Bryce Zabel's MOVIE SMACKDOWN!

The Wackness (2008) -vs- Running with Scissors (2006)

Therapists Who Need Therapists

The Smackdown.  Hollywood loves to write about therapists who are more screwed up than their patients.  Maybe that's because most Hollywood writers and directors are in therapy and want to feel better about themselves, I don't know.  Anyway, both of these films from Sony Pictures and from writer/directors put their coming-of-age male leads in therapy with people who are, shall we say, practicing "out of the box."  In "The Wackness," Luke Shapiro (Josh Peck) trades marijuana for shrink sessions in New York in 1994 and in "Running with Scissors," Augusten Burroughs (Joseph Cross) moves in with his family’s therapist in the 1970s.  Have these movies pushed the boundaries of therapy too far to seem believable?  If therapy was this messed up in the recent past, how bad is it now?  And our Smackdown question:  If you have to see a shrink, do you want a referral from someone who runs drugs or runs with scissors?

The Challenger. The title of the film comes from a line that "Juno" darling, Olivia Thirlby, says to Josh Peck, “You’re the wackness and I’m the dopeness,” which is basically an overly cool way to say that Peck's a pessimist.  (Not as much as the film's cinematographer, who lit the film like he couldn't afford a lighting package.)  Anyway, "The Wackness" gives us Luke Shapiro in the summer before he goes away to college who has a lot to be pessimistic about.  In this film, writer/director Jonathan Levine lingers of the fact that he's masturbating seven times a day dreaming about real sex and dealing drugs out of an ice cream cart in New York City to make some coin.  Oh, yeah, he's looking for love, too. Shapiro is trying to get a grip on life because his parents are fighting over losing their apartment and he never made any friends in high school. Shapiro finds solace in his pot client and therapist, Doctor Squires (Ben Kingsley), who gives a string of unusual advice that probably goes beyond the Hippocratic Oath.  In any case, Shapiro follows Squires' advice about losing his virginity, only does it with Dr. Squires' step-daughter, Stephanie (Olivia Thirlby). Kingsley and Peck give stellar performances as men with no coping skills to deal with the matters of life and love besides escaping through drug use.  It might even be enlightening if it hadn't been shot so damned dark.

License to Wed (2007) -vs- My Best Friend's Wedding (1997)

Review by Lauren Zabel

The Smackdown. The greatest thing about movies revolving around weddings is not, actually, the weddings themselves.  Instead, it's the dramatic and hilarious (hopefully) events leading up to the big day. Personally, I love seeing the different cinematic ways of displaying the wedding jitters, cold feet, and second thoughts. In both P.J. Hogan’s “My Best Friend’s Wedding” and Ken Kwapis’s “License to Wed," they take full advantage of their upcoming unions by making the audience wait until the bitter end to see if the couple makes it down the aisle. Both films focus on the amusing situations their characters get themselves into and ultimately make the bride-and-groom-to-be question whether they should even get married in the first place.

"When it says 8% on Rotten Tomatoes, that's about like Bush's approval ratings, right? Oh, he has 29%, wow!"

The Challenger. "License to Wed" brings a star-studded cast from every discipline; whether it’s series regulars from television (The Office, Big Love) or it’s familiar faces from film (Robin Williams, Christine Taylor) or even if it’s a pop semi-star from the Billboard charts (Mandy Moore). Our newly-to-be-wed and newly appointed leads, Sadie Jones and Ben Murphy, are a happily in love couple who decide to take the plunge. The catch is sincere Sadie, played by Moore, wants to get married to Ben, played by John Krasinski, in her family’s church and wants her crazy Reverend to ordain the ceremony. In one of his regular over-the-top comic performances, Robin Williams plays the Reverend who runs an unusual wedding preparation course and now needs to complete it in the three weeks before the big day, thus giving the movie its comic ticking clock. There's nothing much real here, especially in the story, since the movie centers on this absolutely insane and completely illogical marriage preparation class, which includes animatronic babies, wire tapping, and late night class sessions at a local bar.

"You think you can take my movie from me, girlfriend? Guess again."

