What can I say about An American Tale that has not been said by other, more competent, more Nostalgia Chick commentators? Her various reviews of Don Blueth's career is a key piece of background to this story that I am just going to not touch because her reviews are so good. Nonetheless I must carry on, for the sake of the project, and because I think, as a Jewish history enthusiast, I do have something to contribute here, maybe.
This is another one of those movies I missed (I was 2 when it came out) and never saw despite various recommendations. It is somewhat surprising that I was never forced to watch it on one of the many Jewish youth outings I endured, given that this is the tale of a family of Jewish immigrants, but religious youth activities seem, in retrospect, carefully calculated to make me loath everything in all creation, so exposing me to a well made film instead of a shitty suburban comedy was probably never in the cards.
For those of you who haven't seen the movie, a short summary. Fievel and his family are Jewish mice living in Russia. their home is destroyed in a Pogrom and they decide to move to America, a land where there are reportedly no cats and the streets are paved with cheese. Fievel is washed overboard during the crossing, but washes up on the shores of Liberty Island. Once on land Fievel sees the good and the bad in New York, being sold into child slavery, making new friends, getting attacked by cats, and falling in with a streetwise native and a middle class reformouse. They come up with a plan to rid New York of the cats, which succeeds, and Fievel is reunited with his family.
This story is predictable in many ways, especially for those who grew up on the east coast as part of the culture of the New York City region. The story is populated by stereotypes and caricatures that are familiar, and often telegraphed before even showing up onscreen. For example, as soon as a character said "lets go see Honest Tom downtown, he knows everyone!' I knew I was about to meet a drunken, corrupt Tammany type with an Irish accent. And yet this movie works really really well. The movie is honest to an amazing degree about the history of the groups involved, and neither sugar coats dark realities nor plays them for laughs.
The example often used is the Pogrom in Russian, wherin shadowy shapes of men and horses shoot people down in the streets and burn houses as cats chase down mice. This is indeed a very dark way to begin a movie, and despite the somewhat fantastical inclusion of anthropomorphic mice represents a stunningly realistic view of the lawlessness and chaos that characterized Tzarist Russia's relationship to the Jews. From a narrative standpoint the direct juxtoposition of the human event (pogrom) with a mouse event (attack by a pack of oddly dog like cats.) serves to ease the viewer into the nature of this anthropromorphized world. This is something often left out of the anthropromorphized animals genre. It definitely makes this easier to watch as an adult than, say, Disney's Robin Hood.
Another fantastic example of this movie being honest with its viewers about historical realities is the aforementioned Honest Tom. Tom is an exceptionally corrupt, exceptionally drunk Irish politician. He is constantly after people's votes, and in his first introduction he is adding a dead man to his list of "ghost voters." He clearly has sinister, selfish motives, which makes his antics, while funny, somewhat unnerving. Yet he is seen providing obvious service to both the protagonists and the public at large, even at great personal risk. This was indeed a key aspect of the American Immigrant experience, and remains so to this day.
For those at the bottom of the social and economic ladder, the legitimate economy often does not provide resources necessary for daily life. Ties of ethnic and emotional loyalty in an alien environment are the currency of organized crime, but also provide the informal networks that allow communities to lift themselves out of poverty. Especially in the absence of outside assistance, such corrupt criminal systems play a key role in the American immigrant experience. The classic example of this, or course, was the Tammany system in New York, where the swelling Irish population supported corrupt politicians in return for help with food, fuel in the winter, and jobs. The same could also be said of the Italian mob and even the Jewish Purple Gang. None of these organizations operated without initial local support, and were only effectively destroyed when outside economic opportunities and the killing of innocent bystanders turned their public against them.
