Change Your Image
Moviescribe
Reviews
Cocaine Bear (2023)
Great Premise Undermined By Under-Developed Characters and Too Few Comedic Setups and Pay-Offs
(Warning: spoilers, but not much more than can't be easily gleaned from the title, poster and trailers.)
This movie appears to have a "can't miss" premise, and while some scenes deliver the horrifyingly funny goods, overall the movie would've benefitted from sharper character design and stronger character and story arcs. Though the actors do their best to energize the proceedings, the film's ensemble of "wacky" backwoods characters not only falls short, but also doesn't intersect with the bear aspect of the story as well as it probably could have.
Each character needed a more distinct motivation that would not only put them in sharper conflict with other characters, but would also provide more emotional depth and intensity to conflict with the bear. (Mere survival isn't enough, especially not in a comedy.) We know the bear is coming, but don't feel a sense of anticipation as to how the characters and their motivations, flaws and conflicts will come into play when confronted by the bear.
For instance, what if a character had an intense bear phobia, perhaps instilled during an intense, but ridiculous childhood memory (shown in flashback)? Though it's a Hollywood cliche to force a character to face and overcome a childhood fear, it's that kind of character arc that creates anticipation and, therefore, tension and engagement. It also makes for a more satisfying resolution.
The story lacks a ticking clock; the anticipation of a larger (third act) event in which the arrival of the rampaging bear would foreshadow danger and mayhem on a larger (movie-sized) scale. For instance, adding the impending arrival of a Boy Scout jamboree or a Forest Ranger convention would create a locus to connect all of the characters to the coming danger of the drug-addled bear.
Such an event would both motivate and connect Ranger Liz, Bob the cop, the drug dealers (who don't want other people finding the cocaine), the thieves (who might "work" the event), and also perhaps Dee Dee, who could plan to attend the event, despite her mother forbidding it. Such an event could help the ensemble to "gel," uniting them on an inevitable collision course with the bear.
All of the characters needed to be bigger and more theatrical (so as to be on par with the larger-than-life aspect of the bear), with larger, more ridiculous motivations and conflicts. For instance, Jesse Tyler Ferguson's character, Peter, could've been a pompously arrogant (self-published) nature author with a book signing at the ranger station. A public signing event would be a bigger deal for Ranger Liz, who could be starstruck by the author's "celebrity."
It becomes obvious, however, that Peter has never even been in a forest before and, worse, is terrified of it. His knowledge of nature, gleaned from Wikipedia, proves to be of little use when asked for his advice about how to handle the bear. He gives the worst possible advice, which eventually leads to his own humiliating demise. (Even Ranger Liz might admit that his actions are incredibly stupid.)
If the audience knows that Peter's a fraud before the other characters do, it creates audience anticipation as to how and when his incompetence will be revealed, and how it will be detrimental to his survival when confronted by the bear.
Every primary character needed a similar weakness (or strength) to be exploited by the arrival of the bear; creating set ups for later (comedic) pay-offs. Those pay-offs could relate to conflict with the bear or with other characters.
For instance, there could be a rival drug kingpin who's fought a turf war with Syd for decades, who learns about the dumped cocaine and is determined to find it before Syd does. Resolution of that rivalry could be settled by the bear, either the two of them deciding to join forces to survive, or the "victor" being determined by the bear. (One kingpin could perhaps throw the other to the bear, only to have his "victory" cut short when the bear kills him as well.)
To be clear, I'm not saying that my examples are the best solutions. I only offer them to illustrate ways in which the human stories could not only better connect characters to one another, but also intersect better with the bear story. As-is, the human stories and the bear story operate on mostly separate tracks, with too little new or surprising occurring when the story tracks intersect. Thus, because the setups are lacking, the pay-offs are either nonexistent or not as satisfying (or funny) as they could be.
Pacing is also an issue, particularly during the first act. The scenes establishing the characters needed to move much more quickly and needed to better connect to one another. (The audience should be thinking, "Oh, boy... I can't wait to see these two characters come into conflict. That's gonna be awesome!")
Those early scenes needed to do double duty, both establishing the characters and their relationships, PLUS creating anticipation of what may happen when those characters come into conflict with one another AND the bear.
Speaking of character development, I think the bear itself also needed more personality. You might say, "But it's just a big, dumb animal." True, but this is a comedy. So, we still need comedic setups and pay-offs that spring from the bear's personality and choices as well. What typical bear behaviors could be established, then exploited for comedic effect after the bear ingests the cocaine -- and how might those behaviors help or hinder the human characters?
