Category Archives: Jason Bateman

2014: The Possible Year In Movies

Leave a reply

 

Image via Collider

2013 was an excellent year for movies. 2014 seems like a mixed bag so far. There are a lot of solid releases coming out down the road.

For now, I feel pessimistic. Then again, it is easy to feel that way in January and February when studios focus on the Oscars and release all of the movies they have no faith in. 
 
I think the dry spell will not last too long though, as there are already some promising releases in February and March. Here now are the list of films I want to see, the films I want to ignore, and the films I hope live up to their possible potential in 2014:

Analog This: Season Four of Arrested Development (So Far)

Leave a reply

SPOILER ALERT: I have not finished the fourth season yet, but there may be some light spoilers ahead. Read with caution.

Seven years ago.

That’s when the original series finale of “Arrested Development” aired. That’s also how long I waited for TV’s greatest comedy to come back on the air.

“Arrested Development” holds a special place in my heart. The first three seasons have been like a Comedy Bible to me. It taught me to embrace details as well as the slow buildup to a laugh. I’ve rewatched and deconstructed every episode so many times, yet I always find something new to marvel at. In the universe of “Arrested Development,” no comedy stone is left unturned.

For years, I was constantly teased with the idea that there could be an “Arrested Development” movie. Any mention of the movie itself (without any promise of it actually happening) became something of a recurring joke worthy of the “Arrested Development” universe. That is, until the day that it was announced that a fourth season that would lead up to an eventual movie would be released.

Suddenly, “Arrested Development” was on the level of hype and public scrutiny that no cancelled cult TV series would normally face.  Essentially, season four would have to be the greatest event in television history, because that’s what every hyperbolic blogger labeled it as. However, it is rare that anything that is labeled as “the greatest ever” before it is actually released will actually be the greatest ever. Narrowing it down to film and television, most of the greatest works came out of nowhere with very little hype behind it. Or, as was the case with the first three seasons of “Arrested Development,” it could take years for the public to ever come around to it (despite multiple Emmy wins).

Continued After the Jump



There is no denying that season four of “Arrested Development” is among the greatest events in television history. First off, in an age where everyone is creating a Kickstarter to bring back their favorite cancelled shows, “Arrested Development” was able to return on strong word of mouth alone. The fact that the new season premiered on Netflix is something of a middle finger to all of the networks that wouldn’t give it a chance.* My theory for the original cancellation of “Arrested Development” was that it was too ahead of its time. The circumstances that it premiered in did not support the needs necessary for watching it. It is a show that is meant to be paused, rewound, and fast forwarded. Unfortunately, it hit the air before the proliferation of the DVR. While I have my problems with the binge watching that is caused by releasing an entire season of a show at once, “Arrested Development” was meant for Netflix. It set the stage for the existence of other shows that are jam-packed with jokes, such as “30 Rock,” “Community,” and “Archer”.

During the buildup to season four, I tried my best to resist calling this “the greatest television event of all time.” After all, that is a big label to give something that the world hasn’t yet seen. While this new season is far from perfect, to call it’s existence important would be an understatement.

Before I delve into the details of the new season, I must clarify that I am not yet finished with it. I mean that in two senses. I say that both because I have not watched every episode yet, and that I will not be finished with this season until I have rewatched it and picked up on every hidden detail that I can possibly find. With “Arrested Development,” that is a job that never really ends. I begin here not because this seems like a perfect place to start, but because I couldn’t wait much longer.  It’s been seven years, and while there are always new things to say about “Arrested Development,” finally there are new episodes to write about.

The fourth season is even more confusing and convoluted than any season before it, which is both a good and bad thing. This makes sense, as the Bluths are currently worse off than they’ve ever been. This season brings us to the present day, after a mysterious “Dark Period” has left the family in shambles. Even Michael Bluth (Jason Bateman), who was always the most sane one in the family, can’t quite keep it together.

Perhaps because of a bigger production budget, the Bluths are able to leave their beloved Newport Beach. George Michael (Michael Cera) heads off to college, as his father follows a little too closely behind (leading to one of the most overt incest moments in the show’s history). Meanwhile, Lindsay (Portia de Rossi) tries to find herself in India, George Senior (Jeffrey Tambor) and Oscar (Jeffrey Tambor) become unlikely business partners on the Mexican border, and Gob (Will Arnett) still just wants everyone to be his friend.

