The Players…
Jason London, Zach Galifianakis, Derek Hamilton, AJ Cook, Flex Alexander, David Koechner and Lee Majors, with David Denman, Caroline Dharvernas, Thomas Lennon, Victoria Silvstedt and Willie Garson.
The Basics…
Once again it’s a story of a venerated mom ‘n’ pop business being shoved aside by some upstart, fancy-schmancy, “better” version, threatening the local, maybe too long-in-the-tooth operation.
What’s that? A restaurant that gives discounts for fire fighters? No. The local hardware store being edged out by some big box store where no employee knows your name? Uh-uh. A giant, corporate multiplex theatre running the beloved drive-in into the ground that still show Saturday matinee double features? Nope.
It’s Bull Mountain, a ski resort in Alaska, being overhauled into a frou frou, gentrified tourist trap. New money in favor of freestyling and jibbing? This will not stand. Not if the reliably unreliable ski instructors at Bull Mountain have anything to say about it.
Let’s hit the slopes!
The Rant, pt. 1…
This is gonna be somewhat academic. Never fear, it’ll be quick. Just a quick pinch.
Hey. Another co-directed movie. Back to back here at RIORI. It’s a coincidence; I pick these films at random. This filming method allows me to wax even more philosophical about how such movies get shot. Call me psychic, but I think Out Cold is not in the same league as The Road. Might be a judgment call, but I’m making it.
In the previous installment I spoke briefly of how does a film achieve synergy with two directors. Two visions, two egos, two potentially hardheaded filmmakers trying to reach an accord to get the job done and done well. Make it seamless, even before the editors take their turn. I turned to Quora last time to get some feedback and most of the forum agreed on compromise and good rapport as vital to get down and get with it. All responses sounded pretty reasonable. I got to wondering if there was something more. I dug in. I am a geek, and it is my duty to spout opinions I deem necessary to share with the lot of y’all about how films get pieced together. I’m doing a public service after all.
Here’s what I extrapolated: if you think about it, and being a movie dork like myself all movies have more than one director. If you consider multiple units or specialized experts (EG: stunts, F/X and post-production to name a few) the majority of American films are directed by several heads put together. Oh sure, the head director gets all the accolades and glory, but what would a film like the original Matrix look like if it hadn’t had Woo Ping Yuan to oversee the stunts and gift his acumen of “wire fu?” Right. In short, it’s all about a group effort to get from studio to streaming. Collaboration and probably some head-butting. That’s the angle I wanna tackle here. Not the head-butting though. Not yet.
I bumbled around Reddit for clear, informative and above all non-geeky discourse. Kinda hard to do on those forums, because once a know-it-all chimes in, all the know-it-alls chime in effectively shoving the sane and non-salivating voices away leaving shavings of uniformed opinions, informed options, half-baked opinions and opinions strewn all over the cutting room floor. Reasonable discourse, professional input and proper grammar jumped ship months ago.
Fortunately that didn’t happen in the forum I uncovered. Again, it was on Reddit (yes, I was surprised, too). Here’s what I learned: most of a director’s job is to work solely with the actors. They drive the story, right? So the director drives them. Any other technical aspect of shooting the film is handled by the other directors and their crew. Keeping that in mind, it’s a pretty straightforward albeit time-consuming skill to be Scorsese or Spielberg or Waters. Of course some directors do better PR than others; they are behind the camera and have learned how to be in front of it also. Two heads are better than none only works if the directors are keeping their foci on the game and not fretting about the nits and nats of production. That stuff the other dudes are in charge of. Or if there’s some bad vibes (brewing) between the pair the end result might be both losing sight of the common goal. Or one of the co-directors is goldbricking. That’s pretty much how the road to Development Hell is paved according to the actors and amateur auteurs on Reddit.
I think that was the first and perhaps only time that social media was helpful, no BS and well-constructed. Glad I wasn’t investigating how best to feed a fussy cat. Maybe next time.
What’s beneficial to a movie directed by two people? And what is unique in getting such films made? Synergy, plain and simple. It’s that two heads thing. Sometimes it does benefit production if one director focuses on the acting and the other supervises the tech stuff, so long in the endgame they’re on the same page. Must work well with co-directors who are related (EG: the Coens, the Wachowskis, the Hughes, etc), since they “get” each other hopefully. You’re more likely to be open to opinion/criticism to some you really know and trust. What’s more is that the two directors have different skillsets in getting the job done. Citing the Coens again, ever notice in the opening credits of their films you see a lot of “co-this” and “co-that?” The brothers trade off one another very well, and since neither brother is solely in charge of directing or writing or producing a different movie twice, you get a good mix. The best of both worlds if you will.
