The Lego Movie

I have a vague notion of playing with Tinker Toys when I was a kid and I know my older brother had an Erector set that I envied because it had gears and motors and a lot of shiny metal pieces.  I never knew the joy of Legos as a kid . When I became a parent, I must have deliberately chosen to keep legos out of the house for fear of the mess and pain they might represent (stepping on a sharp plastic item, barefoot and in the dark was something I wanted to avoid). We did play with the Legos at the daycare or at the doctors office but there were never any sets or instructions, just building blocks. Sometime in the last twenty years, Legos marketing figured out that connecting with brand-name icons would move even more product for kids who wanted their toys to resemble their movies and TV shows. So characters and action figures became part of the Lego Universe and it has all lead to this, a movie about building blocks.

Way back in the early eighties I was listening to speeches that criticized half hour kids cartoons that were basically shilling for toys. You know, G.I. Joe, Masters of the Universe, and My Little Pony. All of those toys eventually had movies made out of them and if you judged by those films, you would know what my students were worried about, but if you started with this film, you would have no worries at all. This is a movie, featuring toys, that is less about selling a product and more about playing creatively. While you will never be able to see this film and not think of the product, you will certainly not think of it in the same way. This movie is anarchistic, colorful and somewhat demented. It is also funnier than most of the comedies that you see being advertised. I have not yet seen , nor am I likely to, “Ride Along”, but the jokes in the trailers and ads for that have not made me smile once much less laugh out loud. “The Lego Movie” had me chuckling at the first trailer and seeing the film today, basically repeated the experience for ninety minutes. This movie is a kick and a contender for best animated feature in next years award lineups. 

The story is a hero’s quest featuring the “Legos” figures from most of the popular play sets and some that I’m sure were invented for the movie. There is a funky wizard modeled  after “Gandalf” but don’t think it is Gandalf because he appears as himself briefly in one sequence. The ancient giver of wisdom is voiced by the marvelous Morgan Freeman, whose voice was delivered to us by the Gods. Backing up Freeman are the voices of dozens of well known movie and TV personalities, all cast for the unique qualities of their voices. I was listening to the voice of our hero, Emmet, and I confused it with the voice of Chris Parnell. Emmet’s range is a little higher than Cyril Figus but they both have that plain, somewhat emasculated tone that makes them the vanilla of the cast of crazy vocal performances. The movie features voice acting from; Jonah Hill, Will Ferrell, Will Arnet, Will Forte, Shaquille O’Neil, Billy Dee Williams, Channing Tatum, Elizabeth Banks and a whole bunch more.  Drawing special mention along with Morgan Freeman, is the king of Winter badassery, Liam Neeson himself. I missed his work in “The Nut Job” a couple of weeks ago, but it seems that Mr. Neeson has been regularly employed because this is the second of three films he has coming out in January and February. His dual role here as “Good Cop”/”Bad Cop” is a jewel of comic vocal variety. Freeman and Neeson alone might have been worth the price of admission but there is also the visual spectacular to bring you in.

The city scapes, oceans, clouds and just about everything else is rendered in “lego” form. The effect is hypnotically amazing and very surreal at times. The space craft and cars and building, you sort of expect from the toys, but the backgrounds and scenery are also visualized as lego constructions and it give the movie an odd sense of “pop” art and engineering genius.  This movie is really well imagined and the look might be worth a 3D investment although I was happy with the traditional view that we experienced it through. 

All the crazy visuals would be only interesting to look at for a short while. You need a story and some dialogue to go along with it. The plot is not especially surprising, although the idea of the alternate universes of “Legos” colliding is a fun and creative addition to the story process. The characters are realized in the most creative part of the film. The action figures talk like they would be the characters, as if they were being voiced by a creative child. Ferrell’s President Business drops in an aside here and there to reveal his true colors in some most amusing comments. Will Arnet parodies both Bruce Wayne and Batman with a voice that is deep and dark and silly at the same time. It took a delicate mind to write some of these lines and not have them come off as loud and obvious at times. Pratt’s timing in delivering the gee whiz cliches and oh oh jokes is just perfect. Although we do get sucker punched into more Will Ferrell than I would have preferred, in the end he does a good job as well, keeping his usual screaming persona to a minimum. 

