"Kung Pow" - Come Back, Steve Oedekerk, We Need Your Dumb Comedy.

*I write these articles under the assumption that you’ve seen the movie, so there is little summary and plenty of SPOILERS. (Although I find it impossible to believe that anyone could be upset by having Kung Pow spoiled for them.)

I’ve saved the dumbest for last. After revisiting Nothing to Lose, I decided to rewatch every Steve Oedekerk-directed movie I own, saving Kung Pow: Enter the Fist for last because it seemed to be most Oedekerk-y of the three. Oedekerk specialized in dumb comedy for a while, but has seemingly disappeared in the last few years. I can’t find any kind of recent update on him, and he has nothing in production listed on IMDb. I know this movie didn’t set the world on fire, and his animated film was a bit of a disappointment (and his short films featuring...thumbs didn’t seem to be meant for anyone’s amusement but his own), but I don’t understand why he’s not still working. Perhaps it was the changing popularity in comedy. Dumb comedy isn’t as welcome as it used to be. And let me be clear, I think dumb comedy is actually pretty damn smart. Anyone can make stupid noises and just copy other shit (I’m looking at you, Superhero Movie, Disaster Movie, etc.). It takes skill to be stupid and genuinely funny, and Oedekerk had that. Maybe it was all those not-even-really-parody Movies that put an end to Oedekerk’s style. Whatever it was, it’s been long enough. This guy deserves to be able to make a new dumb comedy every couple years, and Kung Pow is evidence that his stupidity knows no bounds.

If this is dumb comedy, what does it say about me that I still like it?

The main reason I’ve revisited Oedekerk’s movies is because I find comedy interesting in that your sense of humor probably changes the most over time. So I guess I use these movies within my collection to gauge how much my sense of humor has, or hasn’t, changed. The best way to check it is to watch something I consider to be very dumb, and see if it still makes me laugh. Which brings me to Kung Pow. 

I first watched this movie when it was released in theaters back in 2002. I liked it so much that I watched it twice. That’s right: I saw Kung Pow: Enter the Fist in the theater...twice. This particular type of dumb comedy (silly voices, intentionally bad dubbing, absurdity, fart jokes, 4th wall-breaking) was right up my alley. Watching it again, it still is. 

Parts of the movie don’t work for me (most of the CG is terrible and pointless, especially the cow), but they didn’t work for me the first time I watched it, either. I literally laughed out loud at some of this movie when I watched it the other day. I can’t stress enough how rare it is for me to be watching a movie, alone, that I’ve seen before, and laugh out loud multiple times. 

I’m glad Kung Pow still makes me laugh. It means I haven’t become a joyless asshole. Perhaps this will be my comedy barometer for the rest of my life.

We need Steve Oedekerk, now more than ever.

I like Kung Pow in particular because Oedekerk was clearly allowed to make as dumb of a movie as he wanted, and he went for it. I miss that devotion to stupidity. 

Stupid comedies still exist, but they are definitely more rare than they were 15-25 years ago. I’m sure it has more to do with profitability than taste, but I don’t see why someone like Oedekerk isn’t still working regularly. 

Also, Jim Carrey could use the work. It’s not that he’s suffering or anything, but his return to Dumb and Dumber was a misfire. If he truly wanted to recreate the comedic magic of his early career, then he needs to team back up with Oedekerk. They had a project they were both connected to listed on IMDb called Ricky Stanicky that actually sounded kind of interesting (a group of friends made up a person named Ricky Stanicky that they blamed everything on and have to hire Carrey to be him for real), but it’s been in development hell for years and is likely dead. 

And that’s too bad, because I would love to see what kind of stupid shit Carrey and Oedekerk could get up to these days. Until then, I’ll just have to keep going back to movies in my collection like Kung Pow and When Nature Calls. I’m all for R-rated and sophisticated comedies, but the high schooler in me (that apparently won’t die) still yearns for silly voices and farts. I hope that never changes.

Why do I own this?

I think I laid it out pretty clearly above, but I loved it years ago, which is why I originally bought it. And now I’m glad to have it to check up on my sense of humor from time to time.

Random Thoughts

This reminded me a lot of Bad Lip Reading. In fact, if Oedekerk had this idea today, it would probably just end up being a YouTube channel. I would subscribe to it.

