Skip to main content

Calm down, Mr Brand. You’re a cat. It’s not the end of the world.

Nine Lives
(2016)

(SPOILERS) Something of a departure for Kevin Spacey, who after all, isn’t known for prowling the streets at night, on the lookout for frisky business. Nine Lives was roundly ripped to shreds by critics and viewers alike, which rather ignores its star’s Oscar-worthy performance. Spacey, rightly envious of Bill Murray’s astonishing achievement with two Garfield movies, decided he wanted some of that. It probably doesn’t need stressing that Nine Lives is not a good movie, but it isn’t quite the horrendous one it’s been made out as either; it’s simply lazy, which pretty much sums up Barry Sonnenfeld’s directorial career.


I wonder if Baz ever wishes he’d stuck to cinematography. He was, after all, pretty good at it (his Coen Brothers collaborations from Blood Simple to Miller’s Crossing being particularly emblematic). Since casting his net wider, however, he has evidenced zero appreciation for quality or consistency, from producing Space Chimps to directing the likes of Wild Wild West. There have been upticks; Get Shorty, the Men in Blacks showing a flair for the cartoonish that ought to have translated to this, his most recent movie, and dabbling in TV that sometimes pays dividends (Pushing Daisies, and the good notices for A Series of Unfortunate Events). But why would he want to immerse himself in waters that last elicited a trio of less-than-adored Look Who’s Talking movies?


In fairness, I don’t think there’s anything much wrong with this concept, and on paper, Spacey playing a dyspeptic cat sounds decent enough in terms of laughs potential (which is why I put it on my list of 20 to see last year, inadvisably, maybe even inexcusably, I know). But Sonnenfeld’s take appears to have been inspired by YouTube cat videos (as per the opening sequence) rather than MGM or Warner Bros cartoons, with a budget to match. He has an actual, ostensibly live-action cat made to perform, by the less-than-magic of CGI, various feats an actual, live-action cat couldn’t, but seems to be making a feature of the terrible effects from the first scene onwards, almost as if he’s proud of them (in said first scene, Spacey’s corporate titan Tom Brand dives out of a plane for kicks; it looks really bad, not funny bad). Brand’s a good-guy capitalist, a bit of a grouch whose only real failing is that he doesn’t spend enough time with his family, a mogul who’s opposed to privatising his firm. So basically, this guy doesn’t exist in reality.


Five credited writers have come up with nary a gag to rub between them, but the tried-and-tested plot outline, in which Mark Consuelos’ oozing villain attempts to wrest the company from Tom while he’s in a coma (and in a cat) is inoffensive and at least isn’t dull (for contrast on the latter, see The BFG). Jennifer Garner as the long-suffering wife only gets to be grateful she’s not her real hubby in terms of starring roles you really regret, but Cheryl Hines scores as the brittle ex, while the child actors (Malina Weissman and Talitha Bateman) provide decent showings.


This isn’t Christopher Walken’s finest hour, though. He usually brings something to any role, no matter how nondescript the surrounding movie, but his cat whisperer really is nondescript (and as has been pointed out, is pretty much the part he played in Click, to similarly forgettable results).


Spacey does acerbic with aplomb, even when he’s just picking up a cheque, so there are occasionally lines here that work (“Looks like a cat already ate this” he observes of his food), and I’ll admit to raising a smile as the feline dives off the office roof after his son during the climax (“Mr Fuzzypants?” asks the bewildered Robbie Amell). The problem is, no one seems to be enthused by what they’re doing. Even the cat sound effects are half-hearted (seemingly exactly the same sound dubbed onto any given comic moment). As The Secret Life of Pets and Cats and Dogs (or Barnaby and Me, or The Shaggy D.A.) have shown, this kind of thing has a ready audience if done well. Sonnenfeld just doesn’t seem to care. He even kills the cat. 


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion (1975) (SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

One final thing I have to do, and then I’ll be free of the past.

Vertigo (1958) (SPOILERS) I’ll readily admit my Hitchcock tastes broadly tend to reflect the “consensus”, but Vertigo is one where I break ranks. To a degree. Not that I think it’s in any way a bad film, but I respect it rather than truly rate it. Certainly, I can’t get on board with Sight & Sound enthroning it as the best film ever made (in its 2012’s critics poll). That said, from a technical point of view, it is probably Hitch’s peak moment. And in that regard, certainly counts as one of his few colour pictures that can be placed alongside his black and white ones. It’s also clearly a personal undertaking, a medley of his voyeuristic obsessions (based on D’entre les morts by Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac).

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman ( Straw Dogs , Logan’s Run ) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “ The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon ”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.