There are some serious attempts to make the movie a message about the faults of conformity, but to do so without kicking the kids that can actually follow directions in the teeth for doing so. The number one song in the “Lego” universe is a parody of upbeat dance infected pop that passes for entertainment these days, but it is also catchy as heck and like the pop music it is making fun of, it is very entertaining. 
Listen to this clip to get a sense of what I mean:


I would strongly recommend this film to adults and children. You will find plenty to enjoy, and a confusing set of messages that don’t detract from the spirit of the film. It is hard to imagine that the one film made from a specific toy, that I liked was one about a toy that I know next to nothing about and would seem to be incredibly boring. It is the opposite of boring and it is a terrific way to build your weekend into a winner.

Grudge Match

I know, I know, this movie looks like recycled crap. It is some pablum designed to milk a few bucks from undiscerning movie goers who are just looking for a way to kill a couple of hours over the holidays. I can’t really disagree with that too much. It does at times feel lazy, the comedy aspects are weak and the delivery timing on the jokes is bad, really bad. So having accepted the premise that most of you started off with, let me give just a couple of reasons that you should refrain from being so harsh. Those two reasons are in fact the two stars; Robert DeNiro and Sylvester Stallone.

Are they cashing in on old success, yes. The “Rocky” references are everywhere in this film. “Raging Bull” hangs over DeNiro’s performance like a gargoyle, leering at what he has become. Even with all that baggage, both actors suit up and are game for the fight.  In the second half of the movie they start to become characters rather than caricatures. The script does not always give them enough ammunition to pull off an effective dramatic story, it does come up with a few honest moments and enough of what made us love the performers in the past to give them a pass on the flaws of this and enjoy what there is. “Grudge Match” in not a modern classic and it probably isn’t worth your time in a theater, but it is not the travesty that some think it looks like and it overcomes a weak first hour comedy set up to become a mid-level adult drama, not a great drama, but one that does not embarrass us too much by watching.

The tone of the movie is all over the place. Ninety percent of the Kevin Hart sequences look like outtakes from that movie with Ice Cube that he has coming out next month. He cracks wise, makes asides out of the corner of his mouth  and contorts his face into so many clown like expressions that you worry his face might freeze like that, you know, like your Mom always warned you about. Alan Arkin almost always makes a movie better, this film is the one reason that I can think of for saying “almost”. Arkin’s part is underwritten and we are simply expected to use the Burgess Meridith allusion to give it the heart that it needs. His character is supposed to be so infirm at one point that he can’t bath himself and then later he spends time training Stallone’s character. The fact that he uses an electric wheeled cart is not enough to span the chasm between these two views.  Kim Basinger turns out to be a more important character in the story, but she is also not given enough to work with.

So the things that succeed are the stars. DeNiro manages to go back and forth between goofy aging lug and bitter resentful egotist without seeming to be schizophrenic. He does mug for the camera at times but he also plays some scenes with a nice degree of sincerity. The lost family angle is a little hokey, but DeNiro manages to sell the idea of an irresponsible self centered bastard, and the pitiful old guy in funny underwear in the very next scene. The young man who plays his son is fine but is stuck in a pretty cliche role. The little kid who turns out to be his grandchild is “TV kid” precocious, but he also is cute as hell and easy to forgive because of that. Stallone is trapped a bit in the opening sections as the introverted former boxer, that gets financially pushed into making the deal that sets up the fight rematch. We have seen this sullen, silent type in a lot of other films. Once his character reconnects with old flame Basinger, the performance feels a lot more natural even if the script does not. The idea of two men at or nearing seventy, being able to perform in the ring as they do here is far fetched but if you can get past that thought, they sell it as well as anyone could.

