You are browsing the Blog for who used it best - secretly important.

psycho vs. psycho

November 7, 2012 in columns, who used it best

Last week on Halloween, my daughter and I were trying to figure out what to watch.  Having run through favorites like Monster House, Coraline, and the Paranormal Activity series, we needed to find something new, not overly gory and not campy, but definitely something scary.  After browsing Netflix I decided to watch a classic film I’d never seen before, Psycho.  That’s right I’ve never seen Psycho.

Just moments into the movie I realized that this was not the 1960 Alfred Hitchcock classic, but rather the 1998 Gus Van Sant “remake”.  I was about to turn it off when something struck me; I was in the minority of people who will have seen the Psycho “remake” before the original.  I knew nothing about the film aside from the iconic shower scene, which made this the perfect opportunity to see how the “remake” matched up devoid of context.

Here’s what you need to know about the 1998 “remake”.  I put the word remake in quotes because as opposed to traditional remakes this is a copy.  The script by Joseph Stefano is identical to that used for Hitchcock’s with just a few semantical tweaks, i.e. the stolen dollar amount changes from $40,000 to $400,000.  The score is conducted by Danny Elfman and identical to the original written by Bernard Herrmann. The sets are virtually the same, and even the shots are almost identical.  In fact so much of this film is exactly the same as the original that it’s almost easier to talk about what’s different.  For the most part it’s what’s different that really ruins the film.

Let me remind you that I’d never seen the original, and that everything I disliked about the film was genuine as I had nothing to compare it to.

The first major difference is color.  In 1960 Psycho could have been color, at least practically, but it was instead shot in black and white.  It makes the whole film darker, grittier, and effectively scary.  Poorly lit areas of the set become black mysteries that could produce almost anything and your imagination runs wild as you worry about what is hidden.  Van Sant instead chose color, but not just color, obnoxiously vibrant colors.  This was the first thing I noticed about the movie, and I’m saying these colors were bright, it was as if the set and costume designers thought they were working on Dr. Doolittle, or My Fair Lady.

The next major difference was the actors. I think it’s safe to say that if Van Sant were to film Psycho today he would have chosen a mostly different cast.  The original starred

Anthony Perkins, Vera Miles, Janet Leigh, and John Gavin.  The cast was spectacular and never tipped their hand, and in a film with this kind of reveal, that’s important.  The remake starred Vince Vaughn, Julianne Moore, Anne Heche, and Viggo Mortensen.  Vaughn was crazy right off the bat and I basically knew we was the real killer immediately.  Moore is fine as is Viggo, it’s Heche who literally destroys this film, she’s just that bad.  From the moment she sees the money I knew exactly what was going to happen, even though she technically doesn’t make the decision to take the money until later.  Likewise she was so unlikable that I wasn’t terribly upset when she’s killed.

There are some other differences, such as the time period of the film, which is updated to 1998, more nudity when Marion dies, and slight shooting differences at the end of the film with the corpse reveal, and the Doctor’s monologue.  There there were more major changes, for instance Hitchcock intended the opening shot to be continuous all the way into the hotel room, but it was unachievable, Van Sant corrected this.  Another notable difference is when Norman Bates spies on Marion through a hole in the wall, in the original he merely watches her undress then leaves, Van Sant has Bates masturbate to climax.

Though there are few differences they ask the big question as to why with all the similarities he bothered to change anything at all?  The script was written for a different time period and I can’t express to you how weird it feels to have modern actors speaking outdated lines.

If you’ve seen the movie you know how robotic the knife stabs to Marion are, given how the scene needed to be shot in 1960 its wonky nature is forgiven.  Van Sant chose to use the same wonky knife stabs.  Why?  Why if he chose to fix the opening shot why didn’t he fix this shot?  Or what about the death of Milton Arbogast, the P.I. who comes to the Bates house to investigate Marion’s death?  He’s cut at the top of the staircase and falls down the stairs and dies.  Hitchcock chose to shoot this with a unique shot that worked in 1960, but could have been made more realistic in 1998, but Van Sant opted to go with Hitchcocks shot.  Why?