The Defending Champion. By now, ten years since its release, "My Best Friend's Wedding" has gained the status of a modern romantic comedy classic. It stars the now very established actors and actresses who include Julia Roberts, Cameron Diaz, Rupert Everett, and Dermot Mulroney. The engaged couple in this film is not what you would expect, it’s Kimmy and Michael, as played by Cameron Diaz and Dermot Mulroney. Michael has found the love of his life who is also a fabulously wealthy heir to a big fortune. She's many years his junior but, being played by the charismatic Cameron Diaz in a Ron Bass script that does not stack the deck against her, it's a fair cat-fight. Before Kimmy was ever in the picture (or maybe even before she was even in middle school), Jules, as played by Julia Roberts, was Michael’s main squeeze. They were best friends that completely understood each other but the catch here is that they vowed to marry each other by their 28th birthdays. This pact from the past rears its ugly bridal veil and generates some authentic-feeling conflict when Jules finds out Michael is engaged to be married through his wedding invitation. What could be better than the Maid of Honor wanting to ruin the wedding and run off with the groom? That, as they say in the movie business, is a good problem.

The Scorecard. Both films use the concept of "Marriage" as a giant obstacle course, which its characters need to fight through before getting to the finish line. Both explore the overall message that love is what makes the obstacle course called marriage work. The paths they each choose, however, are very different, as we've said.

In “License to Wed," Sadie and Ben have to complete those ridiculous tasks before they can get married in Reverend Frank’s church that range from abstaining from sex to having to learn to fight with each other in front of a group to writing their own vows. I doubt I'd even be around to write this review if my own parents had to pass Reverend Frank's  improbable obstacle course.

In “My Best Friend’s Wedding," the wedding obstacles, instead of being scheduled tasks, are actually a lot of unforseen problems. Whether it’s Jules’s gay best friend (wonderfully played by Rupert Everett) pretending to be her fiancé, or Jules’s faking an e-mail from the bride’s father to his future son-in-law, or a car chase through downtown, or even a screaming match in a woman’s public restroom, it all makes marriage seem like survival of the fittest. But the obstacles seem more organic.

Feeling organic or real is not a pre-requisite to being good, however. Many films are made of improbable set-ups. So this could still go either way...

Evan Almighty (2007) -vs- Bruce Almighty (2003)

Review by Lauren Zabel

The Smackdown. People like to talk about having a "personal" relationship with God. Maybe that's why both these films bring in audiences -- the chance to watch the main characters actually have that relationship on screen in a literal sense. In the wish-fulfillment saga of "Bruce Almighty," weatherman Bruce goes into an on-air meltdown followed by a rant to God about how he's doing a miserable job. Now, in the sequel "Evan Almighty," Evan prays to the Man Upstairs for good luck on his first day as a congressman -- and does it as if it's just another quick cell-phone call. Both Bruce and Evan end up in a one-on-one with God, but it's an open question as to whether this Divine Intervention was enough to float either film. You've probably heard already that "Evan Almighty" had the highest budget for a comedy in film history. Money well-spent? We'll see...

"Listen, God, do you mind if I call you that? Anyway, the thing is when I said I liked animals, I was thinking more along the lines of getting a dog."

The Challenger. "Evan Almighty" is the newest movie from the creative team of director Tom Shadyac and writer Steve Oedekerk, who collaborated together on "Bruce Almighty." Evan Baxter, as played by Steve Carell, a Buffalo news anchor (he was in the original) turned Congressman, moves his family to Washington, D.C. for his new career in politics. Evan got elected through his campaign promise of 'Change the World,' which seems like one tall order for Evan to fill. Even though Evan doesn't even have a new iPhone, God still answers his call. Connection made, though, God personally assigns him the biblical duty of building an Ark due to an imminent flood. Naturally, Evan would rather tend to the people's business as he defines it rather than Ark building but Morgan Freeman's God is an unusually persuasive constituent. You try saying "no" to the guy.

"You'll get used to the walking-on-water thing and, besides, when you see what I have in store for the next guy, you'll thank me."

The Defending Champion. "Bruce Almighty" sets up the themes, ideas, and conflicts for its spin-off, "Evan Almighty," through its character development. For instance, God, as played by Morgan Freeman, is a man in a white-suite with incredible patience for Jim Carrey's self-obsessed Bruce Nolan weatherman. Nolan challenges God to changing responsibilities with him due to his failing career that has added significant stress to his life. God, being a whimsical sort and feeling a little bit of career burn-out himself, is up to the challenge and grants Nolan all of his mighty powers. What Nolan comes to realize throughout the film is that being High and Mighty has its consequences like his floundering relationship with his girlfriend, Grace, as played by Jennifer Anniston. Bruce might have God's powers but it takes him a while to start acting like him.

