Tools:
I never would have believed it if I hadn´t seen it with my own eyes. The big budget, big screen adaptation of TV´s "Get Smart" isn´t nearly the disaster some critics have made it out to be. Yes, it´s not high concept or terribly brilliant. The eventual "twist" is painfully obvious halfway through the film. Some characters are abandoned for prolonged periods of time. And the humor can border on the juvenile (though never vulgar).
When Maxwell Smart (Steve Carell of TV´s "The Office") is paired with Agent 99 (Anne Hathaway, "The Devil Wears Prada") following an attack on the super-secret headquarters of not-so-secret United States intelligence organization CONTROL, they find themselves in Russia, hot on the heels of stolen nuclear material. But Smart is only an analyst and a bubbling one at that while 99 has years of experience under her belt. Can she rein him in enough to keep them both alive, find the bad guys and play straight man to Smart´s innocent jokes?
From its opening moments, it´s quite obvious "Get Smart" is intent on doing on thing: making us laugh. Everything else is secondary. As the credits roll over Smart preparing for his day, we see post it notes reminding him to carry out certain tasks. The best one? A reminder, on an empty goldfish bowl, to buy a new goldfish. Those are the kind of jokes littering the film and, quite honestly, the production is better for it. There´s no need to sully the good name of the original series with poop jokes or double entendres.
Humorous sequences, both big and small, run throughout the film. No character is adverse to being included in the fun, from Chief (Alan Arkin, who surprisingly gets a lot of screen time in the finale) to Terence Stamp as the leader of evil organization KAOS. While most of the comedy works, two techs in the CONTROL headquarters come off as gratuitous, unnecessary and ultimately banal. It´s not the fault of actors Masi Oka and Nate Torrence; their characters, Bruce and Lloyd, are designed to be comic relief when the movie doesn´t need any comic relief. (It should be noted these two are spun off in their own direct to DVD movie, most likely explaining their inclusion here.)
However, this is Carell´s movie to carry, comedy wise. His deadpan delivery and complete allegiance to the material transcends whatever stupidity Smart goes through, allowing us to see he isn´t consciously trying to be funny (like an Adam Sandler). In effect, this makes him the best "name" actor to take the role. It´s enough the script by Tom Astle and Matt Ember packs enough jokes into every scene; Carell doesn´t need to do anything but keep a straight face and recite lines.
The other component to his performance is Hathaway. She comes off as having to be the mother figure here, not allowed to have much fun. In fact, it is only through a dancing sequence do we see her face light up. But there remains a trueness to her, underneath all the fancy outfits and gadgets and responsibility. If there is one deficiency in the roe, it is the lack of development for Agent 99. With the exception of one scene, all her dialogue revolves around Smart, depriving us of getting to actually know her in any meaningful way. On the upside, this gives a potential sequel a lot of territory to explore.
I have to comment, for just a moment, about the middle of the movie. As Smart and 99 scurry around Russia, we presume Chief and an entire cast of characters (including The Rock´s Agent 23) are performing support functions back at CONTROL. After all, when Jack Bauer is out in the field, we check in with Chloe and the rest of the CTU gang every couple of minutes. The script completely forgets about the secondary characters, opting to show them continuing to recover from a KAOS attack to being fully operational. Couldn´t a couple scenes have been thrown in showing Bruce, Lloyd or Chief getting electrocuted by a malfunctioning computer? Something to remind us of the people left behind.
My other concern with the script is it tips its hand far, far too early. Maybe it´s a symptom of the genre it´s working in, but every single spy story has an inevitable mole. "24" is notorious for having poor human resources vetting for its government workers, so it should come as no shock here how the film actually ends. All we get is a ten second snippet of a phone call between Siegfried (that´s Stamp) and his boss-voice electronically masked, of course-and I pinned down who the ultimate bad guy would end up being. It goes hand in hand with being away from CONTROL for so long.
I´m not usually one to criticize a director´s choices, but Peter Segal needs to figure how to inject energy into physical action sequences. Specifically, how not to have a thousand different edits inside of two minutes of film. A fight involving Smart, 99 and a Russian baddie is despicable with its intense close ups of legs flying, bodies tumbling backward and a flurry of other movements. We´ve never able to get a handle on who is doing what to whom, leading to a very boring scene. (I´m not apt to blame editor Richard Pearson since he has worked on the latest Bourne film, the big screen version of "Rent" and "United 93," among other films, none of which had this issue.)
Which brings us back to the story itself. There´s only an A-plot, nothing else. No tangents, nothing to make the movie richer or deeper. In a way, that´s okay. With no superfluous fluff to divert our attention from the main plot, "Get Smart" tends to be a tight production, aside from the already mentioned issue of Bruce and Lloyd. The plot may not be terribly deep or hold the answers to the universe (or even be particularly inspired), but it doesn´t need to. Much like "The Incredible Hulk" or even "Iron Man," "Get Smart" has no ambition to change the world. Only to provide some sort of entertainment for a certain amount of time. And on that count, the finished product succeeds in spades.
This is a fun little flick, very close to being family friendly, with only one repeated curse word that I recall. There is no blood and only one potential obstacle for nudity. A little dense for younger kids and not full of slapstick comedy like "Kung Fu Panda," "Get Smart" would work for anyone over the age of 12, I think. As such, it gets a 6 out of 10. What can I say? I laughed my ass off the entire time.