Such corrupt organizations were often key in helping the country do amazing things like build the Transcontinental Railroad, and fight Facism, but the dark side of this is that those who head these systems are, as in legitimate economic enterprises, out for personal gain and not necessarily the public good. Public money is the price they demand for their goods and services, money which could have been used to provide the goods and services more efficiently, and more directly, without lining anyone's pockets. Those who question the system are effectively eliminated, which means the system can never adapt to changed circumstances, while in extreme cases the public ends up owing more allegiance to whichever faction provides them their goods and services than they owe to the state. This is called a patronage system, and if left unchecked translates into a subversion of any legitimate political process. Corrupt systems can smooth the way for amazing achievements, but ultimately corruption rots a system with cynical inefficiency and waste. A child is unlikely to understand this all directly from the few interactions with Honest Tom, but the DNA of this is there, ready for those who learn enough to extract it, and I appreciate the honestly.
Which is not to say I do not have some serious critiques. As a movie the plot seems oddly rushed with a massive cast of characters that you never get to know well, in the process of confronting the protagonist with constantly shifting challenges that are easily escaped. There are a couple reasons this works, despite what is outwardly somewhat poor writing. First, it should be noted that this is an Oddesy clone. Not in the direct, Warriors kind of way, but from a narrative standpoint. While almost all plots involve a journey, Oddesy clones present a literal journey, where a mobile main character, on what should be a simple quest ("get home" "find my parents") is presented with exotic challenges usually in the form of characters that come to symbolize a place. Particularly good entries into this genre tie many or most of these characters together at the end. Given the length restrictions of a kids movie, and the goal of providing the viewer with a wide ranging introduction to the salient features of the New York Immigrant Experience, these obstacles were going to have to be overcome quickly. As such the movie is almost more a series of vignettes of the pitfalls and opportunities presented by life in New York City at this time period, but it is kept interesting by the fast pace of the plot and the clear devotion of the protagonist to his quest.
The musical sequences are, in comparison to Disney musicals, rough and unpolished. This should probably not be a major concern to me since I hate musical numbers, but it was initially pretty jarring. That said the music being unpolished makes more sense coming from a child, especially from one coming from a peasent background without fancy studios and singing coaches.
That's basically my take. I feel I should also point out that the art is breathtaking. Especially since this is a double feature paked with extras this one is a keeper. 5/5
The only criticism I really have that I have no resolution to is the cats. They growl, they snarl, they run in packs. Has Don Blueth ever met a cat? I think he is thinking of dogs. Protip.
Thursday, June 20, 2013
Monday, June 17, 2013
That Fresh Blog Scent; Adventures in Babysitting
Tom Says; So here we are again. This time myself and my gal Friday are doing a joint blog of the unwatched movies in our collection. Since we are watching together we will both throw in our two cents. We will also be rating out of five, which is new, and if we decide to ditch the movie leave a comment and it is yours. You've been warned.
As I am me we must begin at the beginning. We skipped 12 Monkeys and 40 Yr Old Virgin, so I feel like I should give some account of those movies. 12 Monkeys rules, as does Terry Gilliam. As someone who has worked a lot of shitty jobs with a lot of people much dumber and emotionally vapid than myself, and as someone who lost their virginity rather late, 40 Year Old Virgin hit a bit too close to home for the concept to be funny, while not being otherwise funny enough to compensate. A Mighty Wind is really fantastic. Which brings us to Adventures in Babysitting.
I had never seen this movie. I didn't watch a lot of movies before college, and the few I was forced to watch on class trips tended to make me hate the movies I tend to think of as "Light Hearted Middle Class Family Comedies." Predictable pedantic putridity wherin the mores of "conventional" society are challenged by unfamiliar situations that push characters out of their comfort zone, only to return them safely without ever challenging the economic or social basis of those conventions. A lesson is learned that tends to make the protagonist more selfish or hedonistic.