Well, that’s kind of how the Reddit discussion spelled out. Sounded logical to me, but I have a theory of my own (of course). The subject matter of the movie. Dig this: we all liked the original Matrix. Existential Philip K Dick-like hard sci-fi with cool fight scenes that also tickled your intellect some. Good fun. And the “brothers” should’ve stuck with sci-fi. Instead they delved into high fantasy. Both genres share similarities, but it’s like comparing a Ferrari to a Volkswagen. Sure, they’re both cars, well-designed, well-built and guaranteed to get you from A to B in a timely fashion (however the Ferrari will prob get you there faster). But they’re not the same. The “sisters” may have put their all into Speed Racer, Cloud Atlas and Jupiter Ascending, but they missed the mark, because they didn’t understand the nuances of the fantasy genre. Fantastical doesn’t automatically mean fantasy. And no budget set aside 70/30 for CGI can fix a marred script.
The putting together of heads works the best when the co-directors are working in a genre they’ve proven successful with prior. Never minding the Coens, we’ve had Faxon and Rash’s The Way, Way Back, with their experience in quirky comedy in writing Little Miss Sunshine came in handy. Hoofer Gene Kelly wanted to cut a musical like the flicks he performed in, so he hooked up with his choreographer Stan Donen to co-direct Singin’ In The Rain, one of the greatest movie musicals ever (and one that still holds up to this day). There’s the original Poltergeist, with Tobe “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” Hooper at the helm and master fantasist Steven Spielberg (with the always scary Jaws under his belt) as his wingman. Let’s not forget the Hughes Bros with twisting, cringeworthy drama (in the best way) with Menace II Society, From Hell, and The Book Of Eli. They’re good at being gritty, and none of the team players I mentioned here didn’t really stray from a winning formula.
I guess some genres prove more flexible for co-directors. Or how they get flexed. One thing’s for certain it’s all about the synergy between co-directing seminal horror, resolute drama or silly, lowbrow slobs vs slobs comedies. Which brings us to…
The Rant, pt. 2…
Whew. Done with that. Sorry for being so academic. Time to get to the real meat of this week’s matter. Huh-huh. Meat.
Okay, classic formula: slobs vs snobs comedy. Lotta golden examples out there in Movieland. We’ve had Animal House (prob my fave comedy, always reliable), Caddyshack, Meatballs, Revenge Of The Nerds, Stripes, Trading Places, etc. The list goes on, mostly with good results. Sure, the formula is always the same, but need I remind you how the blues are played? Nah. What would be simpler is to say how the game is played, interpreted, tweaked, sent on its ear and still have some great lowbrow humor, lumpy fart jokes and new, devilish applications of beer. It’s the slob-com CV.
However—
Drop that sandwich. Won’t be that guy. Not another fussy list with an answer key. You all out there know good from bad, and since slobs vs snobs comedies are fairly straightforward/unsophisticated I ain’t gonna wax philosophical about either good or bad. I did enough waxing above, so much so I need new eyebrows. Let’s just play it as it lays: slob comedies are joyfully dumb, will never win any awards and that’s the idea, on both fronts. It’s stupid fun, and we all need that now and again.
Since these premises are always broad, loaded with misfit characters plucked right from the funny pages and always have a happy ending. It’s the old blues schtick again. Endlessly riffing on tried and true notes. However none of these films are interchangeable. Oh sure, the setup is always the same, but there always has to be some kind of cagey nature as the plot unfolds. Most slob coms have a sort of improv voice to them (and many are loaded with such on-the-fly scenes), almost like watching a stand-up comedy act. Yes, and a lot of the bits are populated with erstwhile comics; think Saturday Night Live alumni (EG: Bill Murray, John Belushi, Dan Ackroyd, Eddie Murphy, Adam Sandler, etc). In any event, there’s always this overarching feeling in such comedies that anything can go wrong at a given moment, and usually does.