Then there is something that’s a little more subtle, but extremely important.  Every shot in Van Sant’s Psycho seems to give away the plot, with the sol exception being the dead mother reveal.  It’s  hard to explain this, but if you look closely you can tell that Van Sant’s foreknowledge of the Psycho plot altered every scene just enough to give away the entire story.

As it turns out the best part of Van Sant’s remake was the only element used exactly as the original, the score.  Bernard Herrmann’s score sets the tone for the entire movie, it’s what lets you know that when Marion steals the money the story is actually about something more sinister.  Had this single element been missing the 1998 Psycho would have been totally unwatchable.

I could not figure out why this movie was ever made.  Hitchcock’s Psyco is iconic, an American movie classic, and you don’t remake icons of cinema.  Assuming that this film had to be remade, it just doesn’t make sense to essentially copy the original, the film would have been endlessly better with an updated script, and original cinematography all around.  It’s no surprise that this film was received very poorly, anyone in their right mind saw exactly what I saw.  Gus Van Sant has since said that this was an experiment, which feels like a cop-out, because I doubt that the studio spent $20-60 million on a mere experiment.

It was perhaps Roger Ebert who said it best “demonstrates that a shot-by-shot remake is pointless; genius apparently resides between or beneath the shots, or in chemistry that cannot be timed or counted.”  I couldn’t have said it better.  What Sant proved with his Psycho remake is that the true talent and creativity is ever present in every cell of the work, you may not be able to point to it or reach out and touch it, but you can feel it and you know it’s there.

Last week it was announced that Lucasfilm had been sold to Disney for a kings ransom of $4 billion.  It immediately set off a fire storm of Star Wars fans worried about the future of the franchise in the hands of Mickey Mouse, understandably so.  Though their first order of business was to announce episodes VII, VIII, and IX, it also brought back the rumors of possible remakes of the original trilogy.  Though personally I don’t believe they’ll ever happen, we probably have to make peace with the fact that every great movie will eventually be remade.

We need only to look to Gus Van Sant’s Psycho to realize that there is more to art than what lies on the surface.  More than just film, tape, canvas, or page, it sits deeper than that, it’s emotional.  It’s emotion that the audience feels, and emotion that the artist exudes in every stroke of their work.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

who used it best: anchorman vs. arrested development

August 2, 2012 in columns, who used it best

I checked our archives today and realized that I haven’t written an installment of Who Used It Best since January 5th.  That’s a long time for a column that I really love.  So I make a triumphant return with a new streamlined Who Used It Best, pitting Anchorman against Arrested Development for their use of the song Afternoon Delight.

In the past this column was only for two movies that had the same version of the same song in their soundtrack.  This was to keep from comparing versions of songs and instead to focus solely on how the film used the song.  This time however I break both of those rules.  Here I compare and contrast the use of the song Afternoon Delight, originally written and performed by the Starland Vocal Band, in Anchorman (a movie) and Arrested Development (a television show).  Anyone familiar with either will also note that neither uses the actual song, in Anchorman it is performed by the actors a cappella while in Arrested Development it is performed as Karaoke.  This time I’m really comparing which bit is better.

Anchorman

If you’re reading this website or even just this column, then you’ve probably already seen Anchorman.  But if you’ve been living in an underground bomb shelter eating cold cans of Spaghetti-O’s let me tell you that Anchorman is a bit of a comedy phenomenon and you need to see it.  If you are a fan of the film then you might be asking yourself, “is he talking about the music video in the DVD extras or the scene in the movie?”  The music video is hilarious, especially Steve Carrell with that kitten, but here I’m talking about the scene in the actual movie.

The scene takes place in anchorman Ron Burgundy’s (Will Farrell) office where his Channel 4 new team, Brick Tamland (Steve Carrell), Champ Kind (Dave Koechner), and Brian Fantana (Paul Rudd) asks him what love feels like.  Ron explains by singing Afternoon Delight, eventually everyone joins in with a perfect four part harmony.  It’s the kind of hilarious non sequitur that director Adam McKay is know for.  There is no explanation for why they break into song at that moment, or why Ron Burgundy explains that love is like Afternoon Delight.  By the way if you didn’t know, Afternoon Delight is a euphemism for afternoon sexual relations.

