Hide Article Text (OCR)
Associa ted Press critic looks at two new moviesBy BOB THOMASAssociated Press Writer“Nothing in Common1’ is one of those movies where the whole is unequal to the parts.The new Tri-Star release starring Jackie Gleason, Tom Hanks and Eva Marie Saint has a number of engaging qualities, notably Hanks' spirited performance, but the plot elements prove incompatible. The result is a disappointing sense of what might have been.The film opens with Hanks under a blanket with a nubile beauty. A steamy bedroom scene? No, he is having a snuggle with a stewardess m the rear seat of a Hawaii-Chicago flight. “I’m a frequent flier; they gave me a bonus,” he explains to an indignant passenger.Hanks rqturns to the ad agency where he is obviously a hotshot account executive. The satirical view of the ad world is delicious, especially when Hanks tries to land a big account from an imperious tycoon (Barry Corbin) and his beautiful and dangerous daughter (Sela Ward).I “Nothing in Common” begins to founder when Hanks iearns that his mother (Miss Saint) has deserted his father (Gleason). The father is a blowhard Willy Loman who finally pbsolesces in his salesman's job. He grows morose and resentful of his son and wife, while she seeks a new life in an exercise class.*; Hanks is yo-yoed from one crisis to another at the expense of his ad job. Meanwhile, he tries to maintain romances with the tycoon’s daughter and an old college flame (Bess Armstrong).. Director Garry Marshall, veteran of such TV series as “Happy Days,” “Laverne and Shirley” and “Mork and Mindy,” obviously knows the advertising scene and he deliciously skewers it. He is on less solid ground in domestic matters. The revelations to Hanks by his parents are too often mawkish and discomforting when they were meant to be poignant. 6Hanks is required to carry the movie, and he might have done so, given a more cohesive script. His comedic skill is already established; in “Nothing in Common” he displays emotional depth as well.Gleason suffers from a character that is ill-defined and almost totally unpleasant. You wonder how Miss Saint could have remained with such an insensitive boor as Jong as she did. Her character has even less dimension. Hector Elizondo gives a nice picture of the agencv boss, and Corbin is capital as the tycoon.Rated PG. mostly for language.Running time is 118 minutes — far too long.“Howard the Duck” seemed to possess the most promise as a crowd-pleaser among the summer’s myriad releases.It was based on the admired Marvel Comics series about an oversized duck with a fondness for beer and cigars. It bore the prestigious label “George Lucas Presents.” The director was Willard Huyck and the producer was Gloria Katz, and they co-wrote the script, as thev did for “American Graffiti” and “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.”With all that going for it, why is “Howard the Duck” so disappointing?Perhaps the answer is that you can never quite believe the basic premise: that an inhabitant from a planet of civilized ducks could be zapped to Earth by a malfunctioning laser, then mingle with the humans in various high-tech adventures. That requires a huge suspension of disbelief.The plot might have provided a pleasant little fable if done with cartoon characters. But with live actors and a star duck that is not terribly convincing, the film just doesn’t make it.As if to conceal the fragility of their venture, the filmmakers have laden “Howard the Duck” with enough crashes and special effects to fill another “Star Wars” trilogy.After Howard slams onto this planet, he suffers a series of indignities until he is befriended by the leader of a punk-rock band, Lea Thompson.She tries to protect him. But as always happens in space-alien films, the authorities aim to destroy him. Worse yet, (he laser accidentalso loosed a long-suppressed Dak Overlord, which invades the body of a research scientist, Jeffrey Jones, with the intention of conquering the world.“Howard the Duck” careens from stunt to stunt, special effect to special effect, propelled along by a loud and distracting rock score. Under such circumstances, the human actors have little chance to shine. Lea Thompson adds a soothing note of sanity, and Jeffrey Jones is convincingly manic as the possessed scientist.The production notes coyly list eight names as portrayers of Howard the Duck. Whether they are midgets or special effects people isn’t explained. Unfortunately, their efforts never quite elevate Howard from the appearance of a large duck doll.The effects are the work of Lucas’ Industrial Light and Magic, and they are impressive though occasionally reminiscent. From the Dark Overlord’s mouth comes a salamander-like object that fastens into a truck’s cigarette lighter for a quick power fix. Linda Blair did it better in “The Exorcist.”The Universal release is rated PG for language and scariness. Running time: 111 minutes.COMMUNITY DRIVE-INftte. 422 East of Kittonning548*5749Now Showing Fri., Aug. 8-Thurs., Aug. 14 Box Office Opens 8:15; Showtime DuskIRON EAGLE (PG-13)— Plus-DEATH WISH III (R)
Newspaper Details
Indiana Gazette
Indiana, Pennsylvania, US
Wed, Aug 13, 1986
Page 12
Full Page
Clipped by
Rotten T.
USA 14 Dec 2020
Other Publications Near Indiana, Pennsylvania
Indiana Democrat
Indiana Weekly Progress
Indiana Progress
Indiana Messenger
Indiana Evening Gazette