This poster is better than the movie.

This movie reminded me of another DeNiro misfire from 25 years ago, “we’re No Angels”. A comedy match with Sean Penn that does not work as a comedy and struggles to work as a redemption story. It’s heart is in the right place but something along the way just did not work. “Grudge Match” actually does have a grain of a good idea in it, but the stunt casting and awkwardness of the set up undermines the more believable although cliched parts of the story. If you see it and enjoy it, good for you, just don’t tell anyone because they already have preconceptions about the movie and then they will start having those same ideas about you.

Movies I Want Everyone to See: The Court Jester 1955

Time marches on and history sometimes fades into vague memory and then is forgotten. If I asked anyone in my classes if they know who Danny Kaye was, my guess is that a couple of hands would go in the air and the other twenty-five would look at me blankly. This is no fault of their own, there are so many good films to catch up on, and if you are a fan of the Golden age of Hollywood, you probably want to absorb some film noir, or catch up on classic westerns that you have missed. Heck, maybe you would even want to see some of the socially relevant classics of that time period; films like “On the Waterfront”, “Gentleman’s Agreement”, or “The Best Years of our Lives”. Who could fault you with so many wonderful choices? I don’t ever want this continuing column to be about scolding people for the films they have not yet found. My purpose is always to bring attention to a movie that I want others to share and enjoy. While Danny Kaye starred in dozens of movies and did television up till his death in 1987, it is this movie that makes me most love him. It is time for me to share the love.
“The Court Jester” is a twist on the “Robin Hood” story. A band of outlaws has formed a secret clan to protect the infant that is the true King of England. A group of not so noble Noblemen, has helped a usurper gain the crown and now they seek the last surviving blood heir to end that line. To make the comparison even more complete, the lead conspirator behind the false King is Sir Ravenhurst , played by Basil Rathbone in a part that mirrors his role in “The Adventures of Robin Hood”. The leader of the outlaw group, sworn to protect the true King is known as The Black Fox. Among the followers of the Fox is Hubert Hawkins, a performer in a traveling carnival who dreams of d erring do and the beautiful maid Jean. Danny Kaye is Hawkins, consigned to a role as laundryman to the Fox and nursemaid to the infant king. He and Jean seize an opportunity to place themselves inside the court to gain access to the castle on behalf of the Fox. The means for doing so and the complications that follow make “The Court Jester” a lively entertainment filled with hummable songs, repeatable dialogue and beautiful art direction. It is also comically loaded for bear, with enough ammunition to take down a grizzly. There are corny puns, slapstick physical bits and sly parody of the traditional swashbuckling forms. All of this delivered by one of the most unique screen entertainers of all time. Danny Kaye was a clown, but a suave clown and this is his circus.

