Barbershop (2002)
Dir. Tim Story
Written by Marc Brown
Starring: Ice Cube, Cedric the Entertainer, Eve
Eddie: See, in my day, a barber was more than just somebody who sit around in a FUBU shirt with his drawers hanging all out. In my day, a barber was a counselor. He was a fashion expert. A style coach. Pimp. Just general all-around hustler. But the problem with y'all cats today, is that you got no skill. No sense of history. And then, with a straight face, got the nerve to want to be somebody. Want somebody to respect you. But it takes respect to get respect. Understand? See, I'm old. But, Lord willing, I'd be spared the sight of seeing everything that we worked for flushed down the drain by someone who don't know no better or care.
I have to begin by prefacing this piece with the fact that I am biracial. Or maybe multi-racial is a more appropriate term. Why do I have to express this right off the bat? Because the complicated mystory/herstory that descends from my background gifts me with slightly different view than those who don’t have my background. I struggle with my ethnic identity much as I imagine most people do and even though I identify as both “black” and “white” I know intellectually that I don’t fully understand what these terms mean and probably never will. Whewww…glad to get that out of the way, basically I have a love and hate relationship with films that could be termed African-American films; especially comedies where I literally laugh and cringe simultaneously. Al Sharpton had a few things to say about this film because Cedric the Entertainer makes several jokes that denigrate Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks.
Eddie(Cedric): There are three things that Black people need to tell the truth about. Number one: Rodney King should've gotten his ass beat for being drunk in a Honda a white part of Los Angeles. Number two: O.J. did it! And number three: Rosa Parks didn't do nuthin' but sit her Black ass down!
and then the film does question itself as well:
Jimmy: Eddie, not only is what you're saying not true, it is wrong and disrespectful for you to discuss Rosa Parks in that way.
Eddie: Wait, hold on here. Is this a barbershop? Is this a barbershop? If we can't talk straight in a barbershop, then where can we talk straight? We can't talk straight nowhere else. You know, this ain't nothin' but healthy conversation, that's all.
I think the question of “going to far” concerning comedy will be one that forever exists. When does it stop being funny and hint at deeper social issues or does the fact that it has entered the arena of comedy mean that there has been some progress? I don’t know—and I think that these issues are way too big for little old me.
I found an article that wrote about an interview done on CNN with Ice Cube, the main protagonist in the film, he was there to be interviewed as a rapper but what he says speaks to what I’ve written above. He said:
* “In response to a question as to whether or not rap bears any “social message,” Ice Cube was careful to make a distinction between the occasions when rappers were “just having fun” and the times when they were performing a more serious “social message.” His distinction between informal “play” and more formal “message,” he argued, was apparent to the kids who could “tell the difference” even when their parents couldn’t. He defended rap music’s accountability for what is often seen as violent lyrics by comparing the violence of rap to the violence of film representation “[i]n movies like Terminator and Heat,” for example, “where the violence is visually represented.” Ice Cube’s defense implies that, similar to the violence in films, the linguistic violence in rap music should be taken as representation—performance, play, and perhaps even social message all at the same time; a “theatrical” rather than a supposedly objective or mimetic CNN—and that the performance should not be confused with the performer.”
is that they key? Putting “the performance” in it’s place and not confusing it with the performer?
Barbershops are the property of men; they provide a service to men usually performed by men. It is complicated space, essentially no girls aloud so I’ve never actually been inside one. I remember my brothers used to go to one and come back after a relatively short time (from my perspective—sometimes I would literally be at the hairdresser for five to seven hours, many times they broke combs on my curly/frizzy hair) not looking much different than when they went, having the “edges” done and other mysterious things done that I thought was a waste of time and money. My young self didn’t yet understand that it was more a rite or ritual of African-American manhood or boyhood than anything else.