While structure is crucial to any story, only in “Arrested Development” is it such an integral part to the show’s uniqueness. The first three seasons of the show were described by Jason Bateman as “‘The Royal Tenenbaums’ shot like ‘COPS’.” It was a great spin to the dysfunctional family comedy, and a response to the rising popularity in reality television. Ten years have passed since the pilot premiered, and since then, reality shows make up a majority of the TV landscape. Since then, the Internet has changed how content is viewed. It is a bold move for a show to tinker with its format, but this is a show that defines bold creativity. While Ron Howard’s flawless narration remains intact, each episode now focuses on one character and then ties them back into everyone else’s lives. The concept of past and present is now all over the place. This season feels like somebody with very short attention span jumping back and forth between several YouTube videos.

This new experiment is not necessarily a bad thing, but it was something I had difficulty coping with for a while. While one could make an argument that any one of the Bluths are the best character of the show, the Bluths work best when they are all together. Tobias’ (David Cross) innuendos are nothing without Michael’s deadpan reactions to them (“There has got to be a better way to say that”). Nobody should be safe from Lucille’s (Jessica Walter) insults (“well joke’s on her because she doesn’t know how little I care for Gob”). This show is powered by human dysfunction.

While dysfunction makes the show funny, some sense of order is needed. In an interview, Hurwitz said that he only likes to watch something where he understands the direction it is headed in. In a way, he is praising formula. While formula often goes hand-in-hand with unoriginality, “Arrested Development” created a winning one that never got old. It has veered away from that original formula in many ways. The show is no longer constrained to 30 minutes broken up by commercials. Some of the new episodes run over 30 minutes, and some run under 30 minutes. Some feel a bit too long, and some feel like they could have used more. Hurwitz and crew could have tightened things up a bit and hurt nothing.

I hope that none of this gives the impression that I dislike the new season. Perhaps I’m just lamenting something that I will never get back. Somewhere around episode three (“Indian Takers”), the season began to turn. The farcical, heightened reality of “Arrested Development” had returned. The show had settled back into itself and eased up on the exposition. Then, when it felt comfortable, it took an even more meta turn than it did in season two with the “Scandalmakers” plot line. Ron Howard, the show’s offscreen narrator, became a character onscreen, and Michael finds himself the producer of a movie about his own family. Before it can be made, he must get the life rights from each of his family members. This is a little wink to the supposed purpose of the fourth season: once we’re completely caught up on the Bluths, perhaps “Arrested” fans will finally get the movie they were waiting for.

Some shows can’t recover when they go meta (many believe that the downfall of “The Simpsons” began after it went meta). However, “Arrested Development” has proven over and over again that it can constantly go over the edge and then climb back up. The behind-the-scenes stuff ultimately feels more fun than exclusive and it just makes absolute sense for this story. During its early run, “Arrested” provided some of the best satire on the Iraq War and the Bush Administration. While this season has offered some sharp commentary on the financial crisis and immigration, “The Daily Show” is always there to cover that front. Nobody else has made a portrait of the modern movie industry as funny as “Arrested Development” has.

One of the main things that threw me off most when starting the new season of “Arrested Development” was that the return felt surreal to me. This would be the first time in seven years that I would see a new episode of “Arrested Development.” Seven years. The last time I saw a new episode, it was the last four that ever aired, and they were crammed together on one Friday night in a time slot that nobody watched. As ridiculous as it sounds, I would now get to watch the Bluths say words that I had never heard them say before.

When laughs seemed scarce, I tried hard to remember what it was like seeing an episode of “Arrested Development” for the first time. I remembered that one viewing barely scratched the surface. In that regard, “Arrested Development” is like Freud’s Iceberg of comedy. Watching “Arrested Development” is an art form all its own. Viewing it requires one to multitask. What is happening in the background is just as important as what is happening in the foreground. A billboard can be just as funny or important as a line of dialogue.

Overall, “Arrested Development” requires patience. Things might not make sense the first or even the second time around, but the reward for sticking around is worth it. Just as there is always money in the banana stand, there is always something new lying beneath the surface of any given episode. I look forward to honing my ability to observe the Bluths, and seeing what else season four has to offer.

*While it is fun to blame Fox for the show’s cancellation, they deserve some credit here. They really did try with the show. They could have cancelled it after one season but they knew how good it was and tried for three seasons to find it the audience that it deserved.

And Five Years Later the Lord Said, "Let There Be More Arrested Development"

Leave a reply

Ever since “Arrested Development,” arguably the best sitcom ever put on television, was cancelled in 2006, speculation has been rampant on what will happen to The Bluths next. Creator Mitchell Hurwitz and cast members have hinted at a movie. However, the more they hyped it, the less likely it seemed to happen, and the more fans have been let down.

