Skip to main content

Good heavens! I speak pig!

Doctor Dolittle
(1967)

(SPOILERS) If there’s an obvious and immediate contender for the crown of least justified Best Picture Oscar nominee, it’s surely Doctor Dolittle. Infamous for the campaigning this box office bomb received, leading to nine nominations and two wins, the ignominy is understandable and deserved, even if it’s simply a worst-case and highest-profile example of the kind of behaviour that’s par for the course in the Oscar business. As for the film itself? It isn’t terrible, but it’s so sedate as to be almost inert, a killer for a two-and-a-half-hour family musical.

There are all sorts of problems in that regard. Structurally, it’s a complete mess, introducing Dolittle efficiently enough via Matthew Mugg (Anthony Newley, in his first film role in four years; he’d soon follow it with the star hubris that was Gurney Slade writ large, Can Heironymous Merkin Ever Forget Mercy Humppe and Find True Happiness?) He brings obligatory sprog Tommy Stubbins (William Dix) to meet the good doctor and his menagerie. But then there’s a flashback in which Dolittle’s sister (Portia Nelson) has had it up to here with him, an interlude in which Dolittle takes a newly arrived Pushmi-pullyu to a circus run by Albert Blossom (Richard Attenborough), and a subsequent trial by General Bellowes (Peter Bull, cast to apoplectic type) for murdering a woman by throwing her in the sea (actually a seal disguised as woman in order to smuggle her out of the circus). Then, sentenced to the looney bin, Dolitte’s broken out, where the main quest can begin, to find the Great Pink Sea Snail.

If the early chapters are rather aimless, they do have incident on their side, along with the two best songs (I like Talk to the Animals, even if Harrison didn’t, although the gusto of Never Seen Anything Like It is probably more fun). Sir Dickie offers a spirited account of the latter, there’s the frankly deranged sequence in which Rex serenades a seal (When I look in your Eyes), which is certainly more potent than his push me, pull him not quite convincingly falling for Samantha Eggar as Emma Fairfax, the niece of Bellowes (the more extensive makings of a romance between them were cut). Of course, we’ve already witnessed Newley, who does an almost Dick van Dyke rendition of an Oirish accent, sleeping with a pig. Dolittle’s trial is also quite entertaining, particularly when he recounts, via Bellowes’ dog, the general’s dinner menu for the previous night.

But Leslie Briscusse, who would later adapt A Christmas Carol as Scrooge and pen tunes for Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory with Newley, comes unstuck with events on Sea-Star Island. Geoffrey Holder is good value as William Shakespeare the Tenth, but the progression of events is listless and paceless, and Richard Fleischer, evidently set on proving he could tackle any genre he was set loose upon (previous efforts included 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, The Vikings and Fantastic Voyage, and later ones 10 Rillington Place, Soylent Green and Red Sonja) is unable to inject much life into the proceedings.

Fox had been angling for a big musical, one that would sustain the legacy of The Sound of Music, but Doctor Doolittle was just the beginning of their woes in that genre (successive years would also see them coming a cropper with Hello, Dolly! and Star!) Their thinking in securing Harrison, not one to carry a tune, was sound to the extent that his spoken delivery had been a huge success in My Fair Lady, but he was initially considered too old (and if he was twenty years older than Hepburn, he was twice Eggar’s age). Then he dithered about doing it at all (such that Christopher Plummer was paid for a role he didn’t play).

And then there was the thorny issue of content comprising Hugh Lofting’s 1920 children’s story, some of which was considered racist (although, given reports of his on-set attitudes and insults, that would probably have suited “Tyrannosaurus” Rex just fine). The character of islander Bumpo (considered for Sammy Davis Jr and rejected by Sidney Poitier) was eventually cut completely and replaced with William Shakespeare.