A good slob com requires spontaneity. I know, I know. Most comedy does. It’s gotta. You need to keep that ball of wax a-rollin’ along. Some kind of comedies require a slow burn or some time to digest what just happened (most of Woody Allen’s funnies came to mind). Black comedies make you feel uncomfortable about laughing (think Harold And Maude, MASH or Withnail And I). Don’t get me started on those Monty Python flicks. However like those rapid-fire ZAZ comedies, any lull in the shenanigans and we immediately lose interest. If a good portion of a slob com requires a nonstop slough of dick jokes, boozing it up and pratfalls any exposition crashes the roller coaster ride. Don’t believe me? Watch Animal House again. Every darn scene is either snide, gross, scatological and has plenty of collateral damage. No time to sit back and chew it over. We gots horses to murder.
Okay, so speed is crucial, as well as a nervous anticipation of everything going off the rails. Bad taste in humor, natch. A feeling of winging it and often does. All these elements make up the backbone of a slob com. My rules. I call it like I see it. Nyah. Refute me.
But every experiment in madness needs an out of control control. What happens when a slob com is a hit-or-miss? That’s also an aspect of the genre; let’s throw these jokes against the wall and see what goes ker-splat. I mean what happens when a slob com may come across as unhinged and maybe unfocused? Like fog on little cat’s feet? Or rather tracks in the snow?
I’m glad you asked.
The Story…
Ah, the Great Outdoors. And nothing is as great as winter in Alaska. Especially if you get to spend the days outdoors at the Last Frontier’s no frills ski resort: Bull Mountain. That’s how Rick (London) and his ski bum buddies feel. Fresh powder, thrashing and beer. Lotsa beer. Lotsa snowboards. Lotsa goofing off. Life is grand.
Rick has all he needs, as does his low-life chums. We have Luke (Galifianakis), the resident practicing boozer, approaching pro. His dizzy bro PigPen (Hamilton), who’s better at shredding than…everything else. Cutie pie Jenny (Cook) who can drink anyone under the table and into the basement. Klutzy Anthony (Alexander), who prob should stick to double planks. So out-of-the-closet barkeep Lance (Denman) that he’s in desperate need of a BJ with a mustache. And slightly demented Stumpy (Koechner) expert on all things Bull Mountain, booze and not knowing what time zone he’s in.
Despite the colorful cast, willing to be willing, the mountain’s not profitable. It’s bleeding cash. Owner Ted Muntz (Garson)—who ungratefully inherited the place from his late, drunken, ski-crazy father—is setting his sights higher. Bull Mountain should be sold off to a resort franchise, attract a monied clientele instead the dippy locals and low-rent tourists. And boorish, wealthy entrepreneur John Majors (um, Majors) with his resort empire crossing the Lower 48 has his checkbook at the ready.
Majors first wants to know if his potential investment has…well, potential. So Ted shackles Rick into giving Majors the dime tour. Rick’s not so keen on Bull Mountain get all yuppied up, but Majors hints that if he helps sway the locals into buying into his franchise, there might be some nice kickbacks waiting.
Rick’s torn. A better job drenched in cappuccino, or the lure of seasonal debauchery, shreddin’ the gnar and more debauchery? What’ll his crew think if he turns to the Dark Side? What’ll his rent say when it’s due again? “What about last month?” What’s a professional slacker snowboard slinger to do?
Seek wisdom within what ol’ Papa Muntz always said after he had a few and a few more:
“Bull Mountain! Don’t go changin’!”
The Breakdown…
There’s another thing that gives the slob com that je ne sais quoi: the cast. I think the wing trait of a slob com is likable, relatable characters regardless whether being heroes or bullies. Just as long as both camps are cheerfully goofy and clueless. You know what the literal translation of je ne etcetera is? “I do not know what.” That’s pretty accurate for a film of this ilk. And boy, does Out Cold have that I don’t know what going for it big time.
So we got slobs vs snobs for the New Millennium, and wouldn’t ya know it but it’s Meatballs on ice. Like that prerequisite, perennial rainy day at camp movie, Cold has its alluring charm. The movie has a homespun feel to it, mostly thanks to its lowbrow but not dumb characters and their jokes. In addition to the yuk-yuks the Malloy brothers cut their teeth on snowboarding videos so they knew a few things (what did I say about synergy?), there was a certain feeling of whimsy during the run of the show. The cast felt like family, directed by family. I guess Cold is best described as “chummy.” Equal parts goofy and friendly, an ideal combo. You’d like to hang with these dudes, if only for one night out. And only one.
