Displaying items by tag: Will Ferrell

WILL AND HARPER

US, 2024, 115 minutes, Colour.

Will Ferrell, Harper Steele, and many connections from Saturday Night Live.

Directed by Josh Greenbaum.

Since the end of World War II but, especially from the 1960s on, there have been a vast number of changes in perspective on so many issues: racial equality, colonialism, communism and capitalism, refugees, disability, poverty, sexuality…  We talk about them much more openly as years go on. We have experiences, for instance with migrants, opening up greater understanding. And the media, and social media…

Some of us, perhaps immediately disconcerted by new experiences, open our minds and hearts and experience a change. Some of us, shocked, threatened, hold fast to what has been handed on to us whether we understand it or not, refusing to let go.

These are some of the thoughts that come to mind immediately with Will and Harper. And, it is specifically the issue of gender identification, even more specifically, transitioning, the experience and the consequences.

When longtime friend for almost 30 years, writer for Saturday Night Live and movies for Will Ferrell, Andy Steele, emailed Ferrell to let him know that Andy was now a dead name and that she had transitioned to Harper Steele, Ferrell, like so many others, was surprised. And he came up with the idea, because of Harper’s previous now joy in driving across the United States, that they should travel together, an opportunity for discussion, for Ferrell to ask, for Harper to reflect, communicate what her life’s experience had been and now was to be.

And this film is an invitation for audiences to come along for the ride, for the experiences, for asking questions, hearing responses, empathising with the responses, learning and incorporating new perspectives.

Cameras were fitted to the front of the vehicle – but, they are at all times on occasions unobtrusive, the whole trip seeming realistic, as if we are there, observing, participating.

240 hours of film were taken but reduced to just under two hours, a variety of episodes, initial discussion with Harper’s two children and their views and experience, a visit to the Saturday Night Live set, a basketball game in Indiana, a bar in Oklahoma, a steak-eating competition in Texas, a hot air balloon ride in New Mexico. But, all the time, getting to know Harper Steele, hearing about her life, growing up in Iowa (and a visit to her sister there), self-doubts, settled for decades, therapy, decision, procedures, and the realisation that this trip was an opportunity for her to venture into familiar places in her new identity, apprehensive, sometimes reassured, some wonderful conversations but also the target of vitriolic trolling.

A two hour film where we get to know central characters offers a fine opportunity, sometimes a challenging opportunity, to understand someone, and to walk in their shoes…

1. The title, introducing Will Ferrell, introducing Harper Steele?
2. Audiences responding to the back story, Andrew Steele, years as a writer, Saturday Night Life, Will Ferrell’s films? Friendship with Ferrell, with the Saturday Night Life team? Andrew, marriage, children? Yet the unease, identity, gender, women’s clothes, secrecy, therapy, decision to transition, the consequences, new name, Andrew as a dead name, facing a future in his late 50s? To go out into the world with his female identity?
3. Discussions about transition in the 21^st-century, the past, precedents, more liberal interpretations, Conservative interpretations and condemnations of transition? Political responses, especially in the United States?
4. Will Ferrell, the email giving him the information, his response, the years of friendship, the proposal of the trip, talking together, his being able to ask questions, Harper able to respond, the filming, for the record, the various activities, Ferrell inviting the audience to journey with them and share the experience?
5. The importance of the initial encounter with the children and their response? The visit to Saturday Night Live at the affirmation from the friends on the set?
6. The journey, the camera, unobtrusive, audiences accepting watching the couple driving, in the car, the various activities? Harper emerging, memories of the past and being accepted, wondering about acceptance now?
7. The audience enjoying the activities, the basketball game, the racing cars, the hot air balloon, the night at the club in Oklahoma, Texas and the steak eating and the hostile crowd? And the visit to the hometown, and the discussions with Harper’s sister?
8. The range of questions that Will Ferrell asks, questions the audience would want to ask, Harper and the probing, self questioning, realisations, apprehensions, to be appreciated, self-worth, the surprising positive reactions, Indiana and the meeting of the governor and learning of his anti-legislation? At the club in Oklahoma, the positive reactions and acceptance? The trolling and the messages after the visit in Texas?
9. The realisation that an experience of a person transitioning makes a difference from theoretical analysis of the pros and cons?
10. Audiences with fixed ideas, inherited, narrow, fearful? Those who invoke moral issues?
11. The effect of this journey, getting to know Harper, audiences overcoming any initial fears, prejudices, the move to acceptance?

DESPICABLE ME 4

US, 2024, 95 minutes, Colour.

Voices of: Steve Carell, Kristin Wiig, Joey King, Will Ferrell, Sofia Vergara, Miranda Cosgrove, Pierre Coffin, Steve Coogan, Stephen Colbert.

Directed by Chris Renaud, Patrick Delage.

We might wonder how often we use the word “despicable” in real life. However, since 2010 and the first Despicable Me film, the first thing we think of when we hear the word (well, most of those who are younger) are the films and, especially, with all respect to Gru, the Minions. They appeared in Despicable Me 2 in 2013, had their very own film in 2015, reappeared in Despicable Me 3 in 2017. And, of course, these films can be regularly seen on streaming. The Minions are always with us. But, it is something of a surprise to find that it is seven years since the previous film.

It takes up where 3 left off, the Institute for villains, the escapades of some of the graduates, the agency led by Silas Ramsbottom (Steve Coogan) engaging the help of now reformed Gru (the popular Steve Carell).

