Skip to main content

How’s it going, Frood dude?

Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure
(1989)

The news that Keanu Reeves and Alex Winter are still considering a third outing for Bill and Ted, the loveable fools who somehow manage to bring about a 27th century utopia of peace and serenity (apart from the music bit) through their band Wyld Stallions, hasn’t been met with the usual declamations that they’re bound to ruin it. That’s understandable, as they have a sequel under their belts that managed to improve on the clever-stupid original. There’s also a sense that, for all the easy catchphrases (“Party On!”, “Excellent!”) their adventures and journeys haven’t been consigned to the flash-in-the-pan dustbin the way, say, Wayne’s World has. In its own way, the cheerful abandon of these goofs remains fresh, and there’s potential in the idea that age hasn’t brought wisdom.


Added to that, the first sequel managed to take a commendably out there detour. Originally titled Bill & Ted Go to Hell, it isn’t so surprising the fear of remonstrations from religious groups saw it changed to Bogus Journey. The joyful irreverence of their afterlife adventure demands something just as original for the trilogy-capper. Last that was heard, the script was being tinkered with by the leads. Significantly, the penmen of the first two, Chris Matheson (son of Richard, no less) and Ed Solomon, are reportedly on board. I recall the screenwriters making sufficient impression with their first two movies that I actively went out and rented Mom and Dad Save the World. I didn’t really bother after that. Matheson’s output has been indifferent since. Solomon has been more prolific, with credits including Men in Black (you can see the DNA there) and Charlie’s Angels. Less joyously, he was also involved with Super Mario Bros, What Planet Are You From? (his history with Garry Shandling extending back to the It’s Garry Shandling’s Show) and Now You See Me (I know, it has its fans, but I’m not among them). Whether their contribution will rank with their formative hits remains to be seen, but hopefully Dean Parisot will still be in the director’s chair if and when it sees the light of day (as the Galaxy Quest guy, he seems ideal).


If the stars and writers have remained the same, the directors have not (there’s also no chance George Carlin will make it a hat trick as erstwhile mentor Rufus). Peter Hewitt, who brought a winningly cartoonish style to the sequel, has since been mired in mostly half-arsed family movies. Stephen Herek counts as one of the ‘90s most reliable journeyman directors. With the kind of (lack of) style that wouldn’t look out of place in a TV movie, he first got notices with Gremlins knock-off Critters and went on to land a series of hits including the live action 101 Dalmations, the first in the even-one-is-one-too-many The Mighty Ducks series. Only Bill & Ted follow up Don’t Tell Mom the Babysitter’s Dead had any of the anarchy of that movie. Credit where it’s due, though, what Herek lacks in visual acumen he makes up for in energy. It just hasn’t been enough to sustain him since the ‘00s and beyond. When Excellent Adventure is at is best, it’s down to the combination of that zest and Matheson and Solomon’s scattershot gags. At other times it reveals itself stretched thin, hoping to get by on merely being noisy and colourful.


I was among many who first assumed the screenwriters had essentially ripped off Doctor Who with a slacker twist. Not for the time travel so much as for the telephone box. Whether that occurred to them when they re-envisioned the initial Chevrolet van (too similar to have a time travelling vehicle after Back to the Future) I don’t know, but there’s reason enough not to have paid very much attention to possible transatlantic cries of foul (particularly since Doctor Who was on its last legs at the time). And besides, nothing about the original feels derivative. If anything, it has been hugely influential. If not for Bill & Ted, would we have seen Dude Where’s My Car? (another quite clever movie hiding behind dumb protagonists) or Harold & Kumar? As for the final reel’s non-sequiturs of time travel logic (having to remember to come back later to set up useful props having just though of them in the moment, so they miraculously appear), nu-Who showrunner Steven Moffat appears to have based his entire woeful schtick on such not-really-very-clever plot malarkey (its one thing to take the piss out of time travel logic in an outright comedy, another to set your boat alight while you are still sailing it).


A huge part of Bill and Ted’s appeal is that they’re so guilelessly good-natured. Reeves and Winter’s casting altered the original DNA of the script, since the characters were envisaged younger and more hopelessly nerdy (mentor Rufus was conceived as in his late 20s at this point). They bring them same wide-eyed , open-mouthed, affability to all their encounters, and we as viewers are let in on the joke; their excellent adventure is fastened by the slenderest of dramatic hooks (“Gentlemen, I’m here to help you with your history report”) and the added bonus of that old standby; Ted (Reeves) will be sent by his dad to military school (which would be amusing enough to see in itself) when he flunks.


Their stupidity over basic history possesses a moronic genius, part of which is down to their sure grip on stupid-clever language; it’s a mixture of big, multi-consonant, words and dumb ones, often anchored by a mannered mode of semi-Shakespearean, by way of San Dimas, vocabulary (“Strange things are afoot”, “We are in danger of flunking most heinously tomorrow, dude”). Their ignorance of history is boundless (it has to be, to service the plot), including the understanding that Caesar is “a salad dressing dude” and Napoleon is “a short, dead dude”. Albeit, they know Joan of Arc is not Noah’s wife and Marco Polo is “not just a water sport”.