There is an Oedekerk YouTube page, but I can’t tell if it’s run by him or a fan. And the most recent video was teasing something...thumb-related coming soon. No thanks.

I can't think of another DVD title screen that starts off by explaining the premise of the movie.

This is back in the good old days of DVD title screens that talk to you and shit. It was very annoying if you fell asleep watching the movie and the title screen started playing on a loop.

I still think Betty's voice is kind of funny.

This type of comedy is still right up my alley. I love when a movie uses an obvious dummy for action scenes (like the baby rolling down the hill at the beginning).

"He was raised by various rodents."

"I'm not a doctor, but it was like one clean chunk."

This is even dumber than I remember…

...but the horrible dubbing and repeating scenes are still pretty funny. 

"Your story makes my heart heavy and my prostate weak. My bladder is full to bursting."

"I must apologize for Wimp Lo. He is an idiot. We have purposely trained him wrong, as a joke."

"Prepare the long rubber glove."

The cow fight was too stupid.

There are plenty of Matrix gags that haven't aged well.

That Master Tang voice Oedekerk does sounds so much like Triumph the Insult Comic Dog that I checked to see if Robert Smigel did the voice. Oedekerk describes it as sounding like Edward James Olmos. I guess I hear it a bit.

"I'll kill him. I'll kill him dead. Hmm, like with...with a rock or something."

Even at 81 minutes, this feels pretty damn long.

Hooters and Taco Bell are both thanked at the end of the credits. I'm not surprised. 

.

"Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls" - The Best Kind of Comedy Sequel: a Dumb One.

*As always, I write these articles under the assumption that you’ve seen the movie, so...SPOILERS.

After revisiting Nothing to Lose, I decided to watch all three Steve Oedekerk movies I own. So this month I’m going with Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls (Kung Pow: Enter the Fist is up next). As with most comedy sequels, When Nature Calls is typically looked at as the lesser of the two Jim Carrey movies in the franchise. I like the first one much more, too, but I obviously still like this movie. I admire how intentionally stupid it is, and while my sense of humor may have changed a bit since middle school, a part of me will always find this movie funny. Especially that part with the rhino...

A comedy sequel is usually dumber than the original.

The Ace Ventura franchise is particularly suited to stupidity, but in general comedy sequels follow that rule. Major League II and Anchorman 2 (just to pick a couple from my collection) and goofier and dumber than their first installments. I can see the reasoning behind this; filmmakers feel obligated to one-up the previous movie to appease audiences. With When Nature Calls, that meant Ace had to go from helping find a beloved NFL mascot to becoming a monk then travelling to Africa to find a sacred bat to prevent tribal genocide. The stakes are definitely higher, even though the tone is noticeably more cartoonish. 

It’s hard to fault filmmakers for taking this route. Comedy sequels are generally weaker than their originals, and there’s really nothing that can be done to prevent it. Comedies work because we’re introduced to new characters, and we get to experience something new with no expectations. A sequel has to repeat certain elements, but to a heightened degree. So when Ace ridiculously barrel rolls a vehicle into a parking spot and proclaims, “Like a glove!” we don’t laugh so much as acknowledge it with a smile, as if to say, “I remember when he did that in the first film, and this time is was crazier.” It’s not funny; it’s a callback. It’s fan service we don’t need or want. 

This applies to comedy in general. Do you want to see a stand-up comedian perform the same routine year after year? If so, then comedy sequels are for you. For the rest of us, these repeated moments are what we have to deal with while hoping to see something new and different. 

In a lot of ways When Nature Calls breaks this trend. I can’t think of a much different setting and set of circumstances for such a film without completing changing the character. Yes, Ace is still looking for an important animal, and he goes about his search in annoyingly funny ways, but this is still very different from the first movie. Plus, Ace is the only returning character, and the previous film’s plot is not even referenced. 

Making your main character crazier and injecting him into a completely different setting is probably the best way to make a sequel to Ace Ventura: Pet Detective. The other route is to just copy the first film. Sure, that will appeal to a certain type of fan who simply finds humor in recognizing shit they’ve seen before that they thought was funny, but to most people that would be an unfunny waste of time.

