
Eddie Murphy Takes His Klumps
Updated Saturday, July 29, 2000, at 12:00 AM ET
Movies
Nutty Professor II: The Klumps (Universal Pictures). The sequel to the 1996 hit gets mostly negative reviews and unfavorable comparisons to its predecessor. Eddie Murphy stars—in extensive makeup and costume—as all members of the titular Klump family. While "no Murphy fan can dare to miss this showcase" (Mike Clark, USA Today), his laudable work is not enough to make the film more than "half a movie at best" (Elvis Mitchell, the New York Times). The plot concerns the re-emergence of Buddy Love (Murphy sans latex)—the lean, mean alter ego of the rotund Professor Sherman Klump—and his impact on Sherman's wedding to a fellow scientist played by Janet Jackson. For most critics, this reunion with the Klumps is "more of a chore than a pleasure" (Kenneth Turan, the Los Angeles Times), though a minority think it's "a gas" (Rita Kempley, the Washington Post). (The official Jerry Lewis Comedy Museum and Store has enough information and merchandise about the original Nutty Professor to sate a Frenchman.)
Girl on the Bridge (Paramount Classics). Excellent reviews for this French import about a suicidal woman rescued by a knife-thrower, who then makes her his assistant. Starring pop singer Vanessa Paradis (Johnny Depp's wife), the film is "droll but also soaked in doom-laden eroticism. ... The banter is fast and funny, but it's the poetic imagery that wins you over" (David Edelstein, Slate). Daily Variety agrees, calling it "an unconventional love story that toys with the conventions of movie romance while careening ahead with the suspense and verve of an action thriller" (Lisa Nesselson). Shot in black and white, it's "a tangy frappé of a movie—preposterously comic, deliriously romantic, outrageously stylish" (Richard Schickel, Time). A few find the film unsatisfying. The New York Times' A.O. Scott praises most of the film but says it's ruined by a weak ending, which is "like watching a high-stakes gambler amass a big pile of chips and then fritter it away on a series of small, pointless bets." (Click here to read Edelstein's review in Slate).
The Eyes of Tammy Faye (Lions Gate Films). Although "more of a mash note than a formal documentary," this pic about the former televangelist is good campy fun (Elvis Mitchell, the New York Times). Narrated by RuPaul and with title cards read out by hand puppets, the film never takes itself or its subject very seriously. Some critics find this distressing: "Each shot is simultaneously dedicated to reglorifying Tammy Faye's public image (the PTL song-and-dance flashbacks are as chilling a vision of Yankee foolishness as you'll ever see), and contemptuously pissing on her for it … her cinebiographers come off as smirking buffoons" (Michael Atkinson, the Village Voice). (Slate's David Edelstein calls it "a hilarious, poignant, lovingly ironic celebration of her rise and fall and her refusal to be broken." Read the rest of his review here.)
Book
American Rhapsody, by Joe Eszterhas (Alfred A. Knopf). The celebrity screenwriter's (Basic Instinct, Showgirls) pseudo-journalistic account of the Lewinsky affair may be the media event its publisher had hoped for, but the critical reaction runs the gamut from unenthused to appalled. Eszterhas' "grand unified theory of narcissism" (Lynda Obst, the Los Angeles Times) is that he and Clinton are kindred spirits, enabling what amounts to an "overwritten and overheated mishmash of memoir, history, and fiction" (Bob Minzesheimer, USA Today). "If you're someone who cares enough about the Lewinsky scandal to read more about it—all five of you, raise your hands—you will already know everything Mr. Eszterhas knows" (Andrew Ferguson, the Wall Street Journal). The lone Eszterhas apologist is Liz Smith (Newsday), who is evidently on a first-name basis with the author: "It is the most corrosively scathing, compulsively readable work of hubris (as Joe himself describes the book) since Norman Mailer put his spin on Marilyn Monroe." But too many more credible voices overwhelm Smith's aberrant analysis. Janet Maslin (the New York Times) calls Rhapsody "a loose rambling sketchbook," and Obst laments bitterly, "Trees were felled for this." (Read Liz Smith's column on "Joe" and an excerpt from the book.)
Music
Songs From an American Movie, Volume 1: Learning How To Smile, by Everclear (Capitol Records). Success has certainly not dampened the spirits of grunge-punkers Everclear, who will release the second volume of this two-part concept album later this year. Everyone agrees that the band's happier, bubbly sound is "pleasant" (Ben Goldberg, Spin) as with the radio single "Wonderful," complete with a cheery "na-na-na" chorus. "It's actually kinda sweet to hear front man (and primary songwriter) Art Alexakis stomp through upbeat, instantly likeable tunes" (Billboard). Marc Bennett (CMJ) doubts whether the album "makes sense as a concept record" but concedes that the "hooky, mid-tempo songs will not disappoint." But for some dark-minded critics, this album of "rejected Aerosmith ballads" (Goldberg) is just a bit too saccharine, "exactly the sort of generic corporate rock Everclear were supposed to be rebelling against" (David Browne, Entertainment Weekly). (Listen to samples and buy the album here.)
How Exactly Do They Measure Snowfall? With a Ruler?
If You Want To Be Lectured on Racial Politics by Matt Damon, Go See Invictus
If You Want To Be Lectured on Racial Politics by Disney, Go See The Princess and the Frog
The Week's Best Editorial Cartoons
Is the American Romance With the Drive-Through Finally Over?
Slate Readers Pick the Year's 10 Most Interesting News Stories












Reader Response from The Fray:
[Note from the Fray Editor: This previous Summary Judgement, covering reviews of X-Men, continues to be the subject of controversy in The Fray. Did reviewers like the
movie? Did viewers like the movie? ("Yes we did"--everyone) Do we want professional critics, or honest moviegoers' opinions? ("You want my opinion"--everyone) How about those mutant powers, then? Makes a change from trouble in Movies Fray. The exchange below covers the main points:]
I was startled to read that "The consensus is glum" regarding reviews of X-Men, as the reviews I had found on the web tended towards the positive. Having seen the movie, and the audience's response, I am unsurprised by its $57 million first-weekend take and predict good "legs" based on word of mouth. Not quite this summer's Matrix but quite good.
The three reviewers quoted are in USAT, NYT, and WP. I rarely look at print media movie reviews these days, preferring both the greater diversity of opinion and viewer poll results to be found online. I can recommend the Rotten Tomatoes web site which does an excellent job of summarizing dozens of movie reviews available on the web from major media, minor media, and film fan sites.
--Philip Gross
(To reply, click here.)
To Philip: In the wake of X-Men's incredible box office success, more than a few Fraysters have complained about the film's treatment in "Summary Judgment". Rotten Tomatoes, for instance, gives it an 85% thumbs-up rate. Rotten Tomatoes does provide an invaluable service, but it's a different one from that which "Summary Judgment" provides. RT gauges pre-release buzz on films, taking its reviews primarily from "Dark Horizons" and "Ain't-It-Cool-News" which, while not totally unreliable, are certainly not as useful as say, A. O. Scott or Roger Ebert. For instance, RT was instrumental in creating a frenzy around Gladiator literally months before it hit the gigaplexes. We take the pulse of only the major critics, who had vanishingly faint praise for X-Men. Having seen (and quite liked) X-Men myself, I feel a bit badly about its critical fate. But not as badly as I would feel quoting the masses of sunlight-averse techies who populate the film's test screenings and subsequently write illiterate reviews for Rotten Tomatoes. Online reviews should be used as the first word on a film, not the last word
--Couper Samuelson
(To reply, click here.)
[Couper Samuelson is an intern at Slate.]
(7/24)