In his The Making of Planet of the Apes, JW Rinzler records how the long-in-gestation Apes and its costs ended up looking like small potatoes compared to Arthur Jacobs’ other Fox production, Doctor Dolittle, “which was now spectacularly over budget, heading towards $18m – triple the budget of Apes, triple the headaches”. The combination of issues with locations (floods, Ranulph Fiennes, St Lucia islanders objecting to a giant snail), effects, animals and stars (Harrison being thoroughly objectionable) had resulted in massive overruns, and the enormous licensing campaign, in part a damage limitation against these debts, seemed like lunacy (to any manufacturers buying in) when tie-ins were ignored by an entirely unpersuaded public. On the one hand, it pointed the way to the likes of George Lucas and his jackpot from Star Wars deals. On the other, if this had been the template for making it work, blanket promotional campaigns would never have taken off.

So, with the picture being shunned by audiences and critics, there was only one course left open: to buyrespectability. In The Academy Awards – The Complete Unofficial History, Jim Piazza and Gail Kinn record how Fox “pulled out all the stops and hosted numerous free dinners to get its box office dud Dr. Doolittle on the list”. Anthony Holden dug further into this in The Oscars – The Secret History of the Academy Awards, noting Truman Capote’s outrage (In Cold Blood had been passed over, despite direction and writing nods): “It simply proves [the Academy Awards] is all politics and sentiment and nothing to do with merit”.

Holden relates that “Once it became clear that neither children nor parents rated the sight of Harrison singing tuneless songs to imaginary animals, the word came down that the publicity department were to pull out all the stops on the film’s behalf”. Indeed, the production’s spiralling costs were almost as damaging to Fox’s existence as Cleopatra half a decade earlier. Whoring for votes was nothing new then and will never be banished, but plying Academy members at screenings with champagne and cocktails and buffet dinners apparently reached new levels – the common “wining and dining” cited is a slight exaggeration – as documented by writer John Gregory Dunne, who was enabled to provide an account of the production from start to damning finish in his book The Studio. Per Holden, “So ruthless was the writer’s exposé of the cynical tricks their trade that some Hollywood publicists still measure their careers in terms of ‘Before Dunne’ and ‘After Dunne’”.

The success of Fox’s approach speaks for itself: nine nominations including Best Picture (also Art Direction, Cinematography, Film Editing, Original Music Score, Scoring of Music Adaptation or Treatment, and Sound) and winning two, Special Effects and Song (Talk to the Animals). Conspicuously absent in the major categories besides Picture (direction, acting, writing) Doctor Dolittle may have been, and a sour taste the whole endeavour may have left, but there’s no denying the film’s TV afterlife and beyond, with enough of it that wasappreciated for it to be adapted into a stage musical.

And Fox, radically reenvisaging the property, was also game to give it another go, this time to huge success with Eddie Murphy, spawning a less successful sequel (and direct-to-video spinoffs). The Murphy movies may not have been trying too hard, but they at least got to the kernel of the material’s appeal – the animals themselves (something this picture only intermittently remembers). Obvious perhaps, but Universal seems to have been scuppered by the same thinking as the original, that a prestige production was the way to go with Robert Downey Jr’s Dolittle (notably, he’s only five years younger than the “too-old” Harrison was), with stories of production nightmares percolating that may not quite compare with Fleischer’s film but are certainly in the ballpark of such profligacy. 


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

Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Do you know that the leading cause of death for beavers is falling trees?

The Interpreter (2005) Sydney Pollack’s final film returns to the conspiracy genre that served him well in both the 1970s ( Three Days of the Condor ) and the 1990s ( The Firm ). It also marks a return to Africa, but in a decidedly less romantic fashion than his 1985 Oscar winner. Unfortunately the result is a tepid, clichéd affair in which only the technical flourishes of its director have any merit. The film’s main claim to fame is that Universal received permission to film inside the United Nations headquarters. Accordingly, Pollack is predictably unquestioning in its admiration and respect for the organisation. It is no doubt also the reason that liberal crusader Sean Penn attached himself to what is otherwise a highly generic and non-Penn type of role. When it comes down to it, the argument rehearsed here of diplomacy over violent resolution is as banal as they come. That the UN is infallible moral arbiter of this process is never in any doubt. The cynicism