Mysterio cracks his fishbowl while watching THE KLUMPS
That pile of nerves and eyes and brains in the see through veggiematic... MYSTERIO, managed to check out THE KLUMPS early on... And now he's here to give us the inside skinny about the flick... Read on...
Hey, ho Harry. Mysterio chiming in here again. But pssst! I’m not supposed to say anything about this according to the little slip of paper I signed with a big, fat “M”. But as big as Sherman Klump’s gut is, I’m about to bust out! Ya see I just saw the Nutty Professor. Now not just “the” Nutty Professor, but the whole damn Klump family too!
What I indeed did slip into unnoticed by most (as usual) was…
“THE NUTTY PROFESSOR 2: The Klumps”.
The title says it all, well for the part, most of it.
Now before I get into this review, let me state for record my dislike for the last flick. Didn’t like it, didn’t care for, just didn’t work for me. Way to damn many predictable, tiresome, fat jokes for my flava. I know Moriarty and I are of different opinion on that film from recent talks, but hey, he’s got his valid points for liking it and that’s just fine. There’s just not enough validly for my palate to like it on whole.
But I did enjoy Murphy’s performance in last year’s overlooked, “BOWFINGER”, in which again, he played duel roles. But they were so different and never seemed to cross into the other, that in my opinion, was a terrific performance throughout (not to mention Terrance Stamp’s cameo in it as well).
So, based on my past disliking for Murphy’s “The NUTTY PROFESSOR”, imagine my reluctant disdain in even considering making the effort to take a sneak peek at the sequel. But hey, it’s supposed to be one of this summer’s biggest blockbusters, but will it be? Let’s see…
Well Eddie’s back. And he’s bringing the whole damn Klump family back along with him! And boy, like the title says, there are a lot of Klumps in this comedic “klump” of non-stop hilarity. Oh yeah, and what would a “Nutty Professor” movie be without Sherman Klump’s mischievous and sexist alter ego Buddy Love? He’s back as well.
Man, aside from Janet Jackson playing Sherman Klump’s love interest, this film’s all Eddie. All Eddie, all over the place. No scene is without him. His playing of multi-characters throughout the entire film is something to give props to. What must’ve have been extremely difficult to choreograph, not to mention the excruciating make-up sessions (done wonderfully once again by the talented Rick Baker), is made seemless and impressive to watch throughout. So congrats to Eddie, the make-up and special effects team for pulling it off.
This film overall seems stronger on a whole when compared to the previous. Sherman seems to have more inner depth in this one in his relationship to Denise (Jackson). You see here, Sherman longs for that someone who will love him for what he is on the inside, and look beyond his large physique. Denise sees past that and finds the light in Sherman that sparks his heart. But Sherman is afraid to take it further with Denise, fearing that his alter ego, Buddy Love, will take hold of him, causing any chance of happiness with her to fail because of Buddy’s antics.
There are some really nice moments that show Sherman’s sensitive, shyness, and the conflict that battles inside him with trying to contain Buddy Love. It’s a feeling like that of Bruce Banner trying to hide and control the rage that is The Hulk, inside him. Sherman is a man who longs for normalcy, but who also cannot live apart from his other half, and therefore must strive to find a way to live complacent with Buddy.
(MINOR PLOT SETUP SPOILERS)
Buddy on the other hand is that mischievous devil which rests on his shoulder, that through what seems like a successful gene extraction procedure that Sherman performs on himself, later causes Buddy’s isolated DNA to be accidentally recombined with that of the lab’s dog plays havoc with Buddy’s his psychosis. This “recombining” allows Buddy to become a physical entity which allows him to act independently from Sherman.
And act he does. Buddy learns fast of a “youth serum” that Sherman has nearly perfected that has an offer from a huge pharmaceutical company that, based on it’s demonstrated results, will net him and the college $150,000,000. Of course he plans to steal it and sell it for himself, all the while sabotaging Sherman’s chances of sealing the deal. It’s not long though before the serum ultimately finds itself in the incompetent hands of the Klumps.
The Klump family is back on hand to provide the comical banter that, if you liked the dinner table sequence from the previous flick, you’ll love the Klumps much broadened part in this sequel. Their interaction and squabbling amongst each other is downright hilarious, including one scene that has Grandma Klump trying to get Buddy Love in many uncompromising situations. Mrs. Robinson she ain’t. But she’s the best of the bunch. There’s one hilarious dream gag involving her running towards Buddy in an open field, which offers a great sight gag.
(END OF MINOR PLOT SETUP SPOILERS, you may now proceed reading safely below)
And there are sight gags aplenty to accompany the many crude jokes, which I assume the raunchier ones came from Chris & Paul Weitz, the brothers of “American Pie” fame who co-scripted the screenplay along with Barry Blaustein & David Sheffield.
The weakest link in the film has to be the romance. There’s really not much backstory setup explaining how they met or what discovery causes Denise to feel for Sherman the way she does. It would’ve been nicer to see that romance build rather than just come into it as “she loves him because he’s kind, sweet, yada-yada.” We know that, but what was it about him that made her see that? The romance feels a bit forced and thrown in there, but does offers some nice tender moments shared between the two.