I suppose the major factor that would land people on the negative side of this movie is the influence of writer/director Steve Oedekerk. Oedekerk’s sense of humor is zanier and more childlike (while also hovering in R-rated territory somehow) than the first film. This means that Ace has gone from annoyingly eccentric (which is usually just an act he uses as a distraction to work the case) to unhinged maniac (which has nothing to with working the case). 

Perhaps I’m giving the first film a bit too much credit. There are moments when Ace is being stupid for no purpose and no one’s amusement but his own (when he pretends to be Captain Kirk while checking the dolphin tank comes to mind), but for the most part he is a driven detective trying to solve the case. 

I guess I can some the difference up best in comparing the two fancy party scenes in each movie. In the first film, Ace, who loves to fuck with rich, uptight folk, is a general weirdo/asshole to nearly everyone he comes across. He makes fun of how people talk, he acts insane to the overly serious door man, he eats in a disgusting manner, he grabs the arm of the violinist (still one of my favorite small moments from that movie), and he eventually causes a major scene when he emerges from the bathroom completely soaked. That is all very cartoonish, but while he was there he was searching for evidence. 

In When Nature Calls, Ace also attends a fancy gathering, but it’s amped up. He covers his face in food and is a general asshole, but things escalate when he abruptly knocks out the Monopoly Guy to make a point about wearing fur. (This is also a favorite part of mine.) He’s still going after the rich and uptight in the society, but it is not meant to serve as a distraction as he works the case. That might seem like a minor difference, but it encapsulates the fundamental difference between the two, and it’s what makes the first film a beloved comedy to many and the second film a tolerable, silly sequel. 

All of this is to say this is the way to do it if you’re going to make a comedy sequel. I like Major League II for this very reason. Admit that you can’t repeat the first film and just get stupid with it. And who better to get stupid than Ace Ventura? I prefer the first film, but I can’t fault a comedy sequel that intentionally got this stupid. Part of that is thanks to Carrey’s usual over-the-top performance, but it’s mainly due to Steve Oedekerk’s involvement. And I’ll go into much more detail about his particular style of comedy next month.

The rushed sequel featuring insensitive treatment of indigenous people had trouble behind the scenes. Who knew?

Actually, I had no idea there were issues behind the scenes of this movie, but yeah, looking back it should have been obvious (in my defense, you don’t really think about this stuff when you’re in middle school). You can find all the details here, but the short version is that Carrey didn’t really want to make the movie and was sick for a lot of it, the original director was fired early on, they were worries about the depiction of the African tribes, etc. 

The Carrey stuff interested me a lot, especially when I realized that this was his only sequel until he did that disappointing Dumb and Dumber sequel a few years back. For all his goofiness, it’s fair to say that Carrey has never been interested in repeating himself. But something that cracked me up, and made a lot of sense, was his objection to Ace’s fear of bats. It didn’t make sense to him, and looking back at it, he’s completely right. Why would Ace, who was established in the first film as a lover of all animals, hate bats? Sure, they’re creepy to most people, but (do I have to write it?) Ace is not most people. Carrey’s suggestion to fix this was to have Ace be allergic to bats instead, and I cannot understand why they didn’t go that route instead. 

And the treatment of Africa is pretty bad. Every cliche you can think of is used, but at least they went with fictional tribes and even a fictional country. But the fact that it seems to still be a British colony is odd, to say the least. Definitely not the best idea for a setting, even in the mid-’90s, but it wasn’t as bad as I expected it to be when I rewatched it. And without the Africa setting, how else do we get Ace in a mechanical rhino in a hot savannah? 

The more I think about everything regarding this movie, it’s a minor miracle that When Nature Calls was ever completed, much less that it turned out to be kind of funny. Maybe this is just nostalgia talking, and this is a garbage movie that I should never watch again, much less own. But then again, that rhino scene is magical.

Why do I own this?

I have a whole section of my collection devoted to comedies I loved as a kid, and this deserves to remain a part of it.

Random Thoughts 

Why was the plane's animal cargo at the beginning a single raccoon? Why did they have it? Where were they taking it?

As a Dolphins fan, I loved that the first film factored the team into the story in a major way. That written, I like that this movie just ignores that any of that happened and goes with a completely unrelated plot. 

I get that they were trying to one-up the "like a glove" parking scene from the first movie, but Ace taking the vehicle off-road on the way to the consulate makes no sense at all. I know, I know, why am I expecting sense from this movie? But Ace in the first film was just an eccentric, goofy guy who liked to fuck with people. He's a straight up cartoon character this time around. Maybe I'm remembering it differently, though. I'll have to revisit the first film soon.