There’s a certain flourish to the duo’s background as well. Bill’s bookish dad has somehow landed a gorgeous stepmom (Missy, Amy Stock-Poynton), only a few years older than them (“Your stepmom’s cute!”) leading to the rather icky moment where Mr Preston (J Patrick McNamara) decides to use Bill’s bed for some carnal business (“Now your dad is going for it in your own room!”). Captain Logan (Hal Landon Jr.) is particularly good value as a hard-ass police officer, although Landon’s crowning moment comes when he is possessed in Bogus Journey. I suspect the “Deputy Van Halen” scene was inspired by Cameron’s impression of Sloane’s dad in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.


Herek’s rendition of history comes via studio backlots, so there is much expense spared. The race through history, taking on board multiple luminaries, could be seen as leaveing one wanting more (a good thing) or not making the most of the premise’s potential. Certainly, the extended interlude in the 15th century is the weakest. It spurns any historical dudes but provides Bill and Ted’s obligatory love interests (“Those are historical babes!”). One of whom, Kimberely Kates, has clearly gone on to spend an inappropriate amount of time with the Surgeon General of Beverly Hills. Still, there’s a still-funny Iron Maiden gag (you can’t go wrong there, really).


Some of the historical figures are more successful than others. Terry Camilleri knocks it out of the park as Napoleon, which is saying something since there have been plenty of comic riffs undermining the character over the years (Love and Death, Time Bandits). He’s given the longest sojourn in 1988 and, if some of his scenes (the bowling alley, the water park) aren’t as amusing as others (“Eat the pig!”) he commendably never breaks character (“Do you realise you stranded one of Europe’s greatest leaders in San Dimas?”).


The accompanying score from David Newman includes moments of excellence and others of high irritation. Its biggest problem is that it permeates the entire movie, rather than being used to sparing effect. I love some of Newman’s compositions (Heathers is an absolute classic) but this one doesn’t know when to stop; Herek unfortunately seems to think sped-up motion and fast cutting to cheesy synths and guitar are comedy heaven, and they aren’t (its not so much this aspect has aged badly; it was as cheesy as gorgonzola even then).  Additionally, the soft rock nobody bands who populate the remainder of the soundtrack are universally awful. Which may be a nod to Bill & Ted’s Terrible Music, but it wears thin on the ears very quickly.


So; Billy the Kid (Dan Shor) is likeably uncrazy. So-crates (Tony Steedman) is amusing unponderous (“Philosophise with him!”) and there are some nice plays on insightful pronouncements (“The only true wisdom consists of knowing that you know nothing… That’s us, dude!”). Sigmund Frood (“How’s it going, Frood dude?”) is envisaged as a weiner-holding loser with the ladies, and is granted a nice moment at the police station (“Why do you claim you are Sigmund Freud?”, “Why do you claim I am not Sigmund Freud?”) but Rod Loomis doesn’t quite give him enough attitude. Regularly cast heavy Al Leong is a mostly silent Genghis Khan whose best moment is drinking out of the toilet, while Robert V. Barron aces Abraham Lincoln (even more affable than Daniel Day Lewis, and adept at intoning Valley speak in classic Lincoln mode). “Dave” Beethoven’s (Clifford David) discovery of the electric keyboard is amusing up to a point. Then there’s The Go-Gos’ Jane Wiedlin, who makes for an utterly adorable Joan of Arc (“Miss of Arc”).


Part of the problem during the last third is the assumption that dropping these characters in the mall is sufficiently amusing in and of itself. Joan does a workout routine, Dave plays keyboards; it reaches the point where you wouldn’t be surprised to see Rodney Dangerfield show up. The history talk is likewise quite laurel-resting, but is fortunately interspersed with a few gems; Frood analyses Ted, while Bill demurs (“No, I’ve just got a minor Oedipal Complex”) and there’s a lovely summary of So-crates’ influence (“And like Ozzy Osbourne, was repeatedly accused of corruption of the young”).


As for their (and our) most excellent future, well it’s little wonder Joss Ackland was seen to find it absolutely sickening in the follow-up (perhaps this was partially Solomon and Matheson’s own disposition). Even then, it yields a decent line or two (“We’d take you with us, but it’s a history report, not a future report”). And any future that produces a futuristic George Carlin must have something going for it.


Excellent Adventure was a surprise success, a modest hit for a film on an even more modest budget, back when nothing was expected box office-wise from movies released in February. It took more than a year for it to see the light of day in the UK, as much a reflection of the generally slack approach to non-US locales back then as the lack of faith that it would (time) travel.


Perhaps the most complimentary thing I can say about Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure is that it’s hardly aged at all (and despite the rumours that he is eternally young, Keanu is noticeably baby-faced here). It’s pretty much exactly as I remembered, hugely winning but a little too undisciplined to cross the threshold into classic territory. It’s in such a rush to get where it’s going it doesn’t always make the most of the fish-out-of-water gags lining up for attention. But then, I do think Bogus Journey has the considerable edge. As Rufus says, “They do get better”. Hopefully Number Three will be better still.