 

Arrested Development

In Season two of the cult television comedy there is an episode titled Afternoon Delight, in which the Bluth company holds their Christmas party.  The song appears when Michael Bluth (Jason Bateman) and his niece Maeby Funke (Alia Shawkat) sing Karaoke together.  Michael is unaware of the lyrics and a third of the way through amidst disgusted looks from the party goers he stops, realizing that this was a poor choice of song for he and his niece.

The song also appears at the end of the episode at a make-up Christmas party when Lindsay Bluth (Portia de Rossi) and her nephew George-Michael Bluth (Michael Cera) also sing the song at Karaoke.  The punchline here is when Lindsay’s husband Tobias Funke (David Cross) informs a woman nearby that that’s his wife and nephew, and that they have an open relationship.  Obviously the woman thinks he’s talking about Lindsay and George-Michael together and doesn’t pick up on the fact that Tobias is hitting on her.  At the very end of the episode the song appears one more time as Michael and George-Michael quietly start singing the song to themselves and Michael says “It does not seem like it would be that dirty.”

 

Who used it best?

This was tough, harder than determining the winner between Step Brothers and 500 Days of Summer’s use of the song You Make My Dreams Come True.  I love both Anchorman and Arrested Development equally, and find that the song in each stands out equally.  On the plus side the randomness of Anchorman and the four part harmony make it quirky and funny, that the song is done well is also a major plus.  On the negative side, the fact that the song is so random makes it a comedy bit unto itself, it holds no correlation to the rest of the film.  Were to sing another song it would probably be just as funny.

On the plus side for Arrested Development, the song’s inappropriateness is used to full effect, tonally it sounds wholesome but the lyrics prove otherwise.  It also becomes a running joke through out the entire episode becoming a little more funny every times it’s used.  Incest is also a joke throughout the entire series.  On the negative side… well, the only real negative I could find was that despite being the title of the episode the funniest running gag is Gob Bluth’s (Will Arnett) expensive suits.

After much deliberation and real soul searching I’ve decided to crown Arrested Development as the winner.  It had very little to do with which was funniest as they were both hilarious, Arrested Development wins because they use the song specifically and on multiple occasions.  Did I get it right, or should Anchorman have won.  Let us know in the comments section below.

Tags: , , , ,
2 Comments »

who used it best? oh sweet nuthin`; high fidelity vs. away we go

January 5, 2012 in columns, who used it best

In this edition of who used it best, we look at the Velvet Underground’s, Oh Sweet Nuthin’, in both High Fidelity and Away We Go.  Of all the songs I’ve looked at, this is my favorite.  It’s also my favorite Velvet Underground song.  In the past I’ve included clips from the movies, but there weren’t any available for these two movies.  Instead I’ve posted the song for you to give a listen to.

High Fidelity

After numerous recommendations, I finally watched this movie, even if it was just for the purpose of this article.  Considering that it’s all about music it was encouraging to see this song included.  The soundtrack is good, but it’s all over the map, I generally I like a film’s music to be cohesive, sharing a similar tone and feel.  I did wonder if the writers had ever seen Empire Records.

How they use it:

I don’t think that a song should necessarily have to match the tone of the scene, it can be great when it works with the scene, but intriguing when it works against it.  Both films use the song’s slow and somber feeling to add to the emotional depth of the scene.  In High Fidelity, the song appears when Rob (John Cusack) meets his recent break up, Laura (Iben Hjejle) at a cafe.  It’s a typical where did things go wrong, scene.  When the subject of Ian, Laura’s rebound comes up, she admits to having sex with him.  Rob had assumed as much, but upon hearing her admit to it, he runs from the cafe, and then wallows in his sadness alone at home, while Oh Sweet Nuthin` plays.

What makes it great:

This is an emotional high point for Rod, and having this song play as he runs out of the cafe was gratifying.  We’re I to experience something similar I would wish that song were playing as well.  When Rob sits alone at home by himself, it helps paint a perfect image.