Man, "spank you, spank you very much" was a daily quote in middle school thanks to this movie.

The Monopoly guy stuff is still funny. The sudden punch to the face is great.

"Bumblebee tuna."

"He's good. With my help, he could be the best."

The spit stuff was funny at first, but it's pretty damn disgusting when they leave the chief's hut covered in it.

So even if Ace finds a fingerprint in the sacred hut, what is he going to do with it? Would any of the tribesmen or poachers have their prints on file? I highly doubt it.

"Kind of hot in these rhinos."

The rhino sequence justifies this film's existence. The birthing part is amazing, both for Carrey's insane performance and the tourist family's reaction.

Bob Gunton went from Shawshank to getting interrogated by an eyeball-touching Ace Ventura.

Speaking of eyeball-touching, I started copying that scene at school after watching this, sound effects and all (I was very popular…).

Once again, why do I expect logic, but why did the poachers leave Ace alive? And why would they tie up his monkey with him? Wouldn't they try to sell it instead?

This is a very light-hearted movie considering there's a potential genocide of an entire tribe at stake.

I completely forgot that Ace has an out of body experience to solve the case.

I also forgot that the villain ends up getting ape-raped.

When exactly did Ace bang the princess? Sure, he masturbated after seeing her naked, but there wasn't much follow up to that.

But back to that ape-rape. What a truly horrifying end for the villain. And when it cuts to the bushes shaking, there are no screams. Is he dead already? Is he passed out? Is he...is he enjoying it? The implications are terrifying.

.

"Nothing to Lose" - Does Anyone Remember this Tim Robbins / Martin Lawrence Buddy Comedy?

*I write these articles under the assumption that you’ve seen the movie, so...SPOILERS.

There’s little rhyme or reason to the movies I’ve chosen to watch lately (though I plan on making more timely picks in the future, picking movies that have something to do with current releases or events or holidays, etc.), and this week is no different. I simply realized it had been a while since I wrote about one of the comedies I own. Nothing to Lose seemed like a good choice because it had been a while since I had watched it, and I wanted to see if it held up for me. While watching it, I realized something about the main character, and I wondered what happened to the writer/director Steve Oedekerk (whose other two movies that I own, Kung Pow: Enter the Fist and Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls, I’ll write about in the future). Let’s start with the main character of Nothing to Lose: Nick Beam.

Nick is a dick.

So the entire plot of this movie is based on the fact that Nick thinks his wife is cheating on him. In his slight defense, he does come home to find his boss’s cuff links on the counter, and then sees what appears to be his naked wife having sex with (presumably) his boss in their marital bed. It’s a devastating betrayal, made that much worse because the film has established Nick’s boss as an unfuckable dildo at this point, and the film began with Nick and his wife fake divorcing each other. So Nick ends up having a wild weekend of crime and zany antics with his carjacker/new best friend Martin Lawrence.

I’m not one to dwell on little details that would make a film cease to exist (like Nick immediately confronting his wife, revealing it to actually be his sister-in-law instead or Nick calling his wife at least later that day instead of waiting for all of his horrible deeds to have been done), but I have to point out, at least, that Nick is a dick, and he gets off way too easy by the end of the film. So I can accept the necessary details of the film, even if they are a bit unbelievable. But I do not accept Nick getting off so easy.

First off, he’s an asshole to Martin Lawrence. Yes, Martin tried to carjack him, but even after they develop a slight friendship, he still belittles Martin every chance he gets. Martin can handle it, so that makes it less of a problem. And yeah, being a dick to a guy who tried to rob you at gunpoint is understandable. Still, he definitely uses Martin when convenient and only has a change of heart after he meets Martin’s family. It’s like Martin wasn’t a human until that point. But Nick does get Martin a job at the end, so that’s something. And it’s a hell of a lot better than how Nick treats his wife.