The Scorecard. Both films are set in Buffalo to give their stories that "could happen to anybody" feeling. Honestly, both of these films have enough plot holes in them you could float an Ark through them. In "Evan Almighty," for example, Carell's Evan needs to build a Ark for two of every animal on Earth, like the Bible says, as a way re-populate. So why does the Ark only travel from Prestige Ridge in Virginia to Washington D.C? Why did these animals appear from nowhere to be transported only a miles away? Wouldn't they still happily exist in other parts of the world and not needed to be saved? Questions...

In "Bruce Almighty," Bruce's godly powers are only applied in his hometown of Buffalo and we never see him dealing with the universally big problems to which would be expected on a global scale. Instead, Bruce deals with his dog peeing in his apartment and traffic jams on his way to work.

Both Bruce and Evan probably need to be taught a lesson by somebody, if not God, but the results are uneven. Bruce is clearly the more selfish, cursing at God because, shock!, he can't be a TV anchorman. Oh, boo-hoo! But Jim Carrey did a better job bringing the comedy out of Bruce. Evan, in contrast, is more the beset guy being screwed with by God. We've even seen the complications before -- when his facial hair is growing uncontrollably, I'm thinking "Santa Claus."

The one consistently wonderful element of both films is, of course, Morgan Freeman who is just detached and bemused enough to be warm and funny at the same time. I'm not sure about the theology of God appearing in a white suit and spending time with TV personalities and politicians when there are so many more deserving types out there, but that's the movies, I guess.

Anyway, this is clearly one of those choices where the films are not so great that you simply have to see both of them. If you have to pick one, here's my recommendation:

Both are humorous films with comically perfect leads, but both require a lot of faith of its viewers to believe in the powers of the almighty.

I Think I Love My Wife (2007) -vs- The Last Kiss (2006)

Review by Lauren Zabel

The Smackdown. Do you want the security of being married or the fun of being single? Guess what? You have to choose! That "cognitive dissonance" is the foundation for both films. Each leading man, Chris Rock and Zach Braff, has to deal with what they feel is the suffocation of being in a committed relationship. Both characters desperately want the freedom they experienced as single men and thus enter into new friendships (imagine, if you will, that word being in "air quotes") with exciting and promiscuous women, as played by Kerry Washington and Rachel Bilson. These different relationships propel each character into the obvious conclusion that they actually do love their “wives.” This is the cinematic equivalent of having your cake and eating it, too. Okay, bizarre analogy but you get the idea...

"Please, God, get this review posted while the film's still in theaters." 

The Challenger. I went to see "I Think I Love My Wife" with a male and female friend and let me tell you how their opinions of the movie differed! (Actually, you guess.) The movie revolves around the life of Richard Cooper, who is a suburb livin’, New York workin’ family man. As much as Richard loves his frigid wife, his three children, and his boring job, he longs for something more in his life.  In walks a blast from the past, or Nikki, who comes to see Richard after many years. Richard and Nikki evolve into the flirtiest friends, and Richard starts to entertain more and more ideas that are, shall we say, "problematic" for a marriage vow. As his outside friendship grows more complicated and time consuming, Richard and Nikki both realize that the "cheat thing" is going to happen sooner or later, and probably sooner. In a sudden twist, Cooper, instead, runs home to his wife and (I'm not kidding here) sings out his frustrations until they both arrive at the conclusion that they still committed to each other. Like they say, whatever works...

"I wonder if I'd worn glasses like Rock if it'd made a difference?"

The Defending Champ. This film just recently got its DVD release and I know this because I actually purchased it as a gift for a friend. "The Last Kiss" tells the story of the anxieties of being in a relationship through the different stories of a group of childhood best friends. The main story is about Michael, or Zach Braff, who is in a three-year relationship with his soon-to-be mother of his child. The overwhelming emotions of an unplanned pregnancy lead Michael to stray into the arms of a younger college girl named Kim. The thrill of sneaking around, gaining freedom, and losing responsibility puts Michael to the road of infidelity. But the brilliance of this film is the road back to fidelity, where Braff basically lives on the doorstop of his girlfriend’s house for a week to prove that he is committed.