Drawbacks:

I probably sound like a broken record at this point, but when a song is used within the world of the film, it generally serves to make it better.  In this case the song is simply background, it almost seems that we are led to believe that Rob is listening to it, and it makes it all the more frustrating that he’s not.  Considering his life evolves around music, they could have featured the song more prominently.  But like much of the movies music, it seems compiled only to sell cd’s and not aid in the story telling.

Away We Go

I always like to preface this column by saying that I’m not comparing movie quality, but rather the use of the song within it.  Away We Go is a far superior film, in just about every way.  It’s soundtrack proves that as well.  It’s cohesive and similar tonally.

How they use it:

Burt and Verona (John Krasinski, Maya Rudolph) are expecting a baby, and looking for a change of scenery.  This takes them from Arizona, to Wisconsin, Montreal, and Florida.  It’s while in Montreal that they meet up with some old friends, Tom and Munch, who seem to have a wonderful life, with a brood of adopted children.  The two couples go out for a night on the town and end up at amateur night in a strip club.  While Bert and Tom are talking, Munch finds her way on stage and dances to Oh Sweet Nuthin’.

What makes it great:

The song has a level of somberness to it, but it can also be seductive.  The scene doesn’t rely on the song, but when paired with the emotional context, it adds to it nicely.  During the song we learn that Munch had a miscarriage just days before.  She dances without passion or joy, she’s like a zombie, eyes focused on a different life.  The story that Tom tells skillfully matches the weight of the song.  It fits so well that I have to wonder if the chorus “oh sweet nuthin’” was chosen because of the nothing in her uterus.

Drawbacks:

I love everything about the songs use in the scene but for one thing.  The crowds reaction.  Munch’s dancing isn’t uncomfortable only when seen in context to what Tom says, her expressionless stare and general somber attitude tell the story of a person in pain.  When the song finishes the crowd reacts with genuine applause, can’t they see the sad woman dancing to a sad song?

Final Tally:

From this article you probably already know who won.  Songs in films should be chosen for more then just their ability to sell soundtracks.  They should cut right to the emotional core of the scene, maybe even add another layer to it.  That’s why Away We Go is the clear champion.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

who used it best? goodbye horses; silence of the lambs vs. married to the mob

November 15, 2011 in columns, who used it best

 

In our third edition of who used it best we compare the use of the song Goodbye Horses by Q Lazzarus written by William Garvey.  Incase the song doesn’t ring a bell, just think, “It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.”  Have it now?  Yes, it’s that song.  As I always like to state, I am not comparing the quality of the films but rather the use of the song in each.

Please be aware that this clip contains some difficult images and is not appropriate for children… not that they’re reading this website anyway.

Silence of the Lambs

Chances are the only reason you even know about this song is due to its presence in Silence of the Lambs.  About the only time it’s ever used now is while directly parodying the movie.  In the interest of full disclosure I feel it necessary to admit that this movie is one of my all time favorite films, and my second favorite from director Jonathan Demme.  When he applies himself correctly Demme is a genius.

How they use it:

I’m probably wasting my time describing the scene to you as it’s arguably one of the most famous in modern American cinema.  For those of you who haven’t seen it, let me enlighten you.

Serial killer Buffalo Bill has been killing and skinning women, as the song begins Bill is in his basement, applying makeup, singing along, talking seductively to himself, and applying a wig(with skin) from one of his scalped victims.  He speaks the famous lines “Would you fuck me?  I’d fuck me.  I’d fuck me hard.  I’d fuck me so hard.”

He then proceeds to perform the infamous tuck maneuver with his manhood.  This is all interspersed with Bills latest kidnapping victim attempting to lure his dog Precious (which is why I never refer to my dog by this term) into the dirt hole he’s holding her in.

In this film the song is actually present in the world, Bill dances and sings along to it, changing the song would require changing the scene.

What makes it Great:

Being such an iconic scene I would venture a guess that you probably can’t hear Goodbye Horses without thinking of the creepy as shit Buffalo Bill  putting on that scalped wig and dancing around naked.  That simple fact is enough to make it great without further comment.  However if you listen to this song and disassociate it from Silence of the Lambs (it’s practically impossible) you might discover that it’s a really good song.  Not only is it good, but it’s also the perfect song for this scene.  It skillfully straddles the line between seduction and sinister, which helps explain why our villain has selected this to listen to while… doing what he does.