Adventures in Babysitting is hardly the worst offender in this category, but being a product of the Disney Corporation it doth sit at the right hand of the master. The story revolves around a painfully naive, painfully suburban Chris Parker who ends up babysitting because her date is canceled. Apparently this is the fate of all single women. Anyway, her best friend runs away from home, to the Chicago bus station, and asks Chris to pick her up. The fact that her friend is freeing from what is broadly hinted to be an abusive home is played for laughs. The Chicago bus station is played as a gateway to the realm of madness. The kids blackmail Chris into taking them along. Hilarity ensues.
I feel like it is not necessary to continue a detailed plot synopsis from here because, while there are numerous twists and turns, they manage to be largely predictable in context. For example, Chris' date says he can't make it because his sister is sick. Spoiler alert! This is a lie. The scary large tow truck driver with the hook hand? Friendly! Things are not as they seem! Your stereotypes are challenged! Wacky!
Despite my intense initial rage at these movies, they are also more than the sum of their parts, and there are good entries in this genre. A lot of it is down to pacing, and this movie does a really good job of keeping things going while still allowing character moments. While never really seriously examining the background of the suburban/ urban divide and its implications on American culture, and while it does reinforce this divide while also encouraging distrust of the mentally ill and poor, I just watched a bunch of James Bond movies, so I will say that it manages to avoid overt racism. Although the only black people in the movie are criminals, even if some of those criminals are nice at heart. And they weren't forced to be criminals, either, they chose that lifestyle because they "like the danger." Let me start over.
Adventures in babysitting is not as classist or racist as Mein Kampf, or the Tea Party. The cloying, subconscious racism is not usually very distracting, while the classism is the type of thing you just have to get used to or else put your tv through the head of a Fox commentator. Back to nice things.
The twists are thoroughly predictable, but there sure are a lot of them, and that helps with the pacing. The film is only as sexist as it is racist, but it gets points for a heroine who is assertive without wearing a catsuit, and a little girl character who is obsessed with superheroes.
This is really what saves this movie. Much as Ferris Beuller is only watchable because of Ben Sein and its killer soundtrack, Adventures in Babysitting is saved by a cast of charming characters. From the homicidal fugitive tow truck driver with a heart of gold to the car thief with a heart of gold, there are a plethora of unique characters here, which is good because there are so many they would probably run together otherwise. I was kind of left wishing the protagonist, who was so boring he didn't even get mentioned in the above synopsis, had just been left out so as to give his perverted best friend more air time.
This movie is basically a tightly edited and scripted mess. A product of its time that has not aged well in many ways, good pacing and likable characters keep the whole thing together. The acting is not stellar, but manages to just not be apparent which is what you probably want in a movie like this. I am unlikely to watch this again, but if you really want a light comedy to watch you could do worse. You horrific capitalist bastard.
3/5
Gal Friday here! I think Tom gives a great synopsis and description of the good and bad of this movie, but I have a slightly different take, having watched it as a kid (numerous times), and not seeing for the first time tonight. Most of what prompted me to pick this up in the 2.99 bargains was that nostalgia factor that I thought this movie was badass when I was a sheltered little suburbanite getting a taste of what the big scary "city" was like. Unfortunately, that just reinforced cliches about race relations and socioeconomic divisions between the suburbs and the inner city.
This is, of course, not at all what I consciously took from this movie as a kid. To give a little background, this movie came out in 1987, so I wasn't even 10 when I saw it for the first time. I suppose I identified with Sara, the Thor-worshipping babysittee, though I didn't read comics at that time, and I was confused as hell about all the Thor references, to be honest. I didn't actually understand them until tonight (gasp!). Pretty much all the dangerous events (save one major one) are met by Sara with giggles and "This is great!" which made it less horrifying for kids, I suppose? There were several points tonight when I mused aloud that I couldn't believe my parents let me watch this as a preadolescent, not the least of which was when the 17-year-old babysitter (played by then-24-year-old Elisabeth Shue) threatened two gangs with a knife while stuck with 3 kids in her care on an El-train, saying "Don't FUCK with the Babysitter!"