The Scorecard. Two movies, same theme, wildly different presentations. "I Think I Love My Wife" takes the comedic approach, letting Chris Rock’s narration as a married man with hidden single activities, become Rock-like and, mostly, hilarious. "The Last Kiss" goes for the dramatic approach through Zach Braff’s interactions with the mutating relationships around him, like his best friends or his girlfriend’s feuding parents. But despite the different approaches, the relatability of "The Last Kiss" compared to "I Think I Love My Wife" allows the film to connect to his audience on a much deeper level. I can actually imagine a man camped on a doorstep for a week as a sign of commitment, but singing, well, that seems a little "written."

The Decision. As much as I enjoyed the performances in "I Think I Love My Wife," there was not one moment, where I felt that the movie was authentic in any real sense of the word. In fact, I laughed at a lot of the jokes of the movie, but I laughed more (in the wrong way) at the craziest events of the movie, like when Chris Rock catches a plane with Nikki on a workday or that singing bit. On the other hand, while "The Last Kiss" might have been a bit long and bogged down, I did feel that it displayed genuine human emotions and existed in somebody's real world (if not quite mine). So, don't get wrapped up in a world of impractical situations and confused emotions and, instead, go and rent "The Last Kiss" because this world may just look a little like your own. Rock's gonna be on DVD in about 30 seconds anyway...

Music and Lyrics (2007) -vs- Wimbledon (2004)

Review by Lauren Zabel

The Smackdown. Both films include the formula for a great romantic comedy-- boy meets girl, boy loses girl, and boy gets girl-- but with a twist. In both “Music and Lyrics” and “Wimbledon,” the boy is an older, self-deprecating, British man who by chance meets a younger, quirky American girl, who inspires them greatly in their respective careers. This inspiration translates into love, whether it’s on the tennis court or on the musical stage.

"Put your hands back on the keyboard or we'll lose the PG-13."

The Challenger. Both times I have seen “Music and Lyrics” in theaters, I have been accompanied by large groups of girls, which definitely solidifies it in the genre of romantic comedy. But now, really, who wouldn’t want to go see Hugh Grant? I mean, Drew Barrymore, too? The movie revolves around the life and career of faded 80’s superstar, Alex Fletcher, as played by Grant. With his solo album tanking and his cancelled gigs, Fletcher is in quite a predicament. Then walks in Sophie Fischer, as played by Barrymore, to water Fletcher’s plants. As it turns out, these plants grow the relationship to where Sophie becomes Alex's musical muse and love interest.

"Was that match point as good for you as it was for me?"

The Defending Champion. Another movie I have seen countless times is “Wimbledon,” and I still don’t understand the game of tennis! “Wimbledon” tells the story of a washed up and old British tennis pro, Peter Colt, played by Paul Bettany, who is entering his last Wimbledon of his career. As a perk of playing in the tournament, Colt gets a hotel room, which he walks into with amazement. It’s a lot bigger than he expected, which leads him to see Lizzie Bradbury, as played by Kirsten Dunst, in the shower. Realizing the hotel mix-up, he apologizes but intrigued by this younger, American tennis pro, he asks her to dinner. After their first date, Colt plays an amazing game of tennis and wins. Bradbury is his muse and he cannot get enough of her until he wins all of Wimbledon!

The Scorecard. The absolute charm of “Music and Lyrics” is obvious by its title-- the musical score. Each song reveals more development of its character, whether its being a major hit from Pop, or the 80s band that washed away Grant, or it’s a sweet new love ballad between its leads. You can’t help but dance in your seat, laugh at Grant’s hip popping and thrusting, and sing along to the catchy tunes! Compared to the obvious title of “Wimbledon,” you are getting everything for face value. Through the underdog story of its leader character, you get some cliché tennis analogies for love and a couple declarations of it too. Yet it still does not include its audience in the process of falling in love as much as it includes it in the understanding of the fear of falling in love. The movie’s main theme is fear, whether it’s choking on the tennis court or denying your true feelings for someone because of your father’s disapproval.

The Decision. “Wimbledon” feels like you’ve seen it before; it’s a dramatic sports movie with a love story, whereas “Music and Lyrics” feels fresh and innovative through its musical numbers. So, if you you're looking to find love with an older British man of a certain wit, shall we say, there's just no one out there who can make you like him more -- even when he's playing a man with 'issues' -- than Hugh Grant. I really don't care to know what he did on Sunset Boulevard. That was a long time ago. And after you go and see how adorable he continues to be in “Music and Lyrics," make sure to stop and get the soundtrack because it, as well as the movie, is unforgettable!