I was trying to think of what kind of Screwball Comedy or even what genre this could be compared to and nothing was coming to mind until I saw the end of the film. It reminded of a Frank Capra movie, actually, it has the comedy along with some melodrama. Although Barbershop has a few PG-13 rated moments it still is about family, doing what is right, and having the right values. The ending of the movie is schmaltzy and reinforces the qualities listed above. Capra was known for these kind of patriotic, about the “common man,” and generally corny and sentimental films. Capra directed two movies that had definite screwball tendencies; the most famous is It Happened One Night, and Arsenic and Old Lace. Barbershop can be compared to Capra’s film because it is a comedy with heart or soul rather, it idealizes nostalgia and the credo that if you work hard you can attain the American Dream, while also saying that if you go the other route you will be unsuccessful.
I don’t have much to say about language in this film. It is mostly composed of insults exchanged back and forth between the barbershop crew. I will end with a quote because I feel ill equipped to write about the complicated issues that arise when talking about African-American Language. Dr. Geneva Smitherman, a linguist and educator, known for her advocacy of African-American English; she has written several books on the history and significance of African-American English.
**“Let’s rap/wrap it up. Docta G has shown that Black folk have always already been pushin the language envelope. Black folk have been fightin on all fronts, the physical, geopolitical, metaphysical, philosophical, aesthetic, religious, political, ideological, psychological, spiritual, symbolic, economic, hermeneutic, academic, linguistic, iconic, and more. Through all of these wars, we have managed to maintain a sense of ethics, humanity, dignity, and sanity. Damn! We talkin bout folk who simply refuse to die. Don’t even talk about givin up! What manner of people DO WE BE? Protean. Always already in struggle, al- ways already beginning some new shit, conceptualizing some new order of things, some other/alternative/unheard of/unimagined/ unexplored reality and mode of being. We bees doin da unthinkable. Must be magical and real. We always pushin. Whether its remaking and reconfiguring some superimposed language, creating musical instruments from some old found object, doctoring up a traditional in- strument, because you know we gotta hear that twang and chromatic sound, or pushin the bounds of what it means to be human and democratic, we up on it, way out in front. Blusing. Bopping. Moving. Rapping. Hip Hopping. Historicizing. Morphing. Always in the process of red-shifting, even when we be down. And, yes, LANGUAGING. We are still in process. What next? Can’t be sho. But I’ll C U when WE get there. As Docta G says, stay tuned”
*Rap's Unruly Body The Postmodern Performance of Black Male Identity on the American Stage by Saddik, Annette J.
TDR: The Drama Review, Volume 47, Number 4 (T 180), Winter 2003, pp. 110-127
** Geneva Smitherman: The Social Ontology of African-American Language, the Power of Nommo, and the Dynamics of Resistance and Identity Through Language by Yancy, George.
The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, New Series, Volume 18, Number 4, 2004, pp. 273-299
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Pillows Singin’?
Pillow Talk (1959)
Dir. Michael Gordon
Written by Stanley Shapiro and Maurice Richlin
Starring: Doris Day, Rock Hudson, Tony Randall, Thelma Ritter
Brad Allen: Look, I don't know what's bothering you, but don't take your bedroom problems out on me.
Jan: I have no bedroom problems. There's nothing in my bedroom that bothers me.
Brad Allen: Oh-h-h-h. That's too bad.
Pillow Talk is the quintessential late 50s and 1960s sex comedy. My parents were very strict about what they let us watch when we were youngsters; but this film slid by because even though it is a sex comedy the sex is absent. The motion picture production code was still being enforced but it was losing power and would soon end in 1968. This film was a definite departure from Doris Day’s former movie persona. She was the blond blue-eyed girl next-door and in this film she was the blond blue-eyed career girl next-door.
It is difficult for me the modern-day movie-viewer, desensitized as I am, to look at this film and find it risqué but I did find a bit of trivia that said Rock Hudson turned down the film a few times because it was too risqué for his image. Sex comedies are definitely connected to SC they deal with many of the same elements in similar ways. Marriage, and the pursuit of it is still a major theme and is the goal of those of the female persuasion. I am surprised that this is still the goal in all romantic comedies whether it is explicit or implicit.