***1/2


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why would I turn into a filing cabinet?

Captain Marvel (2019)
(SPOILERS) All superhero movies are formulaic to a greater or lesser degree. Mostly greater. The key to an actually great one – or just a pretty good one – is making that a virtue, rather than something you’re conscious of limiting the whole exercise. The irony of the last two stand-alone MCU pictures is that, while attempting to bring somewhat down-the-line progressive cachet to the series, they’ve delivered rather pedestrian results. Of course, that didn’t dim Black Panther’s cultural cachet (and what do I know, swathes of people also profess to loving it), and Captain Marvel has hit half a billion in its first few days – it seems that, unless you’re poor unloved Ant-Man, an easy $1bn is the new $700m for the MCU – but neither’s protagonist really made that all-important iconic impact.

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Trouble’s part of the circus. They said Barnum was in trouble when he lost Tom Thumb.

The Greatest Show on Earth (1952)
(SPOILERS) Anyone of a mind that it’s a recent development for the Oscars to cynically crown underserving recipients should take a good look at this Best Picture winner from the 25thAcademy Awards. In this case, it’s generally reckoned that the Academy felt it was about time to honour Hollywood behemoth Cecil B DeMille, by that point into his seventies and unlikely to be jostling for garlands much longer, before it was too late. Of course, he then only went and made a bona fide best picture contender, The Ten Commandments, and only then pegged it. Because no, The Greatest Show on Earth really isn’t very good.

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

What lit the fire that set off our Mr Reaper?

Death Wish (2018)
(SPOILERS) I haven’t seen the original Death Wish, the odd clip aside, and I don’t especially plan to remedy that, owing to an aversion to Charles Bronson when he isn’t in Once Upon a Time in the West and an aversion to Michael Winner when he wasn’t making ‘60s comedies or Peter Ustinov Hercule Poirots. I also have an aversion to Eli Roth, though (this is the first of his oeuvre I’ve seen, again the odd clip aside, as I have a general distaste for his oeuvre), and mildly to Bruce when he’s on autopilot (most of the last twenty years), so really, I probably shouldn’t have checked this one out. It was duly slated as a fascistic, right-wing rallying cry, even though the same slaters consider such behaviour mostly okay if the protagonist is super-powered and wearing a mask when taking justice into his (or her) own hands, but the truth is this remake is a quite serviceable, occasionally amusing little revenger, one that even has sufficient courage in its skewed convictions …

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

Monster? We’re British, you know.

Horror Express (1972)
(SPOILERS) This berserk Spanish/British horror boasts Hammer titans Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing (both as good guys!) to its name, and cloaked in period trappings (it’s set in 1906), suggests a fairly standard supernatural horror, one with crazy priests and satanic beasts. But, with an alien life form aboard the Trans-Siberian Express bound for Moscow, Horror Express finishes up more akin to The Cassandra Crossing meets The Thing.

Countess Petrovski: The czar will hear of this. I’ll have you sent to Siberia. Captain Kazan: I am in Siberia!
Christopher Lee’s Alexander Saxton, anthropologist and professor of the Royal Geological Society, has retrieved a frozen corpse from Manchuria. Believing it might be the Missing Link he crates it up to transport home via the titular train. Other passengers include his colleague and rival Dr Wells (Cushing), an international spy, and an antic monk called Father Pujardov (Alberto de Mendoza, strikingly lunatic), who for some rea…

Mountains are old, but they're still green.

Roma (2018)
(SPOILERS) Roma is a critics' darling and a shoe-in for Best Foreign Film Oscar, with the potential to take the big prize to boot, but it left me profoundly indifferent, its elusive majesty remaining determinedly out of reach. Perhaps that's down to generally spurning autobiographical nostalgia fests – complete with 65mm widescreen black and white, so it's quite clear to viewers that the director’s childhood reverie equates to the classics of old – or maybe the elliptical characterisation just didn't grab me, but Alfonso Cuarón's latest amounts to little more than a sliver of substance beneath all that style.

You had to grab every single dollar you could get your hands on, didn't you?

Triple Frontier (2019)
(SPOILERS) Triple Frontier must have seemed like a no-brainer for Netflix, even by their standards of indiscriminately greenlighting projects whenever anyone who can’t get a job at a proper studio asks. It had, after all, been a hot property – nearly a decade ago now – with Kathryn Bigelow attached as director (she retains a producing credit) and subsequently JC Chandor, who has seen it through to completion. Netflix may not have attracted quite the same level of prospective stars – Johnny Depp, Tom Hanks, Will Smith, Tom Hardy and Channing Tatum were all involved at various points – but as ever, they haven’t stinted on the production. To what end, though? Well, Bigelow’s involvement is a reliable indicator; this is a movie about very male men doing very masculine things and suffering stoically for it.