‘South Park”s
big-screen debut
surprisingly good
By Samuel McKewon
Editor
Through no design of its own, “South Park: Bigger, Longer
and Uncut” possesses a perfect sense of timing in lampooning
censorship specifically the nation’s overreaction to movies and
the lack of personal responsibility in America.
That creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone deliver such a
scathing, hilarious satirical message with 80 minutes of the
most daring and shocking raunch ever put onscreen makes
“South Park” the best surprise of the summer. Its humor works
masterfully on two levels: one, it’s just plain out funny, with
Cartman, Kyle, Stan and Kenny in their best form; the second
level deals with wondering just how Parker and Stone got away
with doing this and not getting an NC-17 rating.
Make no mistake, “South Park” is chock fiill of language
like you’ve never seen, delivered in ways previously unheard.
And language is the beginning, not the end, of the numerous
violations.
What makes it all the better is the main target of the movie:
the Motion Picture Association of America ratings board - the
same board that forced Parker and Stone to make numerous
cuts, but somehow allowed a 20-foot talking clitoris to stay in.
Not to mention man having sex with a horse, too.
The Facts
Title: "South Park: 4
Bigger, Longer and Uncut"
Stars: Cartman, Kyle, Kenny, Stan
Director: Trey parker
Rating: R (excessive adult language,
stong sexual content)
Running Time: 120 (80 minutes)
Grade: A
Five Words: Surprise! “South Park"
is fantastic.
Oh, but what fun
this movie has with
(those images. The plot
even has a point, start
ing with the new film
from a Canadian duo
who have mastered the
art of fart and another f
word. The boys see the
film, take the words
back to the classroom in
South Park and shock
the world
It’s Kyle’s mom who
is angered most by her
sun s uewiuuiiu linguis
tics, and starts Mother Against Canada, a group which eventu
ally convinces America to wage war against our neighbors to
the North. From there, “South Park” becomes an allegory that
stands up for the First Amendment and laughs at the double
standard of conservatives.
In between, the movie produces a good number of inside
jokes about current and past movies, mixing in social com
mentary. One thing I loved about “South Park” is its high sense
of culture. The musical scenes is a direct lampoon of movies in
the 1940s and 1950s, replaced with raunchy words, along with
making a point: did we ever really care what they were saying
in “Oklahoma!”? “South Park” says no, and I agree.
“A Clockwork Orange” is spoofed here. So is “Les
Miserables.” Throw in “Star Wars,” every spy movie ever
made, French films, English films, “Apocalypse Now” and
anything with Winona Ryder, the Baldwin brothers or Barbara
Streisand.
Bu the movie always comes back to its basic, toilet humor
with a heaping side of wit thrown in. “South Park” makes its
point by laughing at adults who embrace conformity. By its
end, it’s made a good point about finding scapegoats (as the
movie asserts, it’s not one or two people, but rather a nation of
folks, most of which have nothing to do with it) and accepting
that sex scares us and so does vulgarity. But violence? Hardly.
There’s very little in “South Park: Bigger, Longer and
Uncut” to complain about, if you can stomach the language. If
you don’t think you can, know this: it has a point, unlike most
movies. Like the violence in “Saving Private Ryan,” the lan
guage exists to foster reaction from those in the movie, a reac
tion which I suspect will mirror some older people in the the
ater.
But let the language pass. “South Park” is short, funny,
unpredictable and smart, something other gross-out comedies
currently out, “Big Daddy” and Austin Powers: The Spy Who
Shagged Me,” can’t really claim. Both those movies aren’t bad,
but the boys in South Park whip them both.
‘Wild Wild West’ is a
lightweight success
By Mark Baldridge
Film Critic
Will Smith is back as a man in black,
this time sporting six-guns and a cowboy
hat, bouncin’ through the “Wild Wild
West” as James T. West, America’s first
super secret agent.
Those who remember the 1960s tele
vision show with Robert Conrad will
remember West’s sidekick Artemus
Gordon, master of disguise, here played
with aplomb by Kevin Kline, (who
appears also as President U.S. Grant and
as Gordon’s inept impersonation of Grant
in a dizzying double, double role.)
The two agents are charged with a
mission to stop the threat to national
security posed by a partly mechanized
madman living in the desert
surrounded by
beautiful hench
women and kid-;
napped scientists.
Kenneth
Branagh, as the
indefatigably
cheery and totally .
insane Dr. Arliss
Loveless, sounds
like a younger Steve
Martin and looks
like a poster boy for
obsessive/compul
sive disorder with
his intricately shaved, jet black v \
beard. • \\
Loveless, bitter over his losses in \
the Civil War, intends to divide the US
among the nation’s enemies, leaving a
little retirement spot for himself that
would include most of the Pacific
seaboard. —
To accomplish his diaboli
cal goals he has the cutting edge secret
weapons of the steam age, a giant
mechanical spider and a plan to kidnap
the President.
The Victorian era techno aesthetic of
the film is a thrilling and surprisingly
effective addition to its Western setting
and action/ad venture pacing.
The cost of suspended disbelief is
metered out in small increments, each
new whizbang gadget, imagined clearly
enough, sets the audience up for the next
until, by easy steps, we move from the
merely improbable to the utterly fantastic
without so much as feeling the Gs.
The film is slick enough with its
beautiful costumes, its hit soundtrack and
beautiful ladies. For sheer acting power it
finishes well above standard for this kind
of film. If the predictable script leaves
anything to be desired, the special f/x
make up for a little bit of that - though
Hollywood will have to learn, one day,
that a great cast and eye popping illusions
need a compelling story and solid dia
logue as a counter-balance to all that
flash.
It also might have been nice to see
Conrad in a cameo (Ross Martin, who
played Gordon in the series is no longer
living) but knowing what a hard-head he
is, it’s possible he simply wouldn’t have
done it. He always did have a chip on his
shoulder (or was that a battery?) All atti
tude.
What’s really missing from the film is
continuity. Editing problems make some
of the fight scenes seem pretty confusing
and in one case totally mysterious (what
did that metalhead die of, overheating?)
But what the film does best it does
from the beginning - morphing the
Western genre into seamless science fic
tion without sacrificing too much in
terms of credibility.
For that alone “Wild Wild West” is a
remarkable film and well worth seeing on
its own terms.
The Facts ^
THIs: "Wild Wild West"
Stars: Wilt Smith, Kevin Kline,
Kenneth Branagh
Director: Barry Sonnenfield
Rating: PG-13 (language)
thinning Time: 1:47(107 minutes)
Grade: B
Five Words: West wasn't won this
way