Alma: If there's anything worse than a woman living alone, it's a woman saying she likes it.
“Talk” or dialogue is the mainstay of Pillow Talk; this is definitely a battle of the sexes theme and a lot of the film’s dialogue is a back and forth between the main protagonists Jan (Day) and Brad (Hudson). I noticed that Doris Day’s dialogue about sex is only sung. She sings the title song “Pillow Talk”:
Pillow talk, pillow talk
Another night of hearin' myself talk, talk, talk, talk
Wonder how it would be to have someone to pillow talk with me
I wonder how
I wonder who
Pillow talk, pillow talk
Another night of bein' alone with pillow talk
When it's all said and done, two heads together can be better than one
That's what they say
They always say
All I do is talk to my pillow
Talk to my pillow, talk to my pillow
All I do is talk to my pillow
Talk about the boy I'm gonna marry someday
Somehow, some way, sometime
Pillow talk, pillow talk
Another night of gettin' my fill of pillow talk
You and I both agree there must be a boy, must be a pillow
Must be a pillow-talkin' boy for me
I hope I'm right
I'd better be right…
and then on the road-when Brad and Jan are escaping to the country for a weekend she sings to herself a song titled:
“Possess Me”
Hold me tight, and kiss me right, I’m yours tonight.
My darling, possess me.
Tenderly, and breathlessly, make love to me, my darling, possess me."…
Much scholarship has been done on the image and idea of Doris Day as a virginal figure and thinking back myself on the films I’ve seen of her this is not true. In fact in another pairing of Rock Hudson and Doris Day she has a baby out of wedlock. So, why does this idea still permeate popular culture, it might be because she never explicitly deals with sex. Either she is made a sex object by her potential partner or she modestly sings the songs above and renders them neutral by context or vicinity? Singing these lines instead of saying them turns them into submissive and passive statements. This is one way that Day doesn’t fully fit the bill of a true SC female protagonist. Can you imagine Hildy Johnson singing to Walter Burns in His Girl Friday? It definitely would have changed the flow and dynamics of the screwball genre if they added singing to them.
Dir. Michael Gordon
Written by Stanley Shapiro and Maurice Richlin
Starring: Doris Day, Rock Hudson, Tony Randall, Thelma Ritter
Brad Allen: Look, I don't know what's bothering you, but don't take your bedroom problems out on me.
Jan: I have no bedroom problems. There's nothing in my bedroom that bothers me.
Brad Allen: Oh-h-h-h. That's too bad.
Pillow Talk is the quintessential late 50s and 1960s sex comedy. My parents were very strict about what they let us watch when we were youngsters; but this film slid by because even though it is a sex comedy the sex is absent. The motion picture production code was still being enforced but it was losing power and would soon end in 1968. This film was a definite departure from Doris Day’s former movie persona. She was the blond blue-eyed girl next-door and in this film she was the blond blue-eyed career girl next-door.
It is difficult for me the modern-day movie-viewer, desensitized as I am, to look at this film and find it risqué but I did find a bit of trivia that said Rock Hudson turned down the film a few times because it was too risqué for his image. Sex comedies are definitely connected to SC they deal with many of the same elements in similar ways. Marriage, and the pursuit of it is still a major theme and is the goal of those of the female persuasion. I am surprised that this is still the goal in all romantic comedies whether it is explicit or implicit.
Alma: If there's anything worse than a woman living alone, it's a woman saying she likes it.
