Post by Vits on Sept 1, 2019 10:22:00 GMT
BEDTIME STORY
4/10
BEDTIME STORY began as a high-brow comedy co-starring Marlon Brando as a smooth-talker that halfway through descended into a mess relying on childish and obvious gags that required Brando to be vaudevillianly loud. He wasn't bad at it or anything, but it made the movie feel uneven. DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS pointlessly tells the same story with some of the same lines and gags, but Steve Martin's performance (as the same character) is more consistent. He's over-the-top from beginning to end and he's good at it. Miles Goodman's music score doesn't fit at times, and Frank Oz's directing isn't anything special, but at least it's not flat like Ralph Levy's. The main difference in this remake is the last part. I predicted the 1st plot twist, because it involved a supporting character saying that one of the protagonists did something that wasn't shown on-screen. Of course that didn't happen. On the other hand, the 2nd twist was completely unpredictable and it ended the story on a perfect note.
4/10
I agree with those who say that changing characters from men to women when remaking a movie is pandering (like saying "We don't believe you can get an original lead role on your own"), but that doesn't mean I'm against this practice. Not when the change can be a tool to re-interpret a story instead of recycling it. Well, BEDTIME STORY and DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS were about men who only conned women. They knew how to manipulate in each situation based on the different psychological reactions. THE HUSTLE (is this the 1st time a movie has been remade twice with completely different titles?) shows what happens when the genders are reversed (LAWRENCE JAMIESON and FREDDIE BENSON are now JOSEPHINE CHESTERFIELD and PENNY RUST). That alone would've made this remake's existance justified... if it hadn't been explored already in OCEAN'S 8 not that long ago. To be fair, that wouldn't have compensated for the absense of laughs. Brando, Martin, David Niven and Michael Caine understood that their characters were a form of actors. They played the real and the fake identities with the same commitment. Anne Hathaway and Rebel Wilson are good actresses in general and they do a passable job when playing the real identities, but the fake ones are cartoons. From the accents to the backstories to the facial expressions/voice tones/stutters that indicate that they're making up what they're saying on the spot... How can anyone fall for the act? Granted, Chris Addison's directing and Jac Schaeffer's script probably deserve more of the blame. I guess it depends on how much of the dialogue was ad-libbed. The worst scene in the previous installments was when LAWRENCE hit FREDDIE's legs to "test" him (they were pretending to be a doctor and a paralyzed man respectively). Both times it was unfunny and neverending. The reason why JANET WALKER/COLGATE (their target) allowed it to continue was because FREDDIE insisted that he couldn't feel anything. There was no bad outcome. This time, PENNY is pretending to be blind. No one would believe that JOSEPHINE's tests serve a purpose other than physical and mental torture, so why does THOMAS WESTERBURG (their target) allow it?
1/10
-------------------------------------
You can read comments of other movies in my blog.
4/10
BEDTIME STORY began as a high-brow comedy co-starring Marlon Brando as a smooth-talker that halfway through descended into a mess relying on childish and obvious gags that required Brando to be vaudevillianly loud. He wasn't bad at it or anything, but it made the movie feel uneven. DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS pointlessly tells the same story with some of the same lines and gags, but Steve Martin's performance (as the same character) is more consistent. He's over-the-top from beginning to end and he's good at it. Miles Goodman's music score doesn't fit at times, and Frank Oz's directing isn't anything special, but at least it's not flat like Ralph Levy's. The main difference in this remake is the last part. I predicted the 1st plot twist, because it involved a supporting character saying that one of the protagonists did something that wasn't shown on-screen. Of course that didn't happen. On the other hand, the 2nd twist was completely unpredictable and it ended the story on a perfect note.
4/10
I agree with those who say that changing characters from men to women when remaking a movie is pandering (like saying "We don't believe you can get an original lead role on your own"), but that doesn't mean I'm against this practice. Not when the change can be a tool to re-interpret a story instead of recycling it. Well, BEDTIME STORY and DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS were about men who only conned women. They knew how to manipulate in each situation based on the different psychological reactions. THE HUSTLE (is this the 1st time a movie has been remade twice with completely different titles?) shows what happens when the genders are reversed (LAWRENCE JAMIESON and FREDDIE BENSON are now JOSEPHINE CHESTERFIELD and PENNY RUST). That alone would've made this remake's existance justified... if it hadn't been explored already in OCEAN'S 8 not that long ago. To be fair, that wouldn't have compensated for the absense of laughs. Brando, Martin, David Niven and Michael Caine understood that their characters were a form of actors. They played the real and the fake identities with the same commitment. Anne Hathaway and Rebel Wilson are good actresses in general and they do a passable job when playing the real identities, but the fake ones are cartoons. From the accents to the backstories to the facial expressions/voice tones/stutters that indicate that they're making up what they're saying on the spot... How can anyone fall for the act? Granted, Chris Addison's directing and Jac Schaeffer's script probably deserve more of the blame. I guess it depends on how much of the dialogue was ad-libbed. The worst scene in the previous installments was when LAWRENCE hit FREDDIE's legs to "test" him (they were pretending to be a doctor and a paralyzed man respectively). Both times it was unfunny and neverending. The reason why JANET WALKER/COLGATE (their target) allowed it to continue was because FREDDIE insisted that he couldn't feel anything. There was no bad outcome. This time, PENNY is pretending to be blind. No one would believe that JOSEPHINE's tests serve a purpose other than physical and mental torture, so why does THOMAS WESTERBURG (their target) allow it?
In the original 1st remake, when FREDDIE and LAWRENCE realized that JANET had played them, they were shocked but then they started smiling. They admired her abilities. That's why, when she came back and tried to make them part of her new con job, they played along (after some brief doubts, naturally). Here, JOSEPHINE and PENNY's emotions don't make that transition, so there's no reason for them to play along. Keep in mind that this happens before THOMAS offers them money, so what do they think they're gaining in that moment?
1/10
-------------------------------------
You can read comments of other movies in my blog.