Lastly, the movie has an uneven tone. While some scenes are nearly cartoonish, others are played more straightforward. Both Margo Martindale, Isiah Whitlock, Jr., J. B. Moore and Scott Seiss hit the right comedic tone. Though believable, they're just "theatrical" enough to give their scenes the proper comedic tone and energy.
Martindale's Ranger Liz is impatiently cynical about others, but blindly vain and self-indulgent when it comes to herself. Whitlock's Bob is a hard-as-nails cop, yet has a soft spot for the effete Rosette. Seiss' character tries to be the brave, heroic EMT, but is, in fact, a self-serving coward.
All of the characters needed that kind of inherent contradiction and/or flaw, played with just a dash of larger-than-life theatricality. It would be even better if those flaws put them in heightened conflict, not only with each other, but also at a disadvantage (or advantage) when in conflict with the bear.
With stories like this, I think it's best to flesh out the human characters and their story first. Then add the wild card, in this case the cocaine-crazed bear, as a catalyst to heighten character conflicts, while also exploiting their strengths and weaknesses to maximum effect. In this movie, it sometimes feels like the characters existed primarily as fodder for bear attacks. If there's a sequel, I hope as much time will be put into story and character development (with a focus on comedic setups and pay-offs) as is put into the engineering of the CG bear.
The Ghastly Love of Johnny X (2012)
The Unfocused Script of Johnny X
I saw this movie last night at the Valley Film Festival in North Hollywood, CA. Warning: aspects of this review could be construed as spoilers, though no plot details are given.
While billed as a parody of 1950s low budget sci-fi and exploitation films, I think the filmmakers missed the mark, failing to understand the conventions of those genres that, to a modern viewer, make them campy and funny (e.g., ridiculously naive pseudo-science, archaic technology, outdated sexist, racist social mores, and the laughably unsophisticated pop culture of those times).
The filmmakers also failed to understand that even a parody requires solid story structure and fully realized characters with clear desires (and clear obstacles to achieving those desires). The result is muddled and meandering, with no story spine to pull the audience through from beginning to end. Since too little is set up for the audience to anticipate, the ending can't help but be an unsatisfying anti-climax.
That said, the music and musical numbers are quite good (the sound design top rate); though I would have liked the musical numbers better if they had also driven the story forward, or at least done more to flesh out the characters. As is often the problem with musical numbers in movies, forward story movement grinds to a halt, and we learn little or nothing new about the characters.
The film features several strong performances, particularly from De Anna Joy Brooks as Bliss, Kate Maberly as Dandi Conners, and Les Williams as Chip -- a feat particularly notable since the film was made in bits and pieces over the course of more than ten years. (Kevin McCarthy also turns in a good performance, his last film, despite being 90 years old.)
Will Keenan seems miscast as the titular lead. While he had the attitude and the moves, he lacked the gravitas (and strong singing voice) to carry the film. It's clear that he has no idea why Johnny X does what he does, nor carries any history of his alleged bad deeds. (This is also a failing of the script, which doesn't make the case that Johnny is as powerful as we are told.)
Creed Bratton works well as washed up pop rock sensation Mickey O'Flynn, but is undermined by the weak script, which fails to provide us even a glimmer of insight into why O'Flynn would be so loved and revered.
Reggie Bannister does a credible job as ruthless, self-serving promoter, King Clayton, but he is often undercut by the actress who plays his girlfriend. (Apologies, but I can't seem to positively identify the correct actress here on IMDb.) Though her character is a grotesque cliché, she brings a lot of energy to the role, hitting exactly the right tone -- overbearing, even annoying, yet still funny and, therefore, endearing.
As is the case with most celebrity cameos in indie films, Paul Williams isn't on screen long enough to make much of an impression as Cousin Quilty. Though there are indications that there is history between he and other characters in the story, the writing and direction of Williams' character does too little to bring that history to life.
Director of Photography, Francisco Bulgarelli, does a beautiful job with the cinematography, a task no doubt made more nerve-wracking by the fact that he was shooting the last of a discontinued Kodak black & white film stock, leaving no margin for error in terms of retakes or waste. Every foot shot was one less foot of a finite amount of stock available.
The Art Department and effects team also deserve kudos for the retro practical effects, most of which were done in-camera. Ironically, it's the old school effects that give the film some of its best production values.
Overall, the film is a mixed bag. As is so often the case with movies like this, it's too much style, not enough substance, weakened by an uneven and unfocused script. However, I tip my hat to Paul Bunnell and all involved for persevering through ten years of setbacks to finish the film. Given that circumstance, it's amazing the movie is as good as it is.
Thus, I have to count myself a fan of the movie, and eagerly await Bunnell's next effort, "Rocket Girl."