Drawbacks:

This was a tough one.  Just when I thought I found a drawback, further examination proved me wrong.  I went back to see what I’d listed as draw backs in previous entries, but nothing fit this scene.  In place of simply saying that there are no drawbacks, I’ll us the my weaknesses are actually my strengths, logic.  Jonathan Demme used the song so well that it is actually too disturbing.  When was the last time you heard Goodbye Horses and didn’t get creeped out?  Similarly do you think the song could be used in any way other than to make your skin crawl?  Our next film will prove that you cannot.

Married to the Mob

Remember earlier when I said that when Jonathan Demme properly applies himself he’s genius.  Married to the Mob Does does not display that genius, that’s right this movie was also directed by Demme.  While some may disagree that this is actually a good movie (it had a favorable rating in both IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes) it doesn’t really matter, because I’m only concerned with one scene.

Until last week I’d never seen Married to the Mob, nor was I aware of Goodbye Horses presence in it.  I would like to thank kneemee in the Maximum Fun forum for bringing this to my attention.

How they use it:

Like Silence of the Lambs the song is used in the actual world of the movie.  Michelle Pfeiffer even brings our attention to the song in the scene though she doesn’t mention it by name.  In the scene Michelle Pfeiffer brings Matthew Modine back to her apartment, she goes into the bedroom where she turns on the song,  she puts on a sexy silk robe and saunters back into the living room with a tray of soda water.  It’s your typical seduction scene, where Matthew Modine rubs her feet, hoping to get under her robe.

What makes it great:

As tough as it was to find a drawback to Silence of the Lambs, it was equally as tough to find what makes the scene in this movie great.  In order to do so I had to put myself in the place of someone who actually found this movie funny.

As I said before this song does have a seductive quality, so I could see why Michelle Pfeiffer’s character might choose it.  I can also see how the humor could kick in when Pfeiffer becomes embarrassed by her seduction attempt and begins to cry with “mood” music in the background.  Imagine listening to Al Green and becoming self conscious while seducing your boyfriend in sexy lingerie… I think this is the same idea as the movie.

Drawbacks:

In Demme and the movies defense, Married to the Mob was released in 1988, and Silence of the Lambs wouldn’t come out for three more years.  This was moviegoers first experience with the song in a film, and upon seeing Silence of the Lambs viewers might have thought “hey, didn’t he use this in his other movie?”

Anyone who saw “Silence” first will immediately get a queazy feeling in their stomach when Pfeiffer enters the room and you hear the familiar keyboard and drumbeat followed by Q Lazzarus’ haunting vocals.  You think she’s going to kill Matthew Modine or that he’s going to express to her that he wants to wear her skin like it was his own.  It’s nearly impossible to see it any other way.

Because Demme did his job so well in “Silence” I feel somewhat guilty of knocking it completely based on it’s success in another movie.  Let me look at it one other way.  If I were in charge of the Blu-ray release of Married to the Mob, I would immediately change the song to something else.  Anything else.  The song has no significance to this film, Pfeiffer’s comment could fit with any popular song at that time without changing the scene.

Of course I could be wrong, perhaps Married to the Mob was Buffalo Bill’s favorite film and being reminded of Matthew Modine rubbing Michelle Pfeiffer’s feet on the couch is what gets him in the mood.  But I doubt it.

Final Tally:

This wasn’t a fair fight even from the beginning.  I knew who would win this before I even saw the scene in Married to the Mob.  I just loved the idea of seeing Goodbye Horses in another movie in a non-ironic way.  Silence of the Lambs hands down is this duels champion.  If not because the song is completely identified with that movie, then because it’s completely replaceable in Married to the Mob.

Here’s a fun game, play Goodbye Horses over footage from your wedding, then see how you feel.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

who used it best? shout! animal house vs. wedding crashers

October 11, 2011 in columns, who used it best

For the second edition of who used it best, we look at Animal House and Wedding Crashers and their use of the song, Shout.  Just as with 500 Days of Summer and Step Brothers, we are not comparing the quality of the film, just how the song is used in each.  I should also note that while I had originally planned to use only the exact same versions, viewers of the films will notice that the original version of Shout by the Isley Brothers is used in Wedding crashers and a different version is used in Animal House.  I decided to compare the two anyway because the versions are so similar.

watch the Animal House clip here.

