Reviews

I found this little beauty in a local game shop selling for the hefty price tag of £2.99 and I have to say it was worth all of the 299 pennies spent.

After all, who wouldn't pay that much to own a classic contradiction of film rating?

This series of films was rated an '18' over here in the United Kingdom. I only watched the first film with Brum and the Matthew Broderick wannabe and still got the impression that something was seriously wrong with the BBFC..

How could a talking car and a man with a bleeding nose deserve an 18? It's not as if it is a film from the 50s where perhaps it would merit some certificate of this nature.

Now I have not yet got around to sitting myself down and watching the next to films, but I have a feeling that things are not going to get a whole lot better. The attempt at putting some thought and meaning into the film with the narrative at the beginning suggests that these people are trying to make something that will leave us pondering our own existence. It is obvious that the directors are not wanting to spoil their thoughtful 'masterpiece' with careless violence.

This is what I am going on when I doubt the caliber of the following two films. That and the fact that someone else that has rated the film has claimed it devoid of any violence, nudity or swearing despite the '18' rating (which I will be inclined to say attracted me to the title).

Don't get me wrong, though. I loved the first short I saw, and hope that the other two (by two other directors) follow the same sort of theme. It is the ridiculous and childish premises that make it fun, (that and the nervous man from the beginning, spinning around to bellow 'NO!' at his girlfriend who appeared to have something growing between her first two teeth.) and will watch it again because it reminds me what it was like to sit down and watch CITV after school. I even showed my nine-year-old little brother. I think he mentioned something about taking it to school to show his class.

I might have to leave a note for his teacher, telling her not to be fooled by the '18' certificate, the film is just child's play..

-Stoate

I would be wrong if I said that Danny DeVito's films were made with full intent to capture the realisms of life, and it is because of his ability to portray an eccentric world (or relationship) that he is able to made the most original and entertaining characters known to film.

For example, although he didn't create the character Matilda, he was able to portray the girl with telekinetic ability in a very effective manner in the film of the same name. And also the characters in 'War of the Roses' were thoroughly over-the-top, but it was because of this that the films directed by the short man were so entertaining.

'Death to Smoochy' was no exception. It is because of the over-the-top characters that it is so funny. Edward Norton's character in particular is hilarious just because of the OTT reactions the 'atrocities' of the world draw out of him, and the overly-nice attitude he oozes.

There are other things that create humour. The lines are hilariously witty and even the facial expressions created by some of the characters give the film replay value. So IS there anything wrong with it?

I, personally, don't believe the dated storyline creates an obstruction, but I do feel that there is a problem with the dramatic character arcs. The biggest example of this is Robin Williams' character who goes, in one scene, from being ridiculously hateful, to wanting nothing more than to save his ex-arch-rival. This is where the over-the-top obstructs believability, although it doesn't do enough to make me dislike the film even partially.

The film, although flawed only by the very dramatic character arcs, is thoroughly enjoyable, and DeVito sprinkles just enough dramatic camera angles to support the extremity of the storyline. It is a rare gem, battered at the box office, but very safe in my collection of favourite DVDs.

Enjoy.

-Stoate.