But strangely enough, walking into this, I had reservations as to what I’d expect to see. But I really didn’t expect to laugh as much as I did, since I really don’t remember laughing from the previous one.
The pacing was lean at approximently 105 minutes, and the print seemed about 90% locked sans credits.
The outlook looks good for Murphy and company on this being a successful follow up, and amidst what looks to be a dreadful summer, should fair well at the box-office. It’s only problem though, “ME, MYSELF & IRENE” which could hold strong through the summer.
Till next time out…
Readers Talkbackcomments powered by Disqus
+ Expand All
June 14, 2000, 1:34 a.m. CST
by GEEKBASHER 3.0
June 14, 2000, 1:36 a.m. CST
by GEEKBASHER 3.0
I have snuck out to hide in the lobby from this overplayed trailer, never the less I am very anxious to laugh my ass off in this summer fluff of a comedy! What other trailers do you all think are OVER-PLAYED and GOD NOT THIS ONE AGAIN? Second runner up so far has to be CHICKEN RUN, and third would have to be...Gone in 60 Seconds! Actually that was the most overplayed and most MISLEADING!
June 14, 2000, 1:53 a.m. CST
this'll be good just as well as "me myself & irene", i'm looking forward to both of them!
June 14, 2000, 2:04 a.m. CST
Seriously. At least this trailer is funny to watch. I went to the movies this weekend and I saw the What Lies Beneath teaser like 4 times! That teaser sucks!
June 14, 2000, 4:25 a.m. CST
The first one was terrible and this one doesn't look to promising either. It's going to be most definitely more raunchier than the first. Thanks to There's Something About Mary and American Pie. All in all, it's gonna suck.
June 14, 2000, 7:32 a.m. CST
I think VEERS is the greatest.
June 14, 2000, 8:59 a.m. CST
I hate how Hollywood crack-ho's and film critics pick apart the plot of a movie that's not intended to make you think a whole lot like this one. Love story? Who gives a flying frick? I watch this movie with a beer to laugh, not discover the mystery of the universe! Geez Louise, girls, let's take this into context. It's a hilarious movie and a fun romp through the family of a black middle-class Americans. What's funny is that there are actually families like this out there. BUT you guys want a realistic love story. Go watch Pretty Woman with your box of Kleenix then.
June 14, 2000, 10:02 a.m. CST
Seriously, though... thanks for your comments, Jimmer. I think a lot of the problem is the way that the mainstream media sets unnatural standards for beauty. Case in point - Kate Moss, Calista Flockhart and Angelina Jolie. I'm no "spinner" but I like the way I look. Curvaceous women of the world unite!
June 14, 2000, 10:09 a.m. CST
Can the trailer for What Lies Beneath even be called a "teaser," really? I mean, they give practically every twist in the plot away, which sucks because it looks like it might have been a decent flicky-poo otherwise.
June 14, 2000, 1:35 p.m. CST
by Mills Somerset
Major props to the guys'n gals on here who've dubbed it "most overplayed trailer" (y'all must be goin' to the same shows as me). Seriously, I find myself closing my eyes, now, during the trailer, and blocking my ears and humming, like i'm an inane 8 year old child, but this trailer just makes me think of the minute and ten seconds or whatever I lose of my life every time it shows -- and i must have seen it without exaggeration about 40 times since january/february. EVERY DAMN TIME I'VE SEEN A MOVIE, no matter what the movie...even Virgin Suicides... My question is: why the fruck can I not see trailers I actually like (Oh, like, say, XMEN?) this many times. Most people's answer would be, "well, then THOSE trailers would be the most overplayed and you'd hate THEM." Unh-unh. Untrue. I saw the MI2 trailer about 20 times, never got sick of it. The first GLADIATOR trailer? About 10 times at least, couldn't get enuff. But somehow, the KLUMPS trailer is this season's GUNSHY (trust me, anyone who's seen the GUNSHY movie will not soon forget having to see the GUNSHY trailer 1,000 times and thinking, "Well what do you know, the movie's ten times worse than the trailer"). And the poster above who named GONE IN SIXTY SECONDS and CHICKEN RUN as most overplayed -- you, sir, are a sharp-eyed movie-watcher (or justa person with way too much time on their hands/too big a love of films, like me). At least the CR-1 spoof of MI2 is kinda cool, otherwise it would make viewing that trailer pretty difficult (side note: so much talk re: CHICKEN RUN, why would nobody want to see it, etc. - hey, i'm not pysched for it, but I am interested in seeing it...that trailer simply IS NOT FUNNY, though, at all, if u strip away the "Spybreak" music and MI2 gimmickery). Criminy........where was I? Oh, yeah, THE KLUMPS. Here's what gets me the most. Now, I realize I, like many of my fellow sisters and brothers here, am pretty much a geek de cinema, but, really. I mean, my MOTHER goes to the movies like 3, 4 times a year, and I KNOW she's seen