Review: Bean (1997)
Chad Polenz
Bean
Chad'z rating: ** (out of 4 = fair)
1997, PG-13, 90 minutes [1 hour, 30 minutes]
[comedy]
starring: Rowan Atkinson (Mr. Bean), Peter MacNicol (David Langley), Pamela
Reed (Alison Langley), Harris Yulin (George Grierson); written by Richard
Curtis, Robin Driscoll; produced by Tim Bevan, Eric Fellner; directed by Mel
Smith.
Seen Monday, November 17, 1997 at 7:20 p.m. at The Glenwood Movieplex Cinemas
(Oneida, N.Y.), theater #4, by myself for free (press pass). [Theater rating:
**1/2: fuzzy, dark picture, slightly uncomfortable seats, average sound.]
The problem with making a motion picture related to some kind of cult
following is that it usually doesn't adapt well to the mainstream. And it's
not that "Bean" fails because of this principle (although that has a lot to
do with it), it's just not a very funny, nor entertaining film to begin with.
Rowan Atkinson stars as Mr. Bean, the title character whose British
television series has been acclaimed by audiences around the world. The
premise to the show is simple: a slow-witted, almost mute man wanders around,
oblivious to world around him, and in the process creates for zany comedy.
What makes the show so good is the fact this simple concept makes for some of
the funniest comedy without becoming too lowbrow. It was really just a matter
of time before this was applied to a feature film and this is the net result.
Unfortunately, where the TV series works, the film fails. Bean's antics
don't work here because, unlike the cartoony nature of the show, the film
establishes a relatively serious setting, therefore the character doesn't
keep with the atmosphere at all.
Bean is about to be fired from his job as a security guard at a London art
museum, but the head of the board of directors won't let him go (for reasons
not well explained). When a Los Angeles art museum buys their most valued
painting (an American impressionist portrait they've had for years), they
decide to send Bean as their representative as either some kind of obscene
gesture to the Americans, or to show the head of the board what an idiot he
is, or both.
What ensues is a cross between a generic fish-out-of-water comedy, recycled
gags from the show that don't work out of their context, and ideas the show
probably threw away. Example of the first: Bean seeing an armed guard at the
airport and pretending he has a gun. A wild chase scene occurs and when they
tell him to "take out the weapon and place it on the floor," he does this
using his hand in the shape of a gun and is still arrested. Example of the
second: Bean trying to cheer up a sick kid on a plane and ends up popping a
vomit-filled bag over someone's head. Example of the third: Bean making silly
faces and doing a Dirty Harry impersonation for his passport photo. These
might sound funny on paper, but what actually shows up on the screen seems
pretty lame. There's just such a rigid contrast between Bean's eccentricity
and the realistic world around him, the jokes don't mesh will.
The film is virtually without plot, except a sub-plot involving the L.A.
museum's curator, David Langley (MacNicol), who invites Bean to stay with him
even though his wife Alison (Reed) decides to take the kids and leave five
minutes after Bean arrives. In fact, most of the film is MacNicol's, as the
story revolves around his character's attempt to make sure the unveiling of
the painting and the accompanying ceremony go smoothly.
Of course Bean is a klutz and an idiot and ends up ruining the priceless
work of art. The scenes depicting this and showing his attempts to fix it are
set up through cliches and unbelievable plot devices. Bean's appeal lies in
his stupidity, therefore the scenes of him going to great lengths to restore
the painting seem all wrong. Some funny things do happen in the process, but
not nearly enough to make up for the mediocre screenplay.
But it is the last act that really kills the film. It plays like one of
those "serious" episodes of a sit-com, and what's worse is it's done in
questionable taste. Once again, Bean is mistaken for a doctor and somehow
ends up in a few scenes that seem very serious, but look like poor parodies
of "ER." The ending itself should be a ripping satire, but is just another
fish-out-of-water gag.
It's disappointing "Bean" is the empty comedy it is. This is just another
case of a good premise ruined by commercialism.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Please visit Chad'z Movie Page @ http://members.aol.com/ChadPolenz - over 170
new and old films reviewed in depth, not just blind ratings and quick
capsules. Also, check out The FIRST Shay Astar Web Page @
http://members.aol.com/ChadPolenz/ShayAstar.html
e-mail: ChadP...@aol.com
(C) 1997 Chad Polenz
Chuck Dowling
BEAN (1997)
A movie review by Chuck Dowling
Copyright 1997 Chuck's Movie Reviews
Bean (1997) ** out of ***** - Cast: Rowan Atkinson, Peter MacNichol, Burt
Reynolds, Harris Yulin, Pamela Reed, Larry Drake. Written by: Richard Curtis
and Robin Driscoll. Directed by: Mel Smith. Running Time: 90 minutes.
