Skip to main content

Okay, just jump right into my nightmare, the water is warm.

Jerry Maguire 
(1996)

(SPOILERS) I didn’t much like Jerry Maguire at the time, which I suspect is intrinsically linked to the fact that I didn’t much like Tom Cruise at the time. I’m still not really a massive fan of either, but the latter at least made an effort to rein in his most irksome traits subsequently. Jerry Maguire, however, finds him drawing on the same “bag of tricks” that mystifyingly transfixed his fan base a decade before in Top Gun. Bonnie Hunt suggested the toughest part of the role was “playing a character that doesn’t like Tom Cruise”. I wouldn’t have had that problem. I do not like Tom and Jerry.

Which is evidently not the prescribed response and not the one presumably millions had, responding to – in the manner of swooning Renée Zellweger’s “You had me at hello” – Jerry’s charms. Obviously, Jerry’s supposed to be a difficult character. Cameron Crowe has honed his screenplay, for better or worse, into a wealth of calculated manipulations, and he drags Jerry along a growth arc that duly detonates on the desired spots. What could be better than going from nothing to something? Why, only going from something to nothing and back to something, that’s what.

So Jerry, following his epiphany that he is a cocksure user – “Who had I become? Just another shark in a suit?” – smarming his way through his career at the expense of his clients’ mental and physical health – completely unlike Tom the star – writes a memo, I mean mission statement, in favour of a more caring, sharing sports agency. One that elicits a round of applause, shortly followed by the sack. Thus Jerry, down at heel, becomes a cocksure user of exactly one client, Cuba Gooding Jr’s Rod Tidwell. But never fear, he is devotedly supported by Dorothy Boyd (Zellweger), since she’s smitten with his memo and his golden grin. How could she not be?

Being that I find Cruise, as I noted, insufferable here, when I’m presuming you’re supposed to sympathise or at least empathise with Jerry – only the dependable Jay Mohr can out-ooze the Cruise – it’s difficult to climb on board with his emotional evolution. Which anyway is rather erratic. Crowe writes Dorothy as an emotionally aware doormat who makes continued excuses for Jerry being a dick (she shouldn’t have taken advantage of him when he was vulnerable and forced him into a situation where he felt he needed to do the right thing and marry her. What?) The idea of a man marrying a woman for the kid is an unusual one in movies, and the stuff more generally of suspicion that warming cockles. But Crowe pulls that off, helped in no small part by Cruise and Jonathan Lipnicki (as pint-sized Ray) getting on like a house on fire (even Cruise can’t continue to act the Cruise when he’s opposite a disarming kid).

And the relationship with Rod works for the most part too, since both Jerry and Rod have their growing to do, both are rather over the top and self-regarding, and the bromance crests amusingly (“Why don’t we have that kind of relationship?”). It helps that Gooding Jr takes a gift of a part and sprints with it, making his Oscar entirely understandable. The drop off in decent roles was alarming, but not that uncommon in BSA winners (particularly the actresses). Now, however, he’s likely to be remembered not only for “Show me the money” but also the shower of #MeToo allegations piling up. On Jerry’s side of the equation, you have to wonder, if he really cared, would he still be an agent in football?

The sports agent side sort of writes itself and gives a slew of ready-purposed types who look so much worse than Jerry, starting with Beau Bridges and his promise (“And its stronger than oak”). On the relationship side, Crowe throws in some unconvincing slapstick (Kelly Preston as Jerry’s ex knocks him on his ass). There’s a divorce group meeting in Dorothy and her sister Laurel’s (Bonnie Hunt) house that suggests Crowe has been taking notes from When Harry Met Sally’s “Greek chorus” commentary.

Jerry’s marriage proposal admittedly sends the picture on a different-to-usual route (albeit, in the dramatic-romantic conflict realm, union-then-parting-the-reunion is part of the basic deal), but the key to this is believing in Jerry’s realisation that he does love Dorothy, and I don’t believe it. I believe Zellweger believes Dorothy believes it, and she does a commendable and unenviable job selling the movie’s romantic sincerity when her co-star is screaming “Fake!” (I’ve never been a great Renée fan either, but rewatching this, I feel I may have misjudged her, if only on this occasion).

