Skip to main content

No one said survival was fun.

The Croods
(2013)

DreamWorks’ increasingly wonky animations, in terms of both quality and box office, are getting so that even Jeffrey Katzenberg has to admit they’re a bit shonky. Still, he’s able to put on a brace face as the studio looks likely to get a major shot in the arm with the release of How to Train Your Dragon 2 (we’re talking Despicable Me 2 and Shrek 2 gains on a first outing here). But how long they can sustain themselves with a reliance on sequels for coffers nourishment is debatable. If Turbo screwed the pooch then The Croods did surprisingly decent business, making the most of an uncrowded March 2013 release date. Its success does rather make the case of undiscerning adults eager to take their kids to see something, anything, just to keep them quiet for 90 minutes, since the movie is a desperately middling affair; something of an Ice Age clone (a trek to safety as the environment changes) but with humans (well, Homo Neanderthalensis and a Cro-Magnon). And replete with every join-the-dots element the frankly lazy studio can muster. And a really crappy title. If the titular family had been farting, belching and making vile gestures throughout the movie, there might have been a decent pun in there.


The “Never not be afraid” starting point isn’t an okayish one; a family holed up in their cave save for occasional excursions to get hold of a bite to eat. It would have been a whole lot better if it had developed an even slightly subversive theme, though. Emma Stone as the chunky but not especially beetle-browed Eep is your standard issue rebellious teenager, and Nicolas Cage is the typically over-protective but well-meaning dad (in this case not so bright either). Both make an impression, performance-wise, but Catherine Keener as wife Ugga barely gets a look in. There’s a Les Dawson-esque running gag involving Grug’s wish for his mother-in-law to expire (Cloris Leachman as Gran) that kind of works because it’s so retro (definitely one for the parents; grandparents, even). When Guy arrives, Ryan Reynolds voicing a noticeably smarter semi-alpha male (albeit afraid of the dark), Eep is smitten and Grug threatened. So you can see the trajectory from there; Grug’s emotional journey etc. towards acceptance and proving his patriarchal beneficence.


Of the two directors, the influence of Space Chimps’ (doh!) Kirk De Micco is felt more strongly than How to Train Your Dragon’s Chris Sanders. The picture has a varied history, starting out with an attempt by DeMicco and John Cleese  (there’s nothing discernably Cleesey here, in his first movie writing credit since Fierce Creatures; those post-divorce bills must still be biting hard) to adapt The Twits which then segued into a caveman story Sanders picked up. Then DeMicco joined again as co-director. All of which is more interesting than the movie itself. Lacking a sufficiently interesting cast of characters, and with bland design work (airbrushed ape men is about the size of it; too audience-friendly to go the full ugly, the family ends up with sporting the alarming combination of thickset and large-eyed features), it’s left to the whacked out incidental pleasures to sporadically raise a smile.


If nothing else, DreamWorks can be relied on to provide, amongst the carefully rehashed plot beats, some genuinely mirthful detours. If Guy’s pet sloth Belt is your over-familiar kooky weirdo animal sidekick, the scene in which the Croods first encounter fire (“Try hiding from it in the tall grass”) is satisfyingly undiluted (one have expected a careful instruction that the little ones not play with the stuff). The Stone Age-modern inventions are too sub-Flintstones clever-cute, in that “everything’s one long sugar rush pop video action montage” way these animations have a habit of becoming, but there’s some inspired lunacy involving puppet birds and (later) a puppet sabre tooth tiger that wouldn’t look so out of place in a Looney Tunes.