You would think that this film's dismal failure would be due to American
filmmakers getting hold of a brilliant British comedy and "Americanizing"
it. You'd be wrong, since full blame can be placed on the very folks who
wrote and created the series: Rowan Atkinson, Robin Driscoll, and Richard
Curtis. Should you ever happen to meet those chaps, do me a favor. Grab them
by the hair and yell really loudly in their ear, "WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?!
HAVE YOU EVER HEARD THE PHRASE 'IF IT AIN'T BROKE DON'T FIX IT'?!" Then walk
away.
The film concerns Mr. Bean (Atkinson) and his visit to America while
escorting the painting of "Whistler's Mother" to an American buyer (played
by Burt Reynolds, in the type of bit part that his success in "Boogie
NIghts" should hopefully do away with). Now how or why Mr. Bean is sent on
this trip makes no sense, and I can't even describe how the film explains
it. The point is that Mr. Bean comes to America and causes wacky trouble.
Problems problems problems, where to begin? First, the score music from the
TV show has been completely replaced by score that is either at times one
note away from the score from "Beetlejuice" or one note away from the score
from "Rob Roy". Then, the song choices are totally uninspired. "Good
Vibrations"? "I Love L.A."? Wow, don't put any thought into that guys. Also,
Bean makes WAY too much noise in the film. The character doesn't speak much,
but in the series you really only heard the laughter of the audience, and
maybe the occasional murmur from Mr. Bean. Each episode was like a Chaplin
silent movie. In the film, Bean is constantly moaning, grunting, whining,
etc. It's annoying, and just plain wrong for the character. The main problem
though is that it's just not funny. With each episode of the series there
would be dozens of really great laughs crammed into less than 30 minutes.
Multiply that running time by three however, and the laughs steadily
decrease. They even have the gaul to REPEAT jokes from the series. Sad, and
creatively lazy.
As a series, "Mr. Bean" only ran for about 13 episodes or so. Why on earth
did Atkinson and the gang decide it was time to completely rework
everything? 13 half-hour episodes certainly hadn't exhausted all possible
situations. All I can say positively for the film at this point is that it's
almost appropriate for all ages, if it wasn't for a couple of scenes where
it appears as though Mr. Bean is having sex with things. And even that isn't
a very positive statement. Please guys, go back to England and go back to
television so you'll make me laugh again. [PG-13]
--
Chuck Dowling -- <chuc...@southeast.net>
Visit Chuck's Movie Reviews at http://users.southeast.net/~chuckd21/
Over 1,600 movies rated and/or reviewed! Movie news, film related links, and reader's reviews.
Michael Redman
BEAN CAN STUFF IT UP HIS NOSE
Bean
A Film Review By Michael Redman
Copyright 1997 By Michael Redman
* (Out of ****)
British comic actor Rowan Atkinson is a hit in England with his weekly "Mr.
Bean" television series and now his film hits the United States. Never before
has there been such a vicious retaliation for the American Revolution.
Bean is a guard in London's National Art Gallery where he is despised by the
board of directors but immune from dismissal. To get rid of him, they send the
bumbling grunting mumbler to LA under the guise of an art expert to oversee
the installation of "Whistler's Mother". (You'd think that with all the
authorities in the film that someone would know that the title of the painting
is the mouthful "Arrangement in Black and Gray: The Artist's Mother".)
That's about as much of a plot as we get. Bean is a combination of Pee Wee
Herman and Jim Carrey with a little "Being There" tossed in. As bad as that
sounds, it's even worse.
Most of the so-called comedy is based on making fun of the socially and
possibly mentally inept. The result is cringing in embarrassment for what's on
the screen rather than laughter.
The rest of the humor involves body orifices and what goes into and comes out
of them. Bean stuffs a cigarette lighter up his nose and shoots peanuts from
it. He leaves tissue hanging from it, sneezes on a painting and makes more
noise with it than you want to hear. As a bonus we get urine, vomit and
laxative jokes. Twelve-year-old boys will love it
Supposedly the movie is very popular in Europe. It's possible. After all there
are those stories about Jerry Lewis and France.
[This appeared in the 11/26/97 "Bloomington Voice", Bloomington, Indiana