“Talk” or dialogue is the mainstay of Pillow Talk; this is definitely a battle of the sexes theme and a lot of the film’s dialogue is a back and forth between the main protagonists Jan (Day) and Brad (Hudson). I noticed that Doris Day’s dialogue about sex is only sung. She sings the title song “Pillow Talk”:
Pillow talk, pillow talk
Another night of hearin' myself talk, talk, talk, talk
Wonder how it would be to have someone to pillow talk with me
I wonder how
I wonder who
Pillow talk, pillow talk
Another night of bein' alone with pillow talk
When it's all said and done, two heads together can be better than one
That's what they say
They always say
All I do is talk to my pillow
Talk to my pillow, talk to my pillow
All I do is talk to my pillow
Talk about the boy I'm gonna marry someday
Somehow, some way, sometime
Pillow talk, pillow talk
Another night of gettin' my fill of pillow talk
You and I both agree there must be a boy, must be a pillow
Must be a pillow-talkin' boy for me
I hope I'm right
I'd better be right…
and then on the road-when Brad and Jan are escaping to the country for a weekend she sings to herself a song titled:
“Possess Me”
Hold me tight, and kiss me right, I’m yours tonight.
My darling, possess me.
Tenderly, and breathlessly, make love to me, my darling, possess me."…
Much scholarship has been done on the image and idea of Doris Day as a virginal figure and thinking back myself on the films I’ve seen of her this is not true. In fact in another pairing of Rock Hudson and Doris Day she has a baby out of wedlock. So, why does this idea still permeate popular culture, it might be because she never explicitly deals with sex. Either she is made a sex object by her potential partner or she modestly sings the songs above and renders them neutral by context or vicinity? Singing these lines instead of saying them turns them into submissive and passive statements. This is one way that Day doesn’t fully fit the bill of a true SC female protagonist. Can you imagine Hildy Johnson singing to Walter Burns in His Girl Friday? It definitely would have changed the flow and dynamics of the screwball genre if they added singing to them.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
F-ing Wishful Thinking
*post might have some rated R language
Seth: He is the sweetest guy. Have you ever looked into his eyes? It was like the first time I heard the Beatles.
Superbad (2007)
Dir: Greg Mottola
Written by: Seth Rogen & Evan Goldberg
Starring: Jonah Hill, Michael Cera, Christopher Mintz-Plasse
Cursing, swearing, vulgarities, blue language, [pardon my] French, etc.
“…swearing has a number of distinct functions. In some of these, swearing is an utterance of it’s own, such as for examples exclamations of anger, surprise like Bloody Hell!, unfriendly suggestions like Go to Hell!, or curses like Damn you! In other functions the swearing expressions are part of an utterance for example bloody, like hell, and the devil as in It was bloody difficult, We ran like hell and What the Devil do you mean?” (Ljung xi)
Well--what is the function of swearing in Superbad? I wasn’t allowed to curse growing up, only in college these last couple of years have I learned to appreciate the cleansing quality of a high-quality expletive. Previously, I believed that swearing was the unimaginative persons tool. Superbad has the most inventive uses of taboo words that I have ever come across. And unlike other films where I thought that the swearing was superfluous it works in the film. I found a Wikipedia page that track the number of f-words in films and they said that it was said 176 times in the film—not surprising. In the last blog post about Superbad I track how many times they used some variation of the word vagina 23, I think, and later I tracked how many times they said penis or balls or variants of them around 65. But what does that mean? I don’t know I think I need to watch more Bromances in order to study language uses and gender as well as sexuality in these singular films. *an aside is the weird male fascination with vomiting—I just don’t get it –shuddering-.
Not surprisingly, not a lot of academic scholarship has been done on the film genre jokingly referred to as Bromance; actually there are none that I could find. It really has only been a few years that the term “bro” and “romance” merged. There is now a plethora of new terms and words that are use to describe the unlikely couples in these films.
➢ mandate (when two heterosexual males go on a date)
➢ bromantics (the particular branch of romance that is shown in a Bromance film)
➢ mangina (an insult)
…just to list a few, it’s pretty safe to say that if you add “bro” or “man” as prefix you can create a large and funny vocabulary.
How can I align Superbad or other Bromantic Comedies with other better, classic, iconic screwball films like His Girl Friday? Sadly, I have come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a neo-screwball. The circumstances surrounding, the culture that created them no longer exists in the same form. I do believe that certain elements have integrated into pre-existing and new genres. That is why I can say with some certainty that I believe a close approximation of a classic screwball male/female couple exists within the Bromance with a male/male pairing.