Animal House

It wasn’t until I re-watched the movie that I realized that the version used was not the original.  The song in the movie is performed by a fictional band created for the movie, Otis Day and the Knights.  The name sounds so convincing that for quite some time I believed that they wrote Shout.  Coincidentally after the movie the fictional band did continue on for a while.  I suppose the movie which did not have a large budget, went with the cover in order to save on having to buy the rights to the original.  All that said, I personally prefer the Otis Day version.

How they use it:I won’t go into great detail when it comes to the plot of Animal House.  If you haven’t seen it yet, then you need to get yourself to the store and buy it immediately.  I’ll forgive you if you haven’t seen it and give you the briefest of overviews.  Animal House is about a frat house of misfits Delta Tau Chai, fighting against the school administration and their rival frat of tradition and S&M, Omega Theta Pi.

Shout is performed live (by Otis Day and the Knights) during Delta’s first “Toga” party of the year.  The characters dance to the song and follow what is accepted as as it’s signature moves, such as everyone getting low during the lyrics “a little bit softer now” and then rising to jump when the song comes roaring back.

What makes it great:

In 500 Days of Summer Joseph Gordon-Levitt lives in the world of the song and dances to it.  The case is the same for Animal House.  I don’t know if you can credit this movie with inventing the moves for the song, but by using them the scene is made all the more memorable.

While the humor is not laugh out loud funny, it does feature John Belushi being John Belushi.  Drunk, dancing crazy, and looking up girls togas during “a little bit softer now.”  There is just enough humor and the song is played so well that a moment which could easily be removed from the movie becomes indespensable.

Drawbacks:

The scene is funny, but it doesn’t feature any lines or jokes that Animal House is best known for.  Belushi’s zit, impression, the otter defense, or the big motivational speech are much more well known.

While all the protagonists are present during the song, only Belushi really has a spotlight moment or moments.  It doesn’t teach, expand or really move the story along in a way that makes you say you couldn’t live without it.  If you were to turn on the movie just as the song begins you might not know who are protagonists are, as they seem to blend in with a crowd of extras.

Wedding Crashers

This movie is fairly well known, though it certainly doesn’t have the fanatics that a movie like Animal House does.  It has it’s iconic moments and surely over time it will become a classic.  Where Animal House was full of budding but unknown actors who eventually hit it big, Wedding Crashers is full of well established stars.

Shout has become a staple of wedding playlists (it was certainly played at mine) if your DJ doesn’t use it then he isn’t worth whatever you’re paying him.  You might be able to credit this movie with extending the life of the song into another generation.

How they use it:

Even if you haven’t seen the movie, I really don’t need to describe it to you as the title says it all.  Own Wilson and Vince Vaughn are a pair of legal mediators who crash weddings.  As Spring arrives so does wedding season, and our characters head out on a summer long wedding binge.  The song plays over a montage of weddings that run the gambit of the ethnically stereotyped.

A major key to crashing these weddings isn’t simply for the rush they get, but also to pick up women.  As the song draws to a close we see Wilson and Vaughn falling into bed with a series of topless women.

What makes it great:

Unlike Animal House, our protagonists are prominently featured.  The montage is a device to get a years worth of weddings out of the way without having to feature each one individually (although arguably the arch of the montage could have been the arch of the entire movie).

The montage is well crafted, mostly due to a good editing job.  The pacing and the action fits with what has become the quintessential wedding song, so universal that we are led to believe that our characters are singing and dancing to this song at every wedding they addend.

To cap it all off the scene is very funny.  It contains some of the movies more memorable lines despite the fact that it is not the funniest of what the movie has to offer.

Drawbacks:

Wedding Crashers uses the song both as a dance sequence and as a montage.  The characters are dancing and sometimes singing along to the song, but then at other times the music means nothing.  Because of this the song is edited in a way that it is not used to its fullest potential.  “A little bit softer now,” is skipped completely which seems a shame because Animal House had so much fun with it.

