- - - -
BY JACOB ZHIVOV
AND DAVID BLUMENSTEIN
February 21, 2003
- - - -
A review of the film "Analyse That" I read
not too long ago said, "If anyone is to analyse this latest outing,
it should be De Niro and Crystal, who would be well advised to don
their Mafioso personas and shoot the writers. And the director."
Now, not only did this reviewer not check that the writer
and director were the same person but in fact none other than one
of the best comedic actors I have seen: Harold Ramis.
For those of you who do not know who Harold Ramis is,
let me throw out a couple of hints - Animal House, Meatballs, Caddyshack,
Stripes, Ghostbusters... jogged your memory yet? No? Well, Harold
was responsible for the writing all of these great films, directing
some of them as well. These films have been considered some of the
greatest comedies of our time and yet this reviewer wanted him shot.
Before anyone says, "That's one opinion and why
should you care?", I respond to you with the fact that I too
saw this film and took my father with me. Now for those who don't
know my family, let me tell you that my father hates bad films and
especially bad comedies, so I thought the best person to test this
reviewer's opinion would be him. Lo and behold: my father loved this
film, he couldn't stop laughing in some parts. With this knowledge
at hand I decided to write this piece to defend against bad reviewing
and stupid fucked up comments.
Also Harold was part of the cast of Second City Television,
a sketch comedy show set in a fictitious TV station in 1976, this
show has been considered one of the best comedy shows of all time.
There he met other great comedians like John Candy and Eugene Levy,
another fine comedy actor who often isn't acknowledged for his work.
The point, my friends, is that reviewers A) Should check
before insulting people like Harold Ramis, and B) Don't try to be
funny by saying the people who made the film should be shot. Because
then I demand that once they're done they should go after you. In
my opinion this film was quite good and once again showed how talented
Harold Ramis is.
If it were up to me, this piece would be called "WHY
LOUISE KELLER SUCKS". She's the reviewer who wrote the "writers
and director should be shot" thing quoted above. It's a harsh
thing to say. I imagine if I wrote something like "Louise Keller
is the worst movie reviewer I have ever come across, and Andrew
Urban would be well advised to kick her ass to the curb, then
shove a stake through her heart to make sure she doesn't rise again",
I would be criticised for it. And rightfully so, because it's a nasty
thing to say.
The only proper way for a movie reviewer to insult a
moviemaker is by drawing attention to their ON-SCREEN missteps. For
instance, if I wanted to insult Harold Ramis, I might wonder loudly
what possessed him to get involved with sequels to both "Ghostbusters"
and "Caddyshack". But I would never say that, because (1)
I respect Harold Ramis immensely, because (2) I didn't mind "Ghostbusters
II" and because (3) I haven't seen "Caddyshack II".
Similarly, the proper way for a moviemaker to insult
a movie reviewer would be to draw attention to their LOUSY WRITING.
If Harold Ramis were to point out that Louise Keller is a humongous
brown-nose who bases the content of her reviews largely on whether
she will be quoted on the movie's poster, and relies far too much
on excruciating food-related phrasing like "deliciously quirky"
and "a sumptuous feast for the senses", nobody would complain.
He's foregone the personal attacks and insulted her professional conduct
and writing skill.
Of course, Harold Ramis wouldn't bother. He's too classy
Ramis has been consistently funny for a very long time,
as both a writer and actor. He writes funny films, he is funny onscreen
(as recently as 2002's "Orange County"), and he's -- at
the very least -- a serviceable director. He wrote, directed and appeared
in "Groundhog Day", which is perhaps his (and star Bill
Murray's) artistic peak. Coming, as it did, a good 17 years after
he first appeared on television, and 13 years after he directed his
first movie ("Caddyshack"), it is obvious that Harold Ramis
is in it for the long haul, is not headed for arrogant oblivion like
contemporary Chevy Chase, and is surely not a man to be underestimated,
much less shot.
I haven't seen "Analyse That", though. Is
it any good?