again in a few months.