It works both as an upside and a drawback that all the crashing is condensed into this one three minute montage, there could have been another great movie made about just the crashing.

Final Tally:

I had to think about this one for quite some time.  Who used it best?  Both felt equally memorable, and both used the song in an active way.  This decision was not as cut and dry as Step Brothers and 500 Days of Summer were, those movies used the song in very different ways.  These two used the song differently but similar at the same time. They need the song for the scene to function as it does, plugging in another just wouldn’t work.  But it was Animal House that used the song the best, they had fun with it in a way that Wedding Crashers didn’t.

I will however acknowledge that the winner could fall along a generational line.  Those in their twenties and younger most likely identify the song with Wedding Crashers while those in their thirties and older identify it with Animal House.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

who used it best #1: step brothers vs. (500) days of summer

August 8, 2011 in columns, who used it best


Occasionally my wife will buy US Magazine and when she does I usually make sure to check out one of my favorite tabloid pictorials “who wore it best.”  If you have chosen to spend your time by bettering your life rather than flipping through the pages of celebrity toilet paper then let me explain the premise.  Who wore it best will pit two celebrities against one another by showing a side by side comparison of each wearing the same outfit.  Online readers then have the chance to vote on… who wore it best.

In honor of my favorite tabloid pictorial we will be introducing a new series here on the website, Who Used it Best.  In this series we will take a look at two movies that use the same song.  For our first Who used it best, we will compare and contrast the use of Hall and Oats, You make my dreams come true in both Step Brothers and 500 Days of Summer.

Step Brothers

This is not the first time this instant classic has been featured on the website, you might remember its previous appearance in Comfort Movie.  That said it was the first of a pair of movies to bring about the relative resurgence of Hall and Oats from the depths of music trash can.  Readers should take comfort in knowing that while Step Brothers is one of my favorite movies, this will not sway my decision on way or the other.

How they use it.

I won’t delve too deeply into the plot of the film but what you need to understand is that the two main characters Brennan Huff (Will Ferrell) and Dale Doback (John C. Reilly) become 40 year old step brothers when their parents marry.  At first they are unreceptive to one another, you might even say bitter enemies but after a dinner with Brendan’s brother Derek Huff (Adam Scott) in which they both find a common hatred for someone other than each other, they become best friends.  In fact the song begins with Brennan saying, “Did we just become best friends?” To which Dale responds “Yup!”

What follows is a montage of two 40 year old boys becoming friends in ways you would expect two 10 year old children to.  Karate in the garage, measuring their penises, mixing mentos with Diet Coke, sword fight (the one with pee), watching Steven Seagal films, and concludes with both turning their two twin beds into a makeshift bunk bed.

What makes it great.

Watching John C. Reilly and Will Ferrell act like ten year olds is comedy gold and this montage is filled with the activities that brothers and best friends do when they are young to help bond one another.  What makes the whole thing better is the fact that they seem to bond by doing all of them over the course of two hours after having spent the first third of the movie as bitter rivals.  Each activity as described above is funny enough on its own but when combined they become outright hilarious.

Drawbacks.

Quite honestly there are only two drawbacks to the song as used in the movie and they equate to someone answering the, “What are your weaknesses?” question with “I work to hard.”  The fact is all I could really come up with is that the whole scene is far too short, the song could have gone on longer to include more bonding experiences.  Perhaps it would have thrown the pacing of the film off, but I don’t really care about pacing when watching two 40 year old men have a “sword fight.”

The other drawback to the scene is that because the movie is already off the charts hilarious the montage doesn’t stand out as particularly great.  Sure whenever I hear the song You make my dreams come true, I always hear “Do you want to do karate in the garage?” in my head.  But that is not better than say “I smoked pot with Johnny Hopkins,” or “It’s okay that mines not movie quality.”  While a great scene it does not rise above the rest of the movie.  If you’re wondering what exactly those two quotes mean then you have not yet experienced the immortal genius of Adam McKay’s Step Brothers.