Seth: I just wanna go to the rooftops and scream, "I love my best friend, Evan."
Evan: Let's... go on my roof.
Seth: [whispers] For sure
.
Many of these films have very strong homophobic elements that is maybe a case of the lady doth protest too much? Beneath the search for a female sex companion in most of these films is the true friendship between male characters. Seth(Hill) and Evan(Cera) are really perfect for each other. Instead of a traditional battle between different sexes it is a battle between the same sex.
These films have the narrative trajectory of a romantic comedy, just with two males as the actual “couple”, interspersed with gross-out comedy elements. Another reason that these “couples” resemble classic SC is that there will be no consummation of their “love,” similar to films produced during the enforcement of the production code. I’m not sure what kind of kind is being enforced by the men in these films?
INT. EVAN'S BASEMENT - NIGHT
Seth and Evan are lying in sleeping bags beside one another.
SETH
I can't believe she said that shit.
EVAN
Oh my lord. You have no idea!
They laugh harder.
EVAN (CONT'D)
And then you saved me, man! I fucking
love you!
SETH
I fucking love you, too, man! I'm not
embarrassed, I just love you!
EVAN
Why don't we say that more? It feels
good! I love you more than my brother,
man. Like, when you went away for Easter
last year, I, like, missed you. You know?
SETH
I missed you, too. Come here, man.
Seth grabs Evan and they hug.
SETH (CONT'D)
We'll always be friends. `Cause we love
each other.
The phrase that epitomizes these films is “I Love You, Man”. The verbal equivalent of those awkward one-armed hugs that men exchange. The right thought is behind them but they are tripped up by the fear of appearing to be punks or homosexuals. The portion of dialogue above is at the end of the movie; both Evan and Seth are drunk and that is the reason why they are professing their “love” in such a straight forward manner.
This blog is going to continue in some form far into the future as I have plans to write a book about Bromance films. So keep an eye out for that in the future.
Seth: He is the sweetest guy. Have you ever looked into his eyes? It was like the first time I heard the Beatles.
Superbad (2007)
Dir: Greg Mottola
Written by: Seth Rogen & Evan Goldberg
Starring: Jonah Hill, Michael Cera, Christopher Mintz-Plasse
Cursing, swearing, vulgarities, blue language, [pardon my] French, etc.
“…swearing has a number of distinct functions. In some of these, swearing is an utterance of it’s own, such as for examples exclamations of anger, surprise like Bloody Hell!, unfriendly suggestions like Go to Hell!, or curses like Damn you! In other functions the swearing expressions are part of an utterance for example bloody, like hell, and the devil as in It was bloody difficult, We ran like hell and What the Devil do you mean?” (Ljung xi)
Well--what is the function of swearing in Superbad? I wasn’t allowed to curse growing up, only in college these last couple of years have I learned to appreciate the cleansing quality of a high-quality expletive. Previously, I believed that swearing was the unimaginative persons tool. Superbad has the most inventive uses of taboo words that I have ever come across. And unlike other films where I thought that the swearing was superfluous it works in the film. I found a Wikipedia page that track the number of f-words in films and they said that it was said 176 times in the film—not surprising. In the last blog post about Superbad I track how many times they used some variation of the word vagina 23, I think, and later I tracked how many times they said penis or balls or variants of them around 65. But what does that mean? I don’t know I think I need to watch more Bromances in order to study language uses and gender as well as sexuality in these singular films. *an aside is the weird male fascination with vomiting—I just don’t get it –shuddering-.
Not surprisingly, not a lot of academic scholarship has been done on the film genre jokingly referred to as Bromance; actually there are none that I could find. It really has only been a few years that the term “bro” and “romance” merged. There is now a plethora of new terms and words that are use to describe the unlikely couples in these films.
➢ mandate (when two heterosexual males go on a date)
➢ bromantics (the particular branch of romance that is shown in a Bromance film)
➢ mangina (an insult)
…just to list a few, it’s pretty safe to say that if you add “bro” or “man” as prefix you can create a large and funny vocabulary.