This time we have a new villain, top graduate to Gru’s jealousy, a Frenchman, Maxime (voiced by Will Ferrell). He is vain, something of a peacock in clothes and strutting, has an odd criminal girlfriend who spends most of her time putting on lipstick, determined to be a worldwide criminal phenomenon.

It doesn’t quite work out that way, Ramsbottom summoning Gru into action. Since we know Gru from the past, we know that this isn’t going to be swift justice being done, a whole lot of situations going wrong, Maxime actually caught and imprisoned but, of course, escaping and continued to threaten.

We have seen it before but we are happy to see it all again! This time we see Gru’s wife and children again but there is a new bundle of joy, a baby son. He is a bundle of joy for his mother, always smiling and goo-gooing, but scowling at his father. Which means then that the baby offers an opportunity for Maxime to take him as a hostage, Gru in pursuit (even on high buildings, on an aircraft, all over the place).

And the Minions, plenty of them, their shapes, yellow colour, range of situations, sometimes awkward, often to the rescue, then mumbling and chirping, even, at one stage, their Academy, and dozens of them there on screen. And we are thinking and feeling, long live the Minions!

Lots of action, lots of colour, lots of comic situations (and the question of how long this kind of action franchise can continue), happy family reunion, and the baby now goo-gooing its daddy.

1. The popularity of the Despicable Me series, Gru and his adventures, the presence of the Minions?
2. The animation style, colour, movement, settings, real and imaginative? The characters in this style? The range of the Minions? The voice cast? The musical score?
3. The continuation from the previous film, the Institute, villains, the management, the awards? The social, Gru dramatic arrival, with the Minions, his expectations, the clash with Maxime? Maxime winning the award? His speech and attitudes? Ambitions? The picture of his girlfriend, Valentina, lips on lipstick?
4. Maxime and his career, the clash with Gru, the threats, the threats to the family, their going to the safe house, the continued threats? The visit of the old lady from the Institute?
5. Gru, his wife, support, the family, the happy scenes, the teenage daughter, the little children, the scenes with the new baby, severe with his father, smiling at his mother? His finally being abducted, Gru to the rescue, Maxime and his controlling the baby, the baby finally acting, reconciled with father, family?
6. Maxime and his actions, crimes, reputation, daredevil? Is arrest, imprisonment? His escape?
7. The buildup to the confrontation between Maxime and Gru, the action sequences, in the air, the flight, the baby, over the city, precarious situations?
8. Ramsbottom, his organisation, warning Gru, wanting his help, supervision?
9. The comedy with the Minions, the characters, behaviour, voices and sounds, action? And the variety of Minions, being called from all occupations, gathering, the Minion force?
10. An entertainment for children and adults?

STRAYS

US, 2023, 93 minutes, Colour.

Voices of: Will Ferrell, Jamie Foxx, Isla Fisher, Randall Park, Brett Gelman, Rob Riggle, Josh Gad, Sofia Vergara. With Will Forte, Denis Quaid.

Directed by Josh Greenbaum.

With a comedy like Strays, words that come to the reviewer’s mind include: raunchy, crude, crass, gross, offensive. And it can be said, they are all applicable. But, response very much depends on sensibilities, whether this kind of crude comedy appeals, on sensitivities which find the jokes and the treatment objectionable, too much. But, this is not the case for everyone, and the reviewer or also has to keep this in mind.

While often it seems very much like a cartoon in characters and situations, this is a live-action film about dogs. In fact, dog lovers, despite the jokes, might very well be intrigued by the extraordinary performances of the dogs themselves, and wonder how much is the training of actual dogs and how much is the use of animatronics, especially with the dogs and their moving mouths for the dialogue. Yes, the dogs really come alive, and are very convincing characters.

And a review had better note that the humour, pervasive, relies on constant (incessant) four (and beyond)-letter words and exclamations, probably tiresome even for tolerant viewers, magic mushroom hallucinations, a lot of sex jokes, explicit and innuendo, and bodily parts and bodily functions. Definitely crude, often crass.

But, strangely enough, the story is actually full of sentiment, even sentimental at times, and moving towards a very nice ending, domestic bliss. In a way, the audience can’t help liking the dogs. And, who are they? First of all, there is Reggie (voiced by Will Ferrell), who was at the beck and call of Doug (Will Forte creating a character who is an extreme slob), who resents Reggie because he was the pet of a girlfriend who walks out on him. He persecutes Reggie, verbally abuses him, tosses the ball as far away as possible – but the good-natured Reggie thinks this is all a game and thinks Doug is a wonderful owner. When Doug takes Reggie on a three hour drive and strands him, he is befriended by a smart-talking Bug (voiced by Jamie Foxx). Gradually, with the help of Bug’s other friends, Maggie (Isla Fisher as an Australian collie) and Randall Park as a former police dog trainee, now with a cone and working at an old folks home, Hunter, Reggie learns the truth. And the film becomes a quest, a revenge film, Reggie wreaking havoc on Doug (and we know where).

There are lots of adventures along the way, meeting police dogs looking for a young girl, the real Dennis Quaid with binoculars seeing a giant eagle swoop on Bug, getting lost, finding landmarks, and an eventual confrontation between Reggie and Doug (and what we might have imagined does happen).

Lots of jokes, many crass, others very funny, and, as has been said, quite a deal of sentiment, the talent of the voice cast blending with the expert photography and training of the dogs, their looking to camera, the tilt of their heads, the cheeky looks, which means that the dogs really become credible characters! But, as the government classification advice says: MA: Strong crude humour, sex, coarse language and drug use.