Those moments of inventiveness are a reminder of the better moments in the Madagascar trilogy, which at least had memorably distinctive lead characters when all fell down in the plot department. The Croods has no such luck, yet the picture has clearly made enough to have a sequel scheduled. One can expect second tier business along the lines of Fox’s Rio, as this is far behind the quality of How to Train Your Dragon, or even the “it says it right there in the title” Kung Fu Panda (how they can get a third of those made, when the second was virtually indistinguishable from the first, is beyond me). It’s a shame the studio’s ideas have become so tepid, and each underperformer makes them even less adventurous (Mr. Peabody & Sherman had an arresting idea and origins, but fed through the studio blender comes out looking much the same as anything else; Rise of the Guardians looked good as a premise but suffered from utterly banal plotting). Alternating (semi-) original fare with sequels is probably a (relatively) wise financial move – even Pixar has lost it’s creative backbone, so one can hardly have a go at their always less artistic rival – but it’s four years since DreamWorks last made a great movie. And, apart from a sequel to that movie, they don’t look like they’re going to buck their self-imposed trend any time soon.


**1/2

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mondo bizarro. No offence man, but you’re in way over your head.

The X-Files 8.7: Via Negativa I wasn’t as down on the last couple of seasons of The X-Files as most seemed to be. For me, the mythology arc walked off a cliff somewhere around the first movie, with only the occasional glimmer of something worthwhile after that. So the fact that the show was tripping over itself with super soldiers and Mulder’s abduction/his and Scully’s baby (although we all now know it wasn’t, sheesh ), anything to stretch itself beyond breaking point in the vain hope viewers would carry on dangling, didn’t really make much odds. Of course, it finally snapped with the wretched main arc when the show returned, although the writing was truly on the wall with Season 9 finale The Truth . For the most part, though, I found 8 and 9 more watchable than, say 5 or 7. They came up with their fair share of engaging standalones, one of which I remembered to be Via Negativa .

Isn’t it true, it’s easier to be a holy man on the top of a mountain?

The Razor’s Edge (1984) (SPOILERS) I’d hadn’t so much a hankering as an idle interest in finally getting round to seeing Bill Murray’s passion project. Partly because it seemed like such an odd fit. And partly because passion isn’t something you tend to associate with any Murray movie project, involving as it usually does laidback deadpan. Murray, at nigh-on peak fame – only cemented by the movie he agreed to make to make this movie – embarks on a serious-acting-chops dramatic project, an adaptation of W Somerset Maugham’s story of one man’s journey of spiritual self-discovery. It should at least be interesting, shouldn’t it? A real curio? Alas, not. The Razor’s Edge is desperately turgid.

You have done well to keep so much hair, when so many’s after it.

Jeremiah Johnson (1972) (SPOILERS) Hitherto, I was most familiar with Jeremiah Johnson in the form of a popular animated gif of beardy Robert Redford smiling and nodding in slow zoom close up (a moment that is every bit as cheesy in the film as it is in the gif). For whatever reason, I hadn’t mustered the enthusiasm to check out the 1970s’ The Revenant until now (well, beard-wise, at any rate). It’s easy to distinguish the different personalities at work in the movie. The John Milius one – the (mythic) man against the mythic landscape; the likeably accentuated, semi-poetic dialogue – versus the more naturalistic approach favoured by director Sydney Pollack and star Redford. The fusion of the two makes for a very watchable, if undeniably languorous picture. It was evidently an influence on Dances with Wolves in some respects, although that Best Picture Oscar winner is at greater pains to summon a more sensitive portrayal of Native Americans (and thus, perversely, at times a more patr

Schnell, you stinkers! Come on, raus!

Private’s Progress (1956) (SPOILERS) Truth be told, there’s good reason sequel I’m Alright Jack reaps the raves – it is, after all, razor sharp and entirely focussed in its satire – but Private’s Progress is no slouch either. In some respects, it makes for an easy bedfellow with such wartime larks as Norman Wisdom’s The Square Peg (one of the slapstick funny man’s better vehicles). But it’s also, typically of the Boulting Brothers’ unsentimental disposition, utterly remorseless in rebuffing any notions of romantic wartime heroism, nobility and fighting the good fight. Everyone in the British Army is entirely cynical, or terrified, or an idiot.

My Doggett would have called that crazy.