For the past five years, every time Jason Bateman has been asked about the movie and a soundbite such as “it’s happening” comes out of his mouth, bloggers and journalists alike have been quick to jump on it as evidence that the movie is on its way. But today, cast and crew released some news that actually seems a bit more tangible: ten new episodes of “Arrested Development” will air sometime next year. The movie will pick up where the last new episode left off. This news excited me so much that I accidentally spilled coffee all over my $6300 suit.
Each episode will supposedly focus on each character individually, and where they are in their lives since the show ended. I, for one, think this is a perfect idea, as the movie could now be about basically anything imaginable. It will also allow both the new episodes and the movie to take place in the present. What I hope is that the show keeps its mockumentary style, and that Ron Howard stays on as narrator.
All us loyal fans can do is hope this bit of news is true. If it is not, then the cast and crew of “Arrested Development” will be solidified as the smartest internet trolls of all time.
For any of you who aren’t a loyal fan of “Arrested Development” (and if you aren’t then for your own sake, start watching immediately), you may wonder why we haven’t moved on at this point. Well, it’s for good reason. Every episode of the show packed in so much wit and humor that repeated viewings are the only way to give this show any justice. However, three seasons of the Bluths simply isn’t enough. There can never be enough instances of Gob dancing like an idiot to “The Final Countdown,” Buster forgetting he has a hook for a hand, or Tobias taking the idea of a Freudian slip to the next level. What I’m trying to say is that no amount of “Arrested” puns could some up my excitement for the prospect of new episodes. But that won’t stop me. As the way-too-literal doctor from the show would say: everything is going to be “all right.” And by that I mean, he’s lost the use of his left hand.
See, Obama actually has gotten something accomplished while in office!

Movie Review: Horrible Bosses

1 Reply

Twelve years ago, Mike Judge mastered the cubicle comedy with “Office Space.” His workers just wanted freedom. In this summer’s “Horrible Bosses,” all the workers want to do is have their bosses killed. It’s funny how things change like that.

“Horrible Bosses” follows the lives of three men who are troubled at work: Nick (Jason Bateman), Kurt (Jason Sudekis), and Dale (Charlie Day). Nick goes by the life theory that good things only come when you work too hard and take orders excessively. His psychotic, manipulative boss Dave Harkin (Kevin Spacey), takes advantage of him and eventually takes over the job that would have been Nick’s.
Of the three of them, Kurt is happiest at his job as an accountant at a small chemical company until his boss’s son Bobby Pellitt (Collin Farrell) takes over the company. Bobby is a Scarface wannabe who has no regard for the company he works for. At one point, he tells Kurt to “trim the fat” from the company (by that, he means, fire all the fat people).
Then there is Dale, who’s only purpose in the world is to be the perfect husband. Though he does need some money to support himself, so naturally he becomes a dental hygienist. Unfortunately, his incredibly inappropriate boss, Julia (Jennifer Aniston), is sexually harassing him and prepares a blackmail plan to get him to have sex with her.
The three men constantly reconvene at Applebee’s and discuss their problems until one day they realize that they must kill their bosses in order to achieve happiness. So, they hire a criminal (Jamie Foxx) to help them out. As accordance to the law of comedy, things don’t work out quite as planned.
“Horrible Bosses” is a great summer blockbuster comedy and it succeeds where many other in this field have failed in both being funny and being entertaining. Films like this usually have to deal with following a stringent plot structure and arrive at a certain plot point (think of “The Hangover” movies). While “Horrible Bosses” must not veer from its murder attempt plot line, it also doesn’t hesitate to let everyone involved enjoy themselves a little. What can be picked up from the hilarious outtakes seen in the credits is that improvisation is not out of the “Horrible Bosses” formula.
I’ve always believed that comedy consists of a good mix of good acting, and even better writing. Writing makes a good comedy smart and plausible, and good acting makes the characters and every bit of dialogue spring to life. Yes, “Horrible Bosses” can be described as a dirty comedy in every sense of the word. However, the dirtiness seems more of showing a way people behave and think rather than a way to simply be shocking. A lot of the dirty humor is simply conversational, such as the scene in which the guys argue about who would be most likely to get raped in prison.
It is safe to say that “Horrible Bosses” has one of the best comedic ensembles assembled in many years. All three of the main stars have each developed a certain character and personality through their roles. Bateman plays the vulnerable workaholic straight man that he created in “Arrested Development.” Luckily, that persona never died once that show was cancelled. Day is basically playing the same version of his character in “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia”: a loveably inept idiot who shouldn’t be around, seeing as he screws everything up, but having him there makes the story all the better. Then there is Sudeikis, who can now be named a movie star. Here, he continues the horny everyman character he created in this past February’s underrated “Hall Pass.”
The villains are all perfectly cast as well, with Farrell giving the best (or maybe, the most believable) performance out of all of them. Spacey goes a little too over-the-top for comfort at times, but it definitely seems like he was enjoying himself. Aniston, usually the good girl, is surprisingly the dirtiest character in the whole film. Now, that is good shock humor: making an actor go totally outside their comfort zone, and then making them really good at it.
“Horrible Bosses” consistently works. It’s not perfect (I’m still not used to computers as being a main plot point a movie), but it does everything it can for laughs without debasing itself. Like any good comedy, it has a great sense of recall. As opposed to dropping side characters it introduces early on, it brings them back and ties them into the story in very neat ways. Also, it is not as predictable as, say, “The Hangover: Part II.” I think I can now forgive director Seth Gordon for having previously made “Four Christmases.”
The one thing I keep going back to in “Horrible Bosses,” is the strength of its characters. In good comedy, it is forgivable to have an implausible plot as long as the characters feel real. After all, humor usually comes from sticking ordinary people into a heightened reality. Because there’s nothing funnier than watching three white guys from the suburbs walk into a bar in downtown Los Angeles.