the KLUMPS trailer. But when I went to see GONE IN SHITTY SECONDS the other night, the ENTIRE DAMN AUDIENCE laughed at the KLUMPS trailer, A.) like it was the funniest damn thing they'd ever seen, and B.) like they'd never seen it. What gives? Am I missing something? Is a fat kid, when music cuts out, eating from an automatic ice-cream dispenser and going "what?" with his mouth full really that goddamned funny? And am I the only one who finds it disturbing that Buddy Love is essentially the ego part of Sherman, and hence is in essence still him, and he's getting an underwater hot-tub hummer from Gramma Klump...meanhing they're related, kinda/sorta? Freaky. ......To end, I will say I enjoyed NUTTY part one immensely: precicely because the Klumps were funny for being a small part, not center stage. I fear what this movie is going to unleash by bringing them to the forefront and forgoing stuff like, oh I dunno, a plot? Buddy Love has like 2 seconds in the trailer and from this review, about five minutes in the movie. I like the first one, despite seemingly negative resistence from some people on here, because at its core it was amazingly sweet and fun, rather than raunchy/nasty...sorry, I do believe both can exist in the same film, but with the Weitz brothers overseeing things, it ain't gonna happen. Sherman's fumbly, "oh, well, gosh, well, you see" stuff with Jada Pinkett (Smith) in Part One was the kind of sweetness lost in most films of this ilk and managed to straddle the line between embarassing "family comedy" sacchrine-ness and genuine sentiment. I only hope the makers of this film don't develop AUSTIN POWERS 2 disease and just bastardize the whole deal in the name of the almighty dollar (bastardization....? in Hollywood? mwa-ha-ha-ha...how dare I suggest such a thing). ANYhow....i got on this b/c of the trailer, which I found dumb and limp and provoked no reaction from me the first time I saw it....and most likely shall not when I see it again during SHAFT, TITAN AE, FANTASIA, and BOYS AND GIRLS this weekend......oh but what if I went to see HAMLET or SUNSHINE....oh, wait, it'd be playing then, too. Peace out.
June 14, 2000, 2:01 p.m. CST
by EL Duderino
Reaction towards the trailer hasn't been too great. Most people I talk to say the movie looks stupid. Of course, this is just a handful of people in the DFW metroplex so I could be wrong, but I don't predict staggering success. Maybe greater than Road Trip's earnings, but thats it...
June 14, 2000, 3:01 p.m. CST
Face it, whether it sucks or not, it'll easily break $100 million. Even Big Momma's house is raking it in right now. The trailer is crap - but everytime I see it the whole audience erupts with laughter. I'll probably watch it stoned and giggle uncontrollably.
June 14, 2000, 3:36 p.m. CST
Big Momma's house may have taken some BO (i mean boxoffice!) from Klumps. Really how funny can the fat jokes be the second time around?
June 14, 2000, 4:14 p.m. CST
..... I can say, without hesitation, that you have not seen the funniest moments in either of these movies. Not even close. Both movies should be huge, and well-received by both critics and audiences.
June 14, 2000, 11:48 p.m. CST
Watching Big Momma's House while stoned??! Ha! The utter idiocy involved in this form of entertainment makes me want to convulse with unbridled ridiculing laughter!! Haha!!Thanks, man, for showing me how much more pathetic other people's lives are than mine! Hehe, woo-hoo, whew...man I gotta use the can...
June 15, 2000, 1:42 p.m. CST
i don't understand it...the first one was awful, aside from a few admittedly funny (though brief) moments. the trailer for this one looks awful. and eddie murphy lost his edge about ten years ago. (not to say anything bad about eddie, he used to be amazing...but everyone loses their comedic edge as they get older...just look at chevy chase) but i expect this movie to be a hit as the flocks of mindless sheep will unexplainedly be attracted to it.
- 3rd PICKS & PEEKS of Sept 2014: Crichton Blus, THE PARTY, Bloody Entertainment, GODZILLA 3D & More!!! -- 486 total posts 72 posts
- Loki vs. King Kong in SKULL ISLAND! -- 311 total posts 35 posts
- Behold The Cool(ish) IMAX Poster For DRACULA UNTOLD!! -- 177 total posts 13 posts
- A New Poster For Christopher Nolan’s INTERSTELLAR!! -- 213 total posts 11 posts
- 12 TIFF reviews from 'garbageman33' covers everything from Gyllenhaal in NIGHTCRAWLER to Baumbach's WHILE WE'RE YOUNG! -- 12 total posts 10 posts
- Meryl Streep Bewitches the First INTO THE WOODS Poster! -- 61 total posts 10 posts
- Here’s A 4+ Minute Clip From THE EQUALIZER!! -- 61 total posts 7 posts
- Promo Images From DOCTOR WHO S08E05 - ‘Time Heist’!! -- 109 total posts 7 posts
- Copernicus is really pissed about the Stephen Hawking biopic THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING that he saw at TIFF -- 146 total posts 6 posts
- Fox, Home Of GOTHAM, Makes Pilot Commitment To Project Based On DC Comics’ LUCIFER!! -- 27 total posts 5 posts