The X-Files 9.4: 4-D I get the impression no one much liked Agent Monica Reyes (Annabeth Gish), but I felt, for all the sub-Counsellor Troi, empath twiddling that dogged her characterisation, she was a mostly positive addition to the series’ last two years (of its main run). Undoubtedly, pairing her with Doggett, in anticipation of Gillian Anderson exiting just as David Duchovny had – you rewatch these seasons and you wonder where her head was at in hanging on – made for aggressively facile gender-swapped conflict positions on any given assignment. And generally, I’d have been more interested in seeing how two individuals sympathetic to the cause – her and Mulder – might have got on. Nevertheless, in an episode like 4-D you get her character, and Doggett’s, at probably their best mutual showing.

It’s not as if she were a… maniac, a raving thing.

Psycho (1960) (SPOILERS) One of cinema’s most feted and most studied texts, and for good reason. Even if the worthier and more literate psycho movie of that year is Michael Powell’s Peeping Tom . One effectively ended a prolific director’s career and the other made its maker more in demand than ever, even if he too would discover he had peaked with his populist fear flick. Pretty much all the criticism and praise of Psycho is entirely valid. It remains a marvellously effective low-budget shocker, one peppered with superb performances and masterful staging. It’s also fairly rudimentary in tone, character and psychology. But those negative elements remain irrelevant to its overall power.

You’re a disgrace, sir... Weren’t you at Harrow?

Our Man in Marrakesh aka Bang! Bang! You’re Dead (1966) (SPOILERS) I hadn’t seen this one in more than three decades, and I had in mind that it was a decent spy spoof, well populated with a selection of stalwart British character actors in supporting roles. Well, I had the last bit right. I wasn’t aware this came from the stable of producer Harry Alan Towers, less still of his pedigree, or lack thereof, as a sort of British Roger Corman (he tried his hand at Star Wars with The Shape of Things to Come and Conan the Barbarian with Gor , for example). More legitimately, if you wish to call it that, he was responsible for the Christopher Lee Fu Manchu flicks. Our Man in Marrakesh – riffing overtly on Graham Greene’s Our Man in Havana in title – seems to have in mind the then popular spy genre and its burgeoning spoofs, but it’s unsure which it is; too lightweight to work as a thriller and too light on laughs to elicit a chuckle.

I tell you, it saw me! The hanged man’s asphyx saw me!

The Asphyx (1972) (SPOILERS) There was such a welter of British horror from the mid 60s to mid 70s, even leaving aside the Hammers and Amicuses, that it’s easy to lose track of them in the shuffle. This one, the sole directorial effort of Peter Newbrook (a cameraman for David Lean, then a cinematographer), has a strong premise and a decent cast, but it stumbles somewhat when it comes to taking that premise any place interesting. On the plus side, it largely eschews the grue. On the minus, directing clearly wasn’t Newbrook’s forte, and even aided by industry stalwart cinematographer Freddie Young (also a go-to for Lean), The Aspyhx is stylistically rather flat.

The best thing in the world for the inside of a man or a woman is the outside of a horse.

Marnie (1964) (SPOILERS) Hitch in a creative ditch. If you’ve read my Vertigo review, you’ll know I admired rather than really liked the picture many fete as his greatest work. Marnie is, in many ways, a redux, in the way De Palma kept repeating himself in the early 80s only significantly less delirious and… well, compelling. While Marnie succeeds in commanding the attention fitfully, it’s usually for the wrong reasons. And Hitch, digging his heels in as he strives to fashion a star against public disinterest – he failed to persuade Grace Kelly out of retirement for Marnie Rutland – comes entirely adrift with his leads.

You know what I sometimes wish? I sometimes wish I were ordinary like you. Ordinary and dead like all the others.

Séance on a Wet Afternoon (1964) (SPOILERS) Bryan Forbes’ adaptation of Mark McShane’s 1961’s novel has been much acclaimed. It boasts a distinctive storyline and effective performances from its leads, accompanied by effective black-and-white cinematography from Gerry Turpin and a suitably atmospheric score from John Barry. I’m not sure Forbes makes the most of the material, however, as he underlines Séance on a Wet Afternoon ’s inherently theatrical qualities at the expense of its filmic potential.