Movie Review: Extract

1 Reply

It seems fitting that “Extract” takes place in a vanilla extract factory, since the film is about as plain as the flavor itself. And the saddest part is, it comes from one of Hollywood’s most creative directors.

“Extract” is a comedy. Sometimes, it’s a spoof on work hell. Other times, it’s a spoof on suburbia. And then the rest of the time, it’s supposed to be a comedic crime caper. It never really takes a stand at specifically which one it will be, and not a single one of these ideas ever seems to connect.
“Extract” is directed by Mike Judge, whose previous comedy about life at work is, of course, “Office Space.” This time, rather than being from the perspective of the miserable mid-level worker, it’s from the perspective of the stressed out boss. Joel (Jason Bateman) owns a successful flavor extract company. He’s about to make a fortune by selling his company to General Mills until a freak accident in the factory leaves a worker without a testicle. His replacement is an attractive con woman named Cindy (Mila Kunis). She seems nice, but she’s secretly trying to con the company out of millions of dollars.
Back at home, Joel’s life is even more complicated. He has major sexual troubles with his wife (Kristen Wiig). This is what will eventually set the stage for some bad advice from a drug-loving bar tender (Ben Affleck) and a doomed relationship with Cindy.
Those are the two plots of Extract. If Judge wanted to make a better movie, he should’ve just stuck to one of them. And in my opinion, it should’ve been the hard working, frustrated boss tries to make things work at work and home. The con woman plot goes absolutely nowhere.
How Judge could make such a poorly executed comedy is beyond me. Not only did he direct “Office Space,” he also created “Beavis and Butt-head.” While many people without a sense of irony thought this show was just plain dumb, it’s actually about the humor of observing dumb people. “Extract” certainly could have had some of that. At one point, Joel points out how all of his workers are giant babies, and he is like their babysitter. We see the workers’ work habits. While the workers’ work habits are annoying, they’re never particularly hilarious. None of them seem to have those Milton-like qualities.
Like any Mike Judge film or show, “Extract” is filled with a wide variety of characters defined by their quirks. Usually these quirks include a less than intelligent brain, or a strange way of speaking. Maybe the best one in “Extract” is Joel’s nosy neighbor Nathan (David Koechner). However, his quirks aren’t shown in a lovable way. They’re shown in a more “I want to punch this guy in the face” way.
Maybe the reason many of the characters don’t work is because Judge underutilizes his obscenely talented cast. J.K. Simmons is barely given a funny line, and his role in the film is never defined. Wiig is great at playing shy and asexual, but again, she’s given few chances to be truly funny. And while I was most looking forward to seeing Affleck (what? he’s funny), he is given too little screen time. I always enjoy Jason Bateman, and here I think he did his best to re-create his other famous frustrated boss role: Michael Bluth–if only this film could’ve been more like “Arrested Development.” However, there are two bright spots. Kiss’s Gene Simmons does a hilarious job portraying a sleazy lawyer, and Dustin Milligan gets some of the film’s best laughs for playing the brain dead gigolo Brad.
I don’t want to give “Extract” as bad a review as I could because I know there’s potential for a great movie in here. That potential is perhaps best seen at the film’s end. The ending has an underlying, subtle humor to it and an almost moving, human quality. It is the ending to a film that never actually existed. That end scene showed the film’s true, wasted potential.
Judge is one of Hollywood’s most under appreciated talents, and I thought “Extract” would become another underrated cult hit. It had potential. If only it had emulated that ending scene and been the kind of satire of American life Judge is so great at doing, than this comedy would’ve been an instant classic.