How can I align Superbad or other Bromantic Comedies with other better, classic, iconic screwball films like His Girl Friday? Sadly, I have come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a neo-screwball. The circumstances surrounding, the culture that created them no longer exists in the same form. I do believe that certain elements have integrated into pre-existing and new genres. That is why I can say with some certainty that I believe a close approximation of a classic screwball male/female couple exists within the Bromance with a male/male pairing.
Seth: I just wanna go to the rooftops and scream, "I love my best friend, Evan."
Evan: Let's... go on my roof.
Seth: [whispers] For sure
.
Many of these films have very strong homophobic elements that is maybe a case of the lady doth protest too much? Beneath the search for a female sex companion in most of these films is the true friendship between male characters. Seth(Hill) and Evan(Cera) are really perfect for each other. Instead of a traditional battle between different sexes it is a battle between the same sex.
These films have the narrative trajectory of a romantic comedy, just with two males as the actual “couple”, interspersed with gross-out comedy elements. Another reason that these “couples” resemble classic SC is that there will be no consummation of their “love,” similar to films produced during the enforcement of the production code. I’m not sure what kind of kind is being enforced by the men in these films?
INT. EVAN'S BASEMENT - NIGHT
Seth and Evan are lying in sleeping bags beside one another.
SETH
I can't believe she said that shit.
EVAN
Oh my lord. You have no idea!
They laugh harder.
EVAN (CONT'D)
And then you saved me, man! I fucking
love you!
SETH
I fucking love you, too, man! I'm not
embarrassed, I just love you!
EVAN
Why don't we say that more? It feels
good! I love you more than my brother,
man. Like, when you went away for Easter
last year, I, like, missed you. You know?
SETH
I missed you, too. Come here, man.
Seth grabs Evan and they hug.
SETH (CONT'D)
We'll always be friends. `Cause we love
each other.
The phrase that epitomizes these films is “I Love You, Man”. The verbal equivalent of those awkward one-armed hugs that men exchange. The right thought is behind them but they are tripped up by the fear of appearing to be punks or homosexuals. The portion of dialogue above is at the end of the movie; both Evan and Seth are drunk and that is the reason why they are professing their “love” in such a straight forward manner.
This blog is going to continue in some form far into the future as I have plans to write a book about Bromance films. So keep an eye out for that in the future.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Screwy Ain't It!: Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Screwy Ain't It!: Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm: "It’s Not What You Say It’s How You Say It Young Frankenstein (1974) Dir. Mel Brooks Written by Gene Wilder and Mel Brooks Starring: Gene Wi..."
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
It’s Not What You Say It’s How You Say It
Young Frankenstein (1974)
Dir. Mel Brooks
Written by Gene Wilder and Mel Brooks
Starring: Gene Wilder, Teri Garr, Peter Boyle, Marty Feldman, Madeline Kahn Cloris Leachman
Young Frankenstein, like all of Mel Brooks’ films, is many things. Firstly, a comedy, but it also touches upon different genres such as: satire, parody, homage…but more to the point could it be considered a Screwball?
This is the second Mel Brooks film that I have ever seen. The first that I saw this past summer was High Anxiety, a parody of suspense films—especially Alfred Hitchcock’s Vertigo. It was funny—but not laugh out loud funny. YF took a while to grow on me but now I love it. I’ve also seen Blazing Saddles recently which I have to say was difficult to watch. I know that it was a satire but the number of n-words bandied about so casually threw me for a loop. Brooks has, what I would term a heavy-handed approach to humor. It slaps you in the face and punches you in the stomach. Both Mel Brooks and Gene Wilder wrote this film, so it is a little subtler in some ways than a pure Brooks’ film.
Another descriptive term that I would use would be deliberate, every word and movement is formulated to get the most absurdity out of it possible. This film is a parody of the old black and white monster movies so the pace of the film’s dialogue is rather slow. Gene Wilder has a singular way of expressing himself, he uses leisurely and measured tones interspersed with outbursts that come out of nowhere as his comedic markers.
