Related articles and links |  1 of 3

If Nutty Professor II: The Klumps seems awfully familiar, look past the first installment in the series--and even the original Jerry Lewis comedy--to the gross-out humor of Me, Myself, and Irene and Scary Movie. Yes, it's a third exercise in raunchy humor this summer, introducing audiences to, for starters, a giant hamster having sex with a university dean.

Audiences went nuts for Klumps, despite the ho-hum reviews of critics both Christian and mainstream. Eddie Murphy, who portrayed the entire overweight Klump clan, received pretty much the only accolades that reviewers were willing to dole out. "Mr. Murphy once again proves his versatility as an actor by not only developing six different characters, but by developing them with such depth and distinction," says Michael Elliott of Crosswalk.com. But his praise fades fast. "It is therefore six times as sad that the script … was written to be so offensive . …It should have been called The Smutty Professor." The Dove Foundation elaborates: "When humor isn't extracted from broad sexual innuendo, Mr. Murphy turns to gross-out visuals, jokes about old age and the always reliable flatulence sound effect." Of course, this humor happens to be the summer audiences' cup of tea, so the U.S. Catholic Conference focuses its more basic failings, calling it a "sluggish" story with "few laughs." Paul Bicking of Previewsearches for something positive in the film, noting that "the Klumps do show support for family and for one another," but concludes: "While it strives to have a heart, other organs seem to be in control of [the film]."

What Lies Beneath received another round of faint praise and loud groans from critics this week, while the Harrison Ford/Michelle Pfeiffer ghost mystery continued to rein in audiences Crosswalk.com's Holly McClure admits to being "involved and glued to the screen," but felt "the story gets kind of shaky … in the revelation of who the ghost is and why she's there. … The plot has several holes in it with an ending that's hard to believe." Greenlake Reflections ' Jeffrey Overstreet attacks at the level of intention, not just story: "At their best, [ghost stories] appeal to our sense of mystery. They remind us that "there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in our philosophy", if I may quote the greatest ghost story of all: "Hamlet". … At their worst, ghost stories seek only to make us lose faith," writes Overstreet, placing Beneath in the latter category, "and appeal to our appetites for the malevolent and destructive." PlanetWisdom agrees that the film could cause unintentional harm. "Yes, this is just a movie and you might be able to look past that--except that it might lead to treating too lightly the very real presence of demons and the spiritual world. … If scary movies cause you to struggle with lingering fear of the supernatural, I don't recommend this one." The film is not completely without merit, however Christian Spotlight guest reviewer Halyna Barannik says the human relationships are much more successful than the spiritual ones. Although the film "isn't a great thriller," she writes, "it turns out to be a sobering picture that examines human nature, marriage, [and] infidelity."

Not even a gentle children's comedy could escape the critics' summertime blues. Thomas and the Magic Railroad, based on the popular series of children's books about a cartoon train, was deemed adequate at best. The U.S. Catholic Conference says it "works best when the animated engines are the focus, but human performances are weak and the plot runs out of steam." For Movieguide, though, the quality of the acting wasn't as important as the reputation of the actors; cinematic bad boys Alec Baldwin and Peter Fonda migrated for the first time to the tiny tyke audience. "This is a whimsical Alec Baldwin that audiences have not seen before. Bravo!" says Movieguide. But Crosswalk.'s Michael Elliott notes that even screen legends can't keep toddlers' attention long. "The meandering pace, the simplistic animation, and the overall length of the film (nearly 90 minutes) proved to be simply too much for the antsy preschoolers. [And it's] too silly a movie for their older siblings." The story's reliance on magic drew a range of responses. Childcare Action says it's harmless: "There was 'magic' such as the Mary Poppins style, but as in Mary Poppins none of it was evil, sinister or even selfish. All of it was clean childhood fantasy." Preview's Mary Draughon, however, recommends that the film be saved for those" children who understand the difference between the world of make-believe and reality." For those kids, says the Dove Foundation, there's "positive messages about friendship, loyalty and self-sacrifice." Even better, the film "never preaches. It makes those characteristics seem desirable and attainable."

next page... |  1 of 3

July (Web-only) 2000, Vol. 44