Okay. We got the likable characters down, even the rotten ones like Lee Majors’ Majors (Christ, that’s confusing. Was it intentional?) and the icky Thomas Lennon’s toady act. To think after years of being a TV action star, Majors missed his chance at comedy until here, and his does a good job at it, too. C’mon, there’s nothing funnier in villain being boorish, snarky and quick with a quip. Majors did this is spades, and with nary a Million Dollar Man joke cracked. Majors’ role was a highlight of the goofy fun. You wanted to shake his hand and slap him at the same time.
The rest of the friendly, albeit bland crew were witty in fits and starts. The pacing was sluggish, and had definite feelings of “get on with it” even if I knew all would out in the end. Still, the folks were likable. Heck, this was London’s best role since Dazed And Confused, sorry to say. At least it didn’t go straight to SyFy. Truth be told, I liked all the characters…in a muted way. Maybe I could see where all of it was going as I have seen it before, but there was a general lack of tension in Cold. Right, we had gags aplenty, dappled with sexual dalliances, alcohol abuse and Galifianakis and Hamilton taking turns doing a two-man Three Stooges routine so may argue tension in a comedy like this alien.
WRONG!
Tension is what drives story, and regardless of how dopey, mindless, vulgar and of no redeeming quality a comedy is tailored, there has to be some trouble to overcome. I can’t beat on this chevaline enough, but regardless of genre, pacing and tension are key—key!—in how this dope values his flicks. As I said above any slowing down and/or reflection in a slob com dooms it to the bargain bin. Hell, I think that’s where I scored it. At Costco. On Betamax. It skipped.
Sigh. Anyway…
I had a funny thing going on regarding the technical aspects of Cold. There were none. The Malloys got their start in commercials, and the camerawork proves thus. I did like the ski tricks, and the opening scene is doubtless a first in skiing comedies (yes, there have been others, like Hot Dog! and Ski Patrol, neither are worth mentioning here), but the shredding is more of a bookend to an otherwise rote sports comedy. Kinda like a philistine Maltese Falcon. It looked like the directors were trying to sell me something, like snowboards or how snowboarding is cool or how cheap-ass beer is cool or somehow the toilet brush that was Zack’s beard was cool, which may explain the follicular explosion of the past few years. tLike I said, all slobs coms are interchangeable, so even if the skiing shenanigans were cool, I wasn’t buying into it. Hell, I wasn’t even shopping. I just came here to laugh. I didn’t need passive product placement.
I did find myself giggling however, then later laughing out loud (the Casablanca nods were pretty clever). The humor was lowbrow, but not dumb. In truth the wisecracking was pretty sharp, esp thanks to Majors and Galifianakis’ motormouth delivery and the dopey innocence of the rest of the cast. Sure, the dire situation of Bull Mountain getting yuppified was always floating in the background, but it was pressing enough an issue to disrupt the laughs and stupidity. Like I said, all slob coms are the same. Cold must’ve been the most laid back pervy yukfest I ever saw. Truth be told, it was the silliest movie I ever chilled out to. Must’ve been that I dunno what.
Whatever, Cold teetered on the precipice of boring, but ultimately saved by the dopey et al recipe and a likable cast. Might be a gateway to a full blown 80s style comedy revival. Maybe not. Cold does make for a decent Saturday afternoon movie. It gratefully never takes itself, you know.
Don’t forget the beer. And to wax down.
The Verdict…
Rent it or relent it? A mild rent it. Sure, nothing new here, but the cast was cool and I am a sucker for comedies like this. Might’ve been funnier if I were pished before I hit play. Wait…I think I was.
The Stray Observations…
- “Are you sniffing me?” The dice have been cast.
- I love that Eve 6 song, God help me.
- “I am not gonna take romantic advice from somebody who cannot spell romantic or advice…or bong.”
- I thought black dudes didn’t ski. It’s a new world.
- “Speaking of testicles, let’s get a beer.”
- Best gag/outtake reel I’ve seen in a while (that wasn’t animated).
- “Hey, retard…”
- Ah, chatrooms. Once the 7th level of the Web.
- “It’s called the ’80s! Ford was president, Nixon was in the White House, and FDR was running this country into the ground!”
- Derek Hamilton, the poor man’s Crispin Glover.
- “I don’t have to write a test to tell ya I take drugs!”
- I love that Andrew WK song, God help me.
- “Seize the carp!”
The Next Time…
We bow before the Lords Of Dogtown in awe of their smith grinding, acid drops, bitch slaps and other skateboarding moves, the likes of Nature has never seen. As is it written.