advertisement advertisement

"Ladykillers" an inspid remake

By Sam Weisberg
RAW STORY STAFF WRITER

"The Ladykillers" has two main selling points: it's Tom Hanks triumphant return to comedy after almost 15 years-if you don't count those tepid romantic comedies-and it's also the first time he's worked with legendary filmmakers Joel and Ethan Coen.

advertisement


Here's the first problem, though: Hanks is not funny. Man, does he give this role his all, though. Sporting a ridiculous goatee, twitching, stuttering, and speaking in an accent that can't decide if it's Henry Higgins or Foghorn Leghorn, Hanks portrays Professor G.H. Dorr (is he really a professor or just an educated con artist? Who knows?), a monstrously self-satisfied, garrulous individual who hires a diverse and motley crew of outcasts to help him rob a casino.

He rents a basement room in the house of Marva Munson (Irma P. Hall), an elderly, hefty, good-hearted black churchgoer, and disguises himself and his pack as gospel musicians. Then, while they are supposedly practicing, they burrow through her wall, which connects with the casino's money vault. When she catches on, they plan to kill her.

Sounds like a deliciously macabre, Coens-style comedy in the making, doesn't it? Well, here's Problem #2: the Coens aren't that funny this time, either. This is their third major disappointment-it's still impossible to use a harsh word like "strike" when referring to artists this gifted-after the dull "Man Who Wasn't There" and the flimsy "Intolerable Cruelty."

When the Coens aren't devoting far, far too much screen-time to Hanks' tiresome professor, they're ripping themselves off: there are jokes involving severed limbs and gun mishaps, which they've dealt with better before. The severed toe in "Big Lebowski" provoked one of the funniest arguments ever recorded on-screen. Why'd they have to attempt it again?

And perhaps the Coens should stop remaking, or paying homage to, older films. The lack of originality always shows, and this one is basically a more foul-mouthed version of William Rose's 1955 film of the same name.

Still, a Coens' film is never fully deprived of "little gems," stand-out moments that indicate there could have been a classic movie. In this case, most of these moments involve the vicious rivalry between the two most heavily clashing criminals: Gawain MacSam (Marlon Wayans), a constantly swearing man-child who works as a janitor at the casino, and Garth Pancake (T.K. Simmons), a mustachioed Donald Sutherland look-alike with a nasty bowel condition. Watching these two go at it reveals that nastier, darker Coens edge, and their banter gets funnier as the film progresses.

Also hilarious is Tzi Ma as a crazed, violent storekeeper referred to as The General. Yes, he's a total Asian stereotype, impetuously choking others and speaking only in two-word sentences-I believe "Kill lady" is his only line for the last half of the film-but he adds some much-needed broad humor, like repeatedly swallowing his cigarettes, to balance out that windbag professor's lengthy speeches.

And Hall, as the immense keeper of the house, is astonishingly natural throughout, from her opening rant lamenting the bigotry of hip-hop to her last cheerful stride. Forget about the low moments when the script calls on her to slap Wayans around — how much longer will the cliché of old black women slapping potty-mouthed black men around be relied on by Hollywood? Or snore like a bloated hippo. Her wit and grace fit right into the Coens' agenda, and they should definitely hire her again.

Hanks was funny once, a gifted, raucous, highly physical performer who lent a certain dignity to trash like "Bachelor Party." So why did the Coens' cast him as this insufferable bore? To show off their vocabulary? Furthermore, why don't the volatile Wayans, the belligerent Ma and the just-plain-stupid fifth member, high-school athlete Lump Hudson (Ryan Hurst), ever lash out at the interminably condescending Hanks? In a better film, the Coens would not have let Hanks' underlings respect him so dutifully; they would have enabled potentially hilarious conflicts to break forth.


advertisement
advertisement
Copyright © 2004 by Nexus Media. All rights reserved. | Site map | Privacy policy