YF is chock full of sight gags and verbal gags; every scene is full of jokes, jests, witticisms, quips, puns, double entendres; practical jokes, stunts, larks; informal cracks, wisecracks, and one-liners—you get the jist. Accents are especially important: added “zes” and “unds” along with a few German words for good measure are added to the mix for optimum comedic effect.
Upon the fifth or sixth viewing I’ve come to the conclusion that this is not a screwball. It is too many things to be considered a neo-screwball. Mel Brooks’ films taken as whole are screwy, definitely, but they are in a different comedy bracket—more of a pastiche. When compared to a film such as His Girl Friday YF’s dialogue is hysterical but the delivery is so different.
Women are not very important in this film, which is another reason why it can’t compare to other Screwball comedies. There are couplings and love triangles and inevitable marriages but this film is more about the individual gags then the narrative as a whole. This film definitely has some Bromance elements that I could potentially explore but that topic is for another day and another blog. On the surface this film has some of the tropes of classic screwball such as:
Ø Marriage (in some way shape or form, e.g. couple getting divorced, married, or re- married)
Ø Verbal gymnastics or sparring
Ø Physical Comedy (not required)
but overall it does not use them in the way that a Screwball film does.
Young Frankenstein (1974)
Dir. Mel Brooks
Written by Gene Wilder and Mel Brooks
Starring: Gene Wilder, Teri Garr, Peter Boyle, Marty Feldman, Madeline Kahn Cloris Leachman
Young Frankenstein, like all of Mel Brooks’ films, is many things. Firstly, a comedy, but it also touches upon different genres such as: satire, parody, homage…but more to the point could it be considered a Screwball?
This is the second Mel Brooks film that I have ever seen. The first that I saw this past summer was High Anxiety, a parody of suspense films—especially Alfred Hitchcock’s Vertigo. It was funny—but not laugh out loud funny. YF took a while to grow on me but now I love it. I’ve also seen Blazing Saddles recently which I have to say was difficult to watch. I know that it was a satire but the number of n-words bandied about so casually threw me for a loop. Brooks has, what I would term a heavy-handed approach to humor. It slaps you in the face and punches you in the stomach. Both Mel Brooks and Gene Wilder wrote this film, so it is a little subtler in some ways than a pure Brooks’ film.
Another descriptive term that I would use would be deliberate, every word and movement is formulated to get the most absurdity out of it possible. This film is a parody of the old black and white monster movies so the pace of the film’s dialogue is rather slow. Gene Wilder has a singular way of expressing himself, he uses leisurely and measured tones interspersed with outbursts that come out of nowhere as his comedic markers.
YF is chock full of sight gags and verbal gags; every scene is full of jokes, jests, witticisms, quips, puns, double entendres; practical jokes, stunts, larks; informal cracks, wisecracks, and one-liners—you get the jist. Accents are especially important: added “zes” and “unds” along with a few German words for good measure are added to the mix for optimum comedic effect.
Upon the fifth or sixth viewing I’ve come to the conclusion that this is not a screwball. It is too many things to be considered a neo-screwball. Mel Brooks’ films taken as whole are screwy, definitely, but they are in a different comedy bracket—more of a pastiche. When compared to a film such as His Girl Friday YF’s dialogue is hysterical but the delivery is so different.
Women are not very important in this film, which is another reason why it can’t compare to other Screwball comedies. There are couplings and love triangles and inevitable marriages but this film is more about the individual gags then the narrative as a whole. This film definitely has some Bromance elements that I could potentially explore but that topic is for another day and another blog. On the surface this film has some of the tropes of classic screwball such as:
Ø Marriage (in some way shape or form, e.g. couple getting divorced, married, or re- married)
Ø Verbal gymnastics or sparring
Ø Physical Comedy (not required)
but overall it does not use them in the way that a Screwball film does.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)