Tom, though, is about as sincere as his couchburst almost a decade later. Swallowing the movie’s message isn’t helped any by Crowe either, who loves laying it on with a trowel. He’ll underline in indelible marker every emotional cue (see how unhappy Jerry is in the wedding video!) And he has a music track for every occasion, often ones designed to overwhelm the picture, rather than simply complete it. He nurses an essentially sunny disposish, somewhere between a John Hughes for adults and a Joss Whedon for musos, rather than movie heads. He creates fantasy worlds, which is fine (or not so much, judging by the receptions of Elizabethtown and Aloha), but that means the casting has to click or the sugary dream in a cloud of choking aspartame.

Which isn’t to say a less aspirational ride would have been the way to go. I don’t think Janeane Garofalo would have worked – too pithy – and definitely not Edward Burns – too lacking in an iota of charisma – but Jerry tests your Tom tolerance levels to the max. He’s basically Maverick redux.

Jerry Maguire’s deep vein of horrific sentiment/melodrama was obviously a rich seam, since Titanic surfaced the following year and did win the Oscar. If the picture’s presence in the race was completely out of place, it’s also merely part of the Academy’s history of recognising crowd pleasers to boost the ratings, something that has largely been forgotten in recent years. Regina King has obviously moved on some since 1996, now getting to hold forth wokely at the big event. Perhaps the most surprising thing here is that Janus Kamiński’s cinematography is mostly… fine? There are a couple of very blue scenes, but you might mistakenly conclude he was just a normal DP, not someone who’d lead the charge in the desecration of the visual arts over the next quarter of a century.

Jerry Maguire doesn’t do much for me, then. It certainly doesn’t complete me. It still visibly boasts those catchy lines and slickly sculpted highs and lows, but to repeat my mantra: to like Jerry Maguire you really have to like Tom Cruise.


Popular posts from this blog

Abandon selective targeting. Shoot everything.

28 Weeks Later (2007) (SPOILERS) The first five minutes of 28 Weeks Later are far and away the best part of this sequel, offering in quick succession a devastating moral quandary and a waking nightmare, immortalised on the screen. After that, while significantly more polished, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo reveals his concept to be altogether inferior to Danny Boyle and Alex Garland’s, falling back on the crutches of gore, nihilism, and disengaging and limiting shifts of focus between characters in whom one has little investment in the first place.

The Bible never said anything about amphetamines.

The Color of Money (1986) (SPOILERS) I tend to think it’s evident when Scorsese isn’t truly exercised by material. He can still invest every ounce of the technical acumen at his fingertips, and the results can dazzle on that level, but you don’t really feel the filmmaker in the film. Which, for one of his pictures to truly carry a wallop, you need to do. We’ve seen quite a few in such deficit in recent years, most often teaming with Leo. The Color of Money , however, is the first where it was out-and-out evident the subject matter wasn’t Marty’s bag. He needed it, desperately, to come off, but in the manner a tradesman who wants to keep getting jobs. This sequel to The Hustler doesn’t linger in the mind, however good it may be, moment by moment.

I said I had no family. I didn’t say I had an empty apartment.

The Apartment (1960) (SPOILERS) Billy Wilder’s romcom delivered the genre that rare Best Picture Oscar winner. Albeit, The Apartment amounts to a rather grim (now) PG-rated scenario, one rife with adultery, attempted suicide, prostitution of the soul and subjective thereof of the body. And yet, it’s also, finally, rather sweet, so salving the darker passages and evidencing the director’s expertly judged balancing act. Time Out ’s Tom Milne suggested the ending was a cop out (“ boy forgives girl and all’s well ”). But really, what other ending did the audience or central characters deserve?

If this were a hoax, would we have six dead men up on that mountain?

The X-Files 4.24: Gethsemane   Season Four is undoubtedly the point at which the duff arc episodes begin to amass, encroaching upon the decent ones for dominance. Fortunately, however, the season finale is a considerable improvement’s on Three’s, even if it’s a long way from the cliffhanger high of 2.25: Anasazi .

Your desecration of reality will not go unpunished.