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Member since:
September 2007
September 2007
i thought it was a fun movie to watch, i enjoyed it! after watchn get smart the group i was with decided to sneak into "the Happening" (it was like 11pm) wow now that movie almost put me to sleep, horrible movie. If i wasnt so dam nervous every time i heard the theather doors open i probably wouldve fell asleep, but my friends gf is a cop so i doubt we wouldve got into trouble. oh and it was her ideal to sneak in lol
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Member since:
July 2006
July 2006
Who did this review?
Sounds like a fun movie after all.
Sounds like a fun movie after all.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
Our own Jason Vargo wrote the review. Our sneaky Web-site program mysteriously deleted his name for a moment.
Yes, the new "Get Smart" is a lot better than some other reviewers, like the one in my own local newspaper, the San Francisco Chronicle, would lead you to believe. It may not have quite the zany spirit of the old television series, and Max may no longer be quite the idiot he used to be, but the new version is a lot of fun in its own way. A solid 6/10 from me, too, meaning upper average and far from awful.
John
Yes, the new "Get Smart" is a lot better than some other reviewers, like the one in my own local newspaper, the San Francisco Chronicle, would lead you to believe. It may not have quite the zany spirit of the old television series, and Max may no longer be quite the idiot he used to be, but the new version is a lot of fun in its own way. A solid 6/10 from me, too, meaning upper average and far from awful.
John
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Member since:
January 2006
January 2006
Falcon,
Generally speaking, if it's a theatrical review, I did it. There are exceptions, though. Chris tackles a couple and John and I have been known to do the odd double review.
Jason, review monkey
Generally speaking, if it's a theatrical review, I did it. There are exceptions, though. Chris tackles a couple and John and I have been known to do the odd double review.
Jason, review monkey
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Member since:
June 2008
June 2008
WOW
a site dedicated to movies and movie media,boasting of SNEAKING IN to the cinema( or in other words, putting the cinema out of buisness )
PEOPLE WHO SNEAK INTO CINEMAS....ARE NO BETTER THAN MOVIE PIRATES
SHAME ON YOU DVDTOWN
a site dedicated to movies and movie media,boasting of SNEAKING IN to the cinema( or in other words, putting the cinema out of buisness )
PEOPLE WHO SNEAK INTO CINEMAS....ARE NO BETTER THAN MOVIE PIRATES
SHAME ON YOU DVDTOWN
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Member since:
July 2006
July 2006
First of all Jason Vargo made no mention in his review about sneaking into a movie. It was Scionguy05 who is a forum member just like you.
Please read carefully before you try and accuse people of something.
Please read carefully before you try and accuse people of something.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Member since:
January 2006
January 2006
Thank you, Falcon.
Now can we get back to talking about Get Smart?
Jason, can't we all just get along
Now can we get back to talking about Get Smart?
Jason, can't we all just get along
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Member since:
June 2008
June 2008
i mention only dvdtown(who are responsible for the editing of derogatory comments) no person
this site is a movie and movie media site,and if it supports the industry then it can do without comments of that kind
i work in the cinema,and get naff wages because of FORUM MEMBERS like that
maybe you should think before getting on your high horse,telling people what and what not to do or say
or do you work for a company that believes in giving its products away freely,or do you just agree that the death of the cinema by whatever contributing factors is a good thing?
perhaps even good enough to BRAG & BOAST about on websites supposedly supporting the movie industry,and supposedly staffed by people who feel passionate about movies and their place..THE CINEMA
[Post edited by SMEGMA on Jun 22, 2008]
this site is a movie and movie media site,and if it supports the industry then it can do without comments of that kind
i work in the cinema,and get naff wages because of FORUM MEMBERS like that
maybe you should think before getting on your high horse,telling people what and what not to do or say
or do you work for a company that believes in giving its products away freely,or do you just agree that the death of the cinema by whatever contributing factors is a good thing?
perhaps even good enough to BRAG & BOAST about on websites supposedly supporting the movie industry,and supposedly staffed by people who feel passionate about movies and their place..THE CINEMA
[Post edited by SMEGMA on Jun 22, 2008]
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Member since:
July 2006
July 2006
What is a "naff wage"?
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Member since:
June 2008
June 2008
LOW
- Blu-ray Disc Association: Disc Still Rules!
- Halloween 30th Anniversary Commemorative Box Set DVD/BD (Oct 14)
- Sony ready with $2000 Blu-ray player
- Panasonic intros fourth generation Blu-ray players
- Now official - XBOX 360 for $199
- Space Chimps on DVD & Blu-ray (Nov 25)
- Meet Dave on DVD & Blu-ray (Nov 25)
- The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951): SE on DVD (Dec 2)
- Waterworld (Extended Edition) on DVD (Nov 4) (Updated Story)
- Pink Panther Ultimate Collection on DVD (Nov 25)
- Ultimate Collector's Edition of "I Am Legend" (Dec 9)
- New $2200 Elite Blu-ray Player from Pioneer
- Toshiba XD-E500 review coming soon
- Amazon: Big DVD Sale - Save up to 80%
- Amazon: Get nine DVDs worth of Alien movies for $25.99
- Toshiba XD-E500 review coming soon
- Waterworld (Extended Edition) on DVD (Nov 4)
- Ultimate Collector's Edition of "I Am Legend" (Dec 9)
- Blu-ray Booty!
- Sony ready with $2000 Blu-ray player