(500) Days of Summer

This movie tends to be rather polarizing, people either loved it for it’s sweet indie odd ball qualities or they hated it for all the same reasons.  Personally I fall right in between, it’s a great concept which is executed well, the script is sometimes wonky but with a great actor like Joseph Gordon-Levitt to balance it out most of the time I forgive it’s flaws.  My real problems with the film are that A. Zooey Deschanel is not the incredible woman the film asks us to believe she is.  In fact she’s just a bitch, never once do I see her side of the story.  B. The film takes place in Los Angeles but the characters seem to be living in a city more like New York.  It was not a surprise to discover that it was originally written to take place in San Francisco.  C. During a Karaoke scene Joseph Gordon-Levitt sings The Pixies, Here comes your man which I head never once heard anyone sings at Karaoke.  Just as with Step Brothers, I will act as a mostly partial judge and will not allow my frustrations with portions of the film to obstruct my decision making.

How they use it.

Just as with Step Brothers let me give you some context for the use of the song.  (500) Days of Summer, is a story about 500 days of Summer (Zooey Deschanel) in the life of main character Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt).  The story is told out of order jumping from day 5 to day 105 in just moments, most often happy scenes jump to scenes of sadness and depression.  In the story Tom meets Summer and is instantly in love with her, Summer meanwhile sends mixed messages to Tom about what exactly she is looking for, a fling, friendship, or a relationship.  The song comes into play when finally Tom gets into Summers apartment and they have sex for the first time.

He awakes refreshed and ready for a new day, emerging from the building and thrusting a fist of triumph in the air.  As the song plays he dances his way down the street, hugging and high fiving strangers as he goes along.  At one point to stops to fix his hair in a shop window and instead sees Han Solo winking back at him.  From there we delve further into an absurd dance sequence where the ridiculousness climaxes when a cartoon blue bird lands on Toms finger. He continues by dancing his way into the elevator at work.  The song closes as the doors to the elevator close, when they open we have jumped ahead a hundred days or so and now Tom is depressed.

What makes it great.

At times the film can be a bit moody, though there are very funny moments this scene really stands out as outrageously hilarious.  The director uses various story telling techniques including a split screen that depicts a scene in fantasy and reality, the songs bit of absurdist humor comes at just the right moment in the film to help try and justify the use of a mysterious narrator, or the unique story telling techniques.  The Han Solo reflection is a stroke of genius, it takes you by surprise and the director really earns the laugh and then justifies it to the audience with the dancing.  The last part of what makes the scene great is that unlike Step Brothers where the song is used as a back drop, in (500) Days of Summer it is used as narrative.  The characters are dancing to the music, they can actually hear it, and this takes it to a whole other level of musical theater mockery.

Drawbacks.

In (500) Days of Summer the scene completely stands out as arguably the best in the movie.  Subtract the scene from Step Brothers and I don’t love it any less, subtract the scene from (500) Days of Summer and the movie loses a great deal of likability.  While I was formulating the idea for this article I discussed the movie with a number of people some who did and some who didn’t like the movie but across the board everyone thought this was the best scene by far.

The other drawback of the scene is context, as the audience we immediately understand what has occurred, Tom has finally had sex with Summer and he is celebrating.  The problem is that Summer is such an appalling character that I have a hard time believing that one could really be that happy about reaching home plate with her.  I can’t really think of any actress who contains the qualities that the character of Summer supposedly possesses, Zooey Deschanel definitely does not have them.

Final thought.

Before Step Brothers and (500) Days of Summer I can’t say I was a fan of You make my dreams come true, now I have it on my ipod and use it as an instant pick me up.  This I credit directly to two movies that use it well.  I didn’t develop any kind of scoring system to determine the winner, instead I will rely solely on intuition.

It was very close and could have gone either way but in the end I had to go with (500) Days of Summer.  While I enjoy the movie, to me it is just not as good as Step Brothers, but the fact that the song use in the movie was so much better from everything else I had to give it the nod.  As I mentioned before there are plenty of equally funny scenes in Step Brothers but for (500) Days of Summer the scene really stands out.

Of course this is just my unsolicited opinion, go ahead and watch both scenes and then vote in our poll here.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »