This week in the Deep Hurting Project: A Christmas Story 2
So, this is a sequel to a movie made 29 years ago, and as a result, ABSOLUTELY NOBODY involved in the original is involved. The IMDb page lists Jean Shepherd as the only common cast/crew member in both films, and, of course, he died 13 years before this movie was released, so his involvement is limited to inspiration. Even though he wrote a lot of stories he cold use as further inspiration, that just settled for remaking the original. Of course, we all know why it was made: a cash grab. The original went from an underrated story of Christmas, and a rather unique one at that, to well, basically being the cinematic equivalent of that kitschy leg lamp. They're trying their damnedest to recreate the original, with narration that sounds a lot more like Adam West than Jean Shepherd (or rather, me trying to do an Adam West impression), and Ralphie as a teenager (also, apparently, Gilda's still playing in theatres on Christmas, even though it was released in April 1946; I know releases weren't quite as simultaneous as we'd like, but would it still be in theaters around Christmastime and would people still be talking about it like it's a new film?) looking almost exactly like the 9-year-old Ralphie. I mean, sure, I've kept the same look since I was out of high school, with the most substantive change being an added goose feather in my cap and a Breathe-rite strip on my septum, but still. And he's become even less sympathetic, from his snorting his love interest's hair in band practice to wracking up debt to getting in constant Doug-like fantasies that bog the movie down (plus, even Doug didn't get his imagine spots this frequently. And they were at least a bit inventive, at least to a kid.) It's like an Andy Hardy movie without the moral center of Judge Hardy.
And I think this clip should show the movie's problems pretty well:
Gags that rehash the first movie, but miss the mark in so many ways, from the narrator sounding crap to taking these gags so far they're just not funny. No joke, at first I was reminded of the classic flagpole-licking scene from the original, but once the tongue starts protruding, I'm reminded of the kid from Salo who got his tongue cut out. Also, you'd think Flick would be a bit more circumspect about putting his tongue on things that he probably couldn't pull away from after that incident.
And while they're not usually this gruesome, imagine everything that comes to mind about the original film. All the gimmicks in there, but in a shittier form. We're talking Ralphie in embarrassing costumes, we're talking Aunt Clara's amazingly embarassing costumes, we're talking the Old Man fighting the furnace, an asshole Santa, fights between the kids that get out of hand quickly, absurdly over-bundled kids, slow-motion "Oh Fudge"s, even that fucking leg lamp and the Chop Suey Palace.
So, this is a sequel to a movie made 29 years ago, and as a result, ABSOLUTELY NOBODY involved in the original is involved. The IMDb page lists Jean Shepherd as the only common cast/crew member in both films, and, of course, he died 13 years before this movie was released, so his involvement is limited to inspiration. Even though he wrote a lot of stories he cold use as further inspiration, that just settled for remaking the original. Of course, we all know why it was made: a cash grab. The original went from an underrated story of Christmas, and a rather unique one at that, to well, basically being the cinematic equivalent of that kitschy leg lamp. They're trying their damnedest to recreate the original, with narration that sounds a lot more like Adam West than Jean Shepherd (or rather, me trying to do an Adam West impression), and Ralphie as a teenager (also, apparently, Gilda's still playing in theatres on Christmas, even though it was released in April 1946; I know releases weren't quite as simultaneous as we'd like, but would it still be in theaters around Christmastime and would people still be talking about it like it's a new film?) looking almost exactly like the 9-year-old Ralphie. I mean, sure, I've kept the same look since I was out of high school, with the most substantive change being an added goose feather in my cap and a Breathe-rite strip on my septum, but still. And he's become even less sympathetic, from his snorting his love interest's hair in band practice to wracking up debt to getting in constant Doug-like fantasies that bog the movie down (plus, even Doug didn't get his imagine spots this frequently. And they were at least a bit inventive, at least to a kid.) It's like an Andy Hardy movie without the moral center of Judge Hardy.
And I think this clip should show the movie's problems pretty well:
Gags that rehash the first movie, but miss the mark in so many ways, from the narrator sounding crap to taking these gags so far they're just not funny. No joke, at first I was reminded of the classic flagpole-licking scene from the original, but once the tongue starts protruding, I'm reminded of the kid from Salo who got his tongue cut out. Also, you'd think Flick would be a bit more circumspect about putting his tongue on things that he probably couldn't pull away from after that incident.
And while they're not usually this gruesome, imagine everything that comes to mind about the original film. All the gimmicks in there, but in a shittier form. We're talking Ralphie in embarrassing costumes, we're talking Aunt Clara's amazingly embarassing costumes, we're talking the Old Man fighting the furnace, an asshole Santa, fights between the kids that get out of hand quickly, absurdly over-bundled kids, slow-motion "Oh Fudge"s, even that fucking leg lamp and the Chop Suey Palace.
Comparing the Universal Oneness of All Life to Yo Mama since 2010.
I was born with the gift of laughter and a sense the world is mad.
I was born with the gift of laughter and a sense the world is mad.