While I mention the 7 year age discrepancy in the protagonist's age, I should also mention that my feelings on Brad, the elder sibling of Sara's, were that I equated him with Wil Wheaton; or to be fair, Wesley Crusher. That young, out-of-place but deserves more respect than he gets, nice, unassuming '80s guy. Yup, him. There's an unrequited love subplot, but I gotta agree with my coreviewer that Brad's most important role in this movie is to play the straight man to Anthony Rapp's Daryl. Wait, did I say Anthony Rapp? Why yes, Mr. Mark Cohen, of the original Broadway cast of RENT, as a Playboy-stealing, smartmouthed teenager. Poor Brad is overshadowed by basically every dude in this movie. It wasn't until Keith Coogan (Brad) played Kenny in Don't Tell Mom The Babysitter's Dead (wow, he had a babysitter-filled career) that I thought of him as hot.
Until he cut off his hair, but that's a different story. I should point out here that he also was the voice of Tod in the Fox and the Hound, just to make you uncomfortable with my last declaration.
So to get back to that socioeconomic divide, something I found interesting to see this now as an adult was that while all the people we see from the suburbs are wealthy and white, not all of the city cast is not. The skeeviest of the bad guys is white:
...and the nicest of the "bad" guys is black. And also cute:
So, how did the movie hold up for me nostalgia-wise? Well, it was interesting; it still hit the points I liked as a kid for me, but there was that added awareness that did detract a bit. There were so many cliches, and it is campy and predictable in a weird way. Would I watch it again? Probably, but not often enough to necessitate keeping the DVD. I'd agree with the prior rating of 3/5.
Verdict: Free to a good home.
As I am me we must begin at the beginning. We skipped 12 Monkeys and 40 Yr Old Virgin, so I feel like I should give some account of those movies. 12 Monkeys rules, as does Terry Gilliam. As someone who has worked a lot of shitty jobs with a lot of people much dumber and emotionally vapid than myself, and as someone who lost their virginity rather late, 40 Year Old Virgin hit a bit too close to home for the concept to be funny, while not being otherwise funny enough to compensate. A Mighty Wind is really fantastic. Which brings us to Adventures in Babysitting.
I had never seen this movie. I didn't watch a lot of movies before college, and the few I was forced to watch on class trips tended to make me hate the movies I tend to think of as "Light Hearted Middle Class Family Comedies." Predictable pedantic putridity wherin the mores of "conventional" society are challenged by unfamiliar situations that push characters out of their comfort zone, only to return them safely without ever challenging the economic or social basis of those conventions. A lesson is learned that tends to make the protagonist more selfish or hedonistic.
Adventures in Babysitting is hardly the worst offender in this category, but being a product of the Disney Corporation it doth sit at the right hand of the master. The story revolves around a painfully naive, painfully suburban Chris Parker who ends up babysitting because her date is canceled. Apparently this is the fate of all single women. Anyway, her best friend runs away from home, to the Chicago bus station, and asks Chris to pick her up. The fact that her friend is freeing from what is broadly hinted to be an abusive home is played for laughs. The Chicago bus station is played as a gateway to the realm of madness. The kids blackmail Chris into taking them along. Hilarity ensues.
I feel like it is not necessary to continue a detailed plot synopsis from here because, while there are numerous twists and turns, they manage to be largely predictable in context. For example, Chris' date says he can't make it because his sister is sick. Spoiler alert! This is a lie. The scary large tow truck driver with the hook hand? Friendly! Things are not as they seem! Your stereotypes are challenged! Wacky!
Despite my intense initial rage at these movies, they are also more than the sum of their parts, and there are good entries in this genre. A lot of it is down to pacing, and this movie does a really good job of keeping things going while still allowing character moments. While never really seriously examining the background of the suburban/ urban divide and its implications on American culture, and while it does reinforce this divide while also encouraging distrust of the mentally ill and poor, I just watched a bunch of James Bond movies, so I will say that it manages to avoid overt racism. Although the only black people in the movie are criminals, even if some of those criminals are nice at heart. And they weren't forced to be criminals, either, they chose that lifestyle because they "like the danger." Let me start over.
Adventures in babysitting is not as classist or racist as Mein Kampf, or the Tea Party. The cloying, subconscious racism is not usually very distracting, while the classism is the type of thing you just have to get used to or else put your tv through the head of a Fox commentator. Back to nice things.
The twists are thoroughly predictable, but there sure are a lot of them, and that helps with the pacing. The film is only as sexist as it is racist, but it gets points for a heroine who is assertive without wearing a catsuit, and a little girl character who is obsessed with superheroes.
This is really what saves this movie. Much as Ferris Beuller is only watchable because of Ben Sein and its killer soundtrack, Adventures in Babysitting is saved by a cast of charming characters. From the homicidal fugitive tow truck driver with a heart of gold to the car thief with a heart of gold, there are a plethora of unique characters here, which is good because there are so many they would probably run together otherwise. I was kind of left wishing the protagonist, who was so boring he didn't even get mentioned in the above synopsis, had just been left out so as to give his perverted best friend more air time.
This movie is basically a tightly edited and scripted mess. A product of its time that has not aged well in many ways, good pacing and likable characters keep the whole thing together. The acting is not stellar, but manages to just not be apparent which is what you probably want in a movie like this. I am unlikely to watch this again, but if you really want a light comedy to watch you could do worse. You horrific capitalist bastard.
3/5
Gal Friday here! I think Tom gives a great synopsis and description of the good and bad of this movie, but I have a slightly different take, having watched it as a kid (numerous times), and not seeing for the first time tonight. Most of what prompted me to pick this up in the 2.99 bargains was that nostalgia factor that I thought this movie was badass when I was a sheltered little suburbanite getting a taste of what the big scary "city" was like. Unfortunately, that just reinforced cliches about race relations and socioeconomic divisions between the suburbs and the inner city.
This is, of course, not at all what I consciously took from this movie as a kid. To give a little background, this movie came out in 1987, so I wasn't even 10 when I saw it for the first time. I suppose I identified with Sara, the Thor-worshipping babysittee, though I didn't read comics at that time, and I was confused as hell about all the Thor references, to be honest. I didn't actually understand them until tonight (gasp!). Pretty much all the dangerous events (save one major one) are met by Sara with giggles and "This is great!" which made it less horrifying for kids, I suppose? There were several points tonight when I mused aloud that I couldn't believe my parents let me watch this as a preadolescent, not the least of which was when the 17-year-old babysitter (played by then-24-year-old Elisabeth Shue) threatened two gangs with a knife while stuck with 3 kids in her care on an El-train, saying "Don't FUCK with the Babysitter!"
While I mention the 7 year age discrepancy in the protagonist's age, I should also mention that my feelings on Brad, the elder sibling of Sara's, were that I equated him with Wil Wheaton; or to be fair, Wesley Crusher. That young, out-of-place but deserves more respect than he gets, nice, unassuming '80s guy. Yup, him. There's an unrequited love subplot, but I gotta agree with my coreviewer that Brad's most important role in this movie is to play the straight man to Anthony Rapp's Daryl. Wait, did I say Anthony Rapp? Why yes, Mr. Mark Cohen, of the original Broadway cast of RENT, as a Playboy-stealing, smartmouthed teenager. Poor Brad is overshadowed by basically every dude in this movie. It wasn't until Keith Coogan (Brad) played Kenny in Don't Tell Mom The Babysitter's Dead (wow, he had a babysitter-filled career) that I thought of him as hot.
So to get back to that socioeconomic divide, something I found interesting to see this now as an adult was that while all the people we see from the suburbs are wealthy and white, not all of the city cast is not. The skeeviest of the bad guys is white:
 |
| Creepy Motherfucker. |
| Yum. |
Verdict: Free to a good home.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)