2021-22 Best-of, Worst-of and Everything Else Besides The movies might be the most visible example of attempts to cling onto cultural remnants as the previous societal template clatters down the drain. It takes something people really want – unlike a Bond movie where he kicks the can – to suggest the model of yesteryear, one where a billion-dollar grosser was like sneezing. You can argue Spider-Man: No Way Home is replete with agendas of one sort or another, and that’s undoubtedly the case (that’s Hollywood), but crowding out any such extraneous elements (and they often are) is simply a consummate crowd-pleaser that taps into tangible nostalgia through its multiverse take. Of course, nostalgia for a mere seven years ago, for something you didn’t like anyway, is a symptom of how fraught these times have become.

You have a very angry family, sir.

Eternals (2021) (SPOILERS) It would be overstating the case to suggest Eternals is a pleasant surprise, but given the adverse harbingers surrounding it, it’s a much more serviceable – if bloated – and thematically intriguing picture than I’d expected. The signature motifs of director and honestly-not-billionaire’s-progeny Chloé Zhao are present, mostly amounting to attempts at Malick-lite gauzy natural light and naturalism at odds with the rigidly unnatural material. There’s woke to spare too, since this is something of a Kevin Feige Phase Four flagship, one that rather floundered, showcasing his designs for a nu-MCU. Nevertheless, Eternals manages to maintain interest despite some very variable performances, effects, and the usual retreat into standard tropes, come the final big showdown.

Captain, he who walks in fire will burn his feet.

The Golden Voyage of Sinbad (1973) (SPOILERS) Ray Harryhausen returns to the kind of unadulterated fantasy material that made Jason and the Argonauts such a success – swords & stop motion, if you like. In between, there were a couple of less successful efforts, HG Wells adaptation First Men in the Moon and The Valley of the Gwangi (which I considered the best thing ever as a kid: dinosaur walks into a cowboy movie). Harryhausen’s special-effects supremacy – in a for-hire capacity – had also been consummately eclipsed by Raquel Welch’s fur bikini in One Million Years B.C . The Golden Voyage of Sinbad follows the expected Dynamation template – blank-slate hero, memorable creatures, McGuffin quest – but in its considerable favour, it also boasts a villainous performance by nobody-at-the-time, on-the-cusp-of-greatness Tom Baker.

Doctors make the worst patients.

Coma (1978) (SPOILERS) Michael Crichton’s sophomore big-screen feature, and by some distance his best. Perhaps it’s simply that this a milieu known to him, or perhaps it’s that it’s very much aligned to the there-and-now and present, but Coma , despite the occasional lapse in this adaptation of colleague Robin Cook’s novel, is an effective, creepy, resonant thriller and then some. Crichton knows his subject, and it shows – the picture is confident and verisimilitudinous in a way none of his other directorial efforts are – and his low-key – some might say clinical – approach pays dividends. You might also call it prescient, but that would be to suggest its subject matter wasn’t immediately relevant then too.

I think it’s wonderful the way things are changing.

Driving Miss Daisy (1989) (SPOILERS) The meticulous slightness of Driving Miss Daisy is precisely the reason it proved so lauded, and also why it presented a prime Best Picture pick: a feel-good, social-conscience-led flick for audiences who might not normally spare your standard Hollywood dross a glance. One for those who appreciate the typical Judi Dench feature, basically. While I’m hesitant to get behind anything Spike Lee, as Hollywood’s self-appointed race-relations arbiter, spouts, this was a year when he actually did deliver the goods, a genuinely decent movie – definitely a rarity for Lee – addressing the issues head-on that Driving Miss Daisy approaches in softly-softly fashion, reversing gingerly towards with the brake lights on. That doesn’t necessarily mean Do the Right Thing ought to have won Best Picture (or even that it should have been nominated for the same), but it does go to emphasise the Oscars’ tendency towards the self-congratulatory rather than the provocat

You’re the pattern and the prototype for a whole new age of biological exploration.

The Fly II (1989) (SPOILERS) David Cronenberg was not, it seems, a fan of the sequel to his hit 1986 remake, and while it’s quite possible he was just being snobby about a movie that put genre staples above theme or innovation, he wasn’t alone. Fox had realised, post- Aliens , that SF properties were ripe for hasty follow ups, and indiscriminately mined a number of popular pictures to immediately diminishing returns during the period ( Cocoon , Predator ). Neither critics nor audiences were impressed. In the case of The Fly II , though, it would be unfair to label the movie as outright bad. It simply lacks that *idea* that would justify the cash-in.