Much of the humor derives from the fact that this is a mistaken identity plot.  To start, Hawkins assumes the part of Giacomo, a jester imported from Italy to entertain the new Royal family. John Carradine, the patriarch of the acting family, appears briefly as the jester that the outlaws hope to replace. Since no one at the court knows Giacomo by sight, they think they have the perfect cover.  There of course is a twist on the plot because the jester is also an assassin, brought in to quell rival nobles in palace intrigue. So the hero thinks he is playing a simple entertainer and Ravenhurst thinks the fake jester is his hired killer. The confusion  over character goes even more crazy when the Princess, seeking escape from the plans of her father the usurper, chooses the jester as a love interest. It involves hypnosis and subterfuge from the chief lady in waiting Griselda, played by Mildred Natwick, standing in for Una O’Conner. 
Rathbone is at his oily best, planning assasinations, plotting to thwart an alliance with a powerful baron, and in the end showing one more time that he was Hollywood’s premier fencer. He plays the straight man to Kaye’s clown so well that you might think they had worked vaudeville or Broadway together years before. Although his lines are never the punch lines, he manages to fit in with the clever word play and come off as a really sinister character at the same time. I suppose like Bond aficionados, who prefer the actor they first discovered 007 with, Baker Street Irregulars will identify with the Sherlock Holmes that helped them discover the great detective. For me, Rathbone will always be the perfect Sherlock. He was the quintessential villain for generations of fans of Errol Flynn and other swashbuckling stars of the era. His casting here is a sly nod at the familiarity with which he played those parts. 
Danny Kaye gets to play several different roles in the story, without ever changing the character he is portraying. As Hawkins, he is a bit nebbish and googie eyed around the outlaws he is working with. As Giacomo he plays suave lover and cunning conspirator sometimes in the same scene. Inevitably he will also get to play the hero but before that happens he must be the buffoon that everyone underestimates or mistakes for someone else.  When he puts on the raiment of the jester, he entertains the whole court as only a song and dance man like Kaye could. The lyrics and rhyming dialogue that Kaye performed were crafted with the assistance of his wife, composer Sylvia Fine.  The delivery was all Danny Kaye. He could take a couple of silly lines, perform them in a funny voice or accent and make them memorably hysterical. In this film the pies-ta resistance is the dilemia over which cup to drink from in the ceremony preceding a joust he is forced to engage in. I hope it doesn’t spoil the movie for you but I can’t resist including part of  that sequence here:
The villainous but lovely princess in the film was played by Angela Lansbury. Glynis Johns, who later played Mrs Banks in the film version of Mary Poppins, is a pretty sexy partner for Kaye as Maid Jean. Both of these actresses get to play off different versions of Kaye’s character and they are suitably bewitched or befuddled as the case may call for. The witch Griselda, who is both matron and victim to the Princess, manages to confound the whole scenario by giving Hawkins the illusion of a romantic Don Juan type and later, makes him into a fine swordsman, all at the snap of a finger. Of course fingers get snapped in awkward situations and the pantomime of Kaye bouncing back and forth between his persona’s is one of the gifts of

the movie. He has to go from dashing devil may care lover to confused spy, to heroic outlaw all in the blink of a moment. That is Danny Kaye’s gift to film, his ability to instantly convey an emotion or a state of mind in an instance. The only parallel I can think of among contemporary performers is Robin Williams in one of his milder comic riffs. In a few weeks, we will see Ben Stiller tackle the role of “Walter Mitty” a character from a short story, who visualized and led a vivid imaginary life. Danny Kaye played the part in a musical comedy back in 1947. I doubt that Stiller will be expected to be quite as elastic as the Danny Kaye version of the character, I also doubt that he would be willing to try. Kaye’s gift feels truly unique. It may be imitated but never duplicated. 

Film styles change and many movie lovers of today may not have the patience for the way narratives unfolded in traditional Hollywood fare. I also know that despite the frequent love of films adapted from stage musicals, many people can’t relate to this form of musical story telling. I find it magical and I want others to take a chance and give the movie an opportunity to charm you. Pay close attention to the lyrics, there are delightful puns and word play in most every line. The opening title credits are funny. I mean the text and the font, not just the picture and the words. I have been keeping a list of all the films I watched this year and this one appears three times already, and it was not in theaters. 
It’s up to you to decide to enhance your life and seek out one of the wonderful comic geniuses of the twentieth century. Don’t let the fact that this actor and his style of comedy are not en vogue prevent you from experiencing one of the best comedies of the 1950s and a terrific musical to boot. All you have to do is choose. Now will it be the Vessel With the Pestle or the Flagon with the Dragon? I know which I will choose, no wait wasn’t there a Chalice from the Palace? Oh Oh. 
Richard Kirkham is a lifelong movie enthusiast from Southern California. While embracing all genres of film making, he is especially moved to write about and share his memories of movies from his formative years, the glorious 1970s. His personal blog, featuring current film reviews as well as his Summers of the 1970s movie project, can be found at Kirkham A Movie A Day
A great Podcast with Danny Kayes Daughter on Warner Home Archives