| Title: | Movie Reviews and Discussion |
| Notice: | Please do DIR/TITLE before starting a new topic on a movie! |
| Moderator: | VAXCPU::michaud o.dec.com::tamara::eppes |
| Created: | Thu Jan 28 1993 |
| Last Modified: | Thu Jun 05 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 1249 |
| Total number of notes: | 16012 |
I didn't see any likely looking notes on this, having searched
under the actual title and under "A Fish Called Wanda II"
Fierce Creatures is a throwback. It is not a sequel to "A Fish
Called Wanda" in the sense that characters from the first story
appear in a second story. It has the same actors, playing somewhat
similar characters, with something of the same dynamic as the
first movie. Fierce Creatures is tied to A Fish Called Wanda in
much the same way the Marx Brothers movies are tied together, or
the Hope and Crosby Road pictures, or (yikes) the Bowery Boys.
If you thought the first one was a waste of time, you'll doubtless
think the same of this. I thought the first one was quirky and
funny. This one is a little more quirky and a little less funny,
although there are some sequences that are hilarious in an almost
Marx Brothers way. The closet sequence, in particular, is almost
worth the price of admission.
John Cleese's and Jaime Lee Curtis's characters are most like
their counterparts in A Fish Called Wanda. Kevin Kline's
characters were a little less over the top, possibly because he
had to play two roles, but the sum of the two didn't add up to the
madcap Otto. In A Fish Called Wanda Michael Palin couldn't get a
sentence out. In Fierce Creatures he can't stop talking.
I'm pretty sure most of the supporting cast from A Fish Called
Wanda is in here, though I confess I'm not up enough of the names
to be certain. They have more of a role in the comedy this time
rather than simply being foils for John Cleese, and I think that
works just fine. There are two inside jokes. One will strike
people who are familiar with Curtis's career, the other is for
people who saw the first movie. They're subtle and don't stop the
flow of the story.
It's a cute little movie. A lot of the innuendo might go over the
heads of innocents. I wouldn't mind if these people got together
and kicked out one of these little oddballs every two or three
years for a long time to come.
DFW
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1208.1 | WHAT IS IT ABOUT? | PCBUOA::CHENARD | Mon Jan 27 1997 10:22 | 7 | |
I loved A Fish Called Wanda so of course I want to see this
one.
Anyone have a synopsis of the story? Haven't heard much about
it except it takes place in a zoo - I think.
Mo
| |||||
| 1208.2 | definitely the next flick we'll see | MPGS::WOOLNER | Your dinner is in the supermarket | Tue Jan 28 1997 10:09 | 6 |
Haven't seen it either, but I think the premise is that a Big Bad
Company buys the zoo--Cleese is a middle manager of this company--
and decides the zoo should only have fierce animals in it. Head of the
company (and his son) are Kline's two roles.
Leslie
| |||||
| 1208.3 | poor effort, cheapened all involved I felt (cashing in).... | APLVEW::DEBRIAE | searching for the language that is _also_ yours | Tue Jan 28 1997 14:00 | 18 |
I went to the theatre to see a movie I saw in a listing. It turned out
it wasn't playing but FC was playing at the same time.
I liked "Wanda," it was a charming little low-key film which had it's
moments. I particularly enjoyed the bits comparing Americans to Brits
and several other classic Cleese-wit moments.
FC had none of the charm, none of the wit, and none of the understated
humour that "Wanda" had. This was one lame film - through and through.
Not much thought at all went into it. A poor performance from all
involved I thought, even Kline who had the more 'difficult' role.
This film has nothing in common with "Wanda" and probably was made in
a quarter the time and effort of "Wanda."
I wouldn't even recommend it as a rental, any made-for-TV movie on that
night would beat it. Anything on PBS definitely will...
| |||||
| 1208.4 | Review from Boxoffice Online | ORION::chayna.zko.dec.com::tamara::eppes | Nina Eppes | Tue Jan 28 1997 16:55 | 48 |
[Got this off of Boxoffice Online (http://www.boxoff.com). - NE]
[Review]
Boxoffice Movie Review Search
FIERCE CREATURES
***
Starring John Cleese, Jamie Lee Curtis, Kevin Kline and Michael
Palin. Directed by Robert Young and Fred Schepisi. Written by John
Cleese and Iain Johnstone. Produced by Michael Shamberg and John
Cleese. A Universal release. Comedy. Rated PG-13 for sexual innuendo
and language. Running time 93 min.
Funny. Not quite as perfectly formed funny as the starring cast's
previous collaboration, "A Fish Called Wanda," but nevertheless
"Fierce Creatures" is laugh, giggle and chuckle provoking. The film
contains all that should be hoped for in a farce: men in
compromising positions with their pants down around their ankles;
good-looking, smart women; and enough pointed satire about issues
that matter to give true bite to the jokes.
The struggles of a little zoo to stay true to its animals in the
face of a powerbroker takeover works as an apt example of corporate
downsizing and its ugly consequences. The stars all fit naturally
into their roles, especially Kevin Kline doing double duty as a
vulgar Australian tycoon and his inane but equally greedy son. John
Cleese, as a rigid chap who is essentially a good egg, and Michael
Palin, as a verbally dexterous know-it-all, do variations on the
types that made them famous; Jamie Lee Curtis, as a glamorous
executive whose ambitions wilt amid the mammals, manages to be foil,
decoration, catalyst and emotional core with consummate ease.
The real animals, particularly a lemur (played by four of the
charming creatures), are totally appealing and could probably have
merited more screen time, though it is a shame that animatronics
were needed here and there. A crucial, emotion-altering instance
with Curtis and a gorilla is undercut by this technology, despite
the best efforts of both the actress and the artificial animal. This
use of special effects in making the movie, though probably
unavoidable, also undercuts a good joke in the script about their
use in the restructuring of the zoo into a theme park.
The script is more a collection of slaphappy scenes than a
seamless whole, and the work of two directors probably didn't help
in this area. (Fred Schepisi came in after some negative preview
testing to reshoot sequences for which Robert Young wasn't
available.) But, despite the various bumps, jerks and missteps in
the whole, the point really is that Cleese in bed with one unusual
animal is always worth a laugh, and this time he's on the wrong side
of the blanket with five. -Bridget Byrne
--------------------------------------------------------------------
| |||||