Nick’s wife lets him off the hook at end by replying, “No, you dick!” when Nick asks, “So you weren’t cheating on me?” Sure, she rightfully calls him a dick, but that’s it? Your husband disappears for an entire weekend, you find out he did so because he thought you were having an affair with his boss, and you just want him to come home, end of story? She should be so much more pissed off with him. And it’s the cheating accusation that should bother her the most. For Nick to believe that her cheating is a possibility is a huge issue for their relationship. Sure, it’s a bit messed up that her sister thought it was cool to bang her boyfriend in their bed, but still, Nick should have thought, “That can’t be her,” instead of immediately believing it was and going off on a zany adventure. Nick’s wife should at least confront him in a more significant way about this. But it is a comedy, so I assume that’s why she’s so forgiving. But did she get all the details?

This is an odd comparison, but this movie is similar to Eyes Wide Shut. The main character questions the strength of his relationship, and he goes off on a wild night of temptation and danger before returning home, eventually revealing all to his wife to rebuild their marriage. The main issue with the comparison is that we don’t know what Nick tells his wife whereas Tom Cruise says to Nicole Kidman, “I’ll tell you everything.”

Does Nick’s wife know about all the crimes he committed? More importantly, does she know he was seconds away from cheating on her? Something tells me he left that part of his night out of the story. At least it’s that moment that seems to make him realize he needs to talk to his wife because he’s incapable of cheating himself. That doesn’t change the fact that he made out and got into bed with another woman, and his wife did nothing at all.

Because of this, I believe resentment is bound to build up in their marriage. And Nick’s wife will finally reach a breaking point and end their marriage. And I hope she does it by fucking his boss for real.

What happened to Steve Oedekerk?

I love movies of all kind, but there will always be a special place in my heart for stupid comedies that I can watch as pure escapism from time to time. Nothing to Lose is one of those movies. I know that I can put this movie on at the end of the night, and I can fall asleep while watching it. That sounds like a dig on the film, but it’s not. I enjoy movies that are interesting and funny to me while also being silly enough to ignore and lose consciousness while watching. Whereas, if I put on There Will Be Blood or something at the end of the night, it might hook me in and keep me up for two and a half hours. (I am proud of myself for finding a way to mention There Will Be Blood and Eyes Wide Shut in an article about Nothing to Lose.)

So dumb comedies are special to me, and write/director Steve Oedekerk made three of these movies in a row. It began with Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls, which came out in 1995; I was 11, which made it perfect for my sense of humor at the time (who am I kidding, it’s still a good fit for my current sense of humor). Even at 11, I noticed that this sequel to the Jim Carrey animal detective movie was dumber than the original, but I didn’t care. In fact, even though I consider the first movie much better, the sequel still has a lot of moments that I find to be the funniest of the two films (I’ll go into much more detail with a whole post about this movie in the future).

When Nature Calls was pretty successful ($108 million), which allowed Oedekerk to make Nothing to Lose, which made $44 million on a $25 million budget. That’s not a runaway hit, but pretty decent for an R-rated comedy. And that allowed Oedekerk to make Kung Pow, which ended up getting some terrible reviews (less than 20% on RT), and only making $17 million on a $10 million dollar budget. I loved Kung Pow when it came out (and will write a full article about it in the future as well), but I can see why people did not care for it. It is as silly and dumb as movies get.

Then Oedekerk made a bunch of parody shorts with thumbs? Oh, and he made an animated movie, Barnyard, that didn’t have much of an impact. And since then...nothing. I’m sure he still punches up comedy scripts and whatnot, but he hasn’t had a produced credit since 2011. I just wonder what happened to him. Sure, his movies weren’t critical darlings, and they only turned modest profits, but is this enough to warrant this complete shutdown in production?

I still think there’s a place for Oedkerk’s brand of comedy. I enjoyed the R-rated comedy of Nothing to Lose (mainly because it allowed Martin Lawrence to cuss a lot), but When Nature Calls and Kung Pow are both PG-13, and I find them very funny. That takes a special kind of talent, and that seems to be missing in comedy today. Things are either super R-rated or super childish. Oedekerk found a middle ground.

Maybe the Oedekerk type of comedy is just a thing of the past. I hope not. But until (or if) he gets another chance to make another movie, I’ll just have to enjoy the dumb trilogy he gave us in the late 90s/early 2000s.

Why do I own this?

I own a lot of random comedies from this era, and this one definitely got watched a ton of times by me and my friends years ago. I like having these movies on hand for multiple reasons. First, I like the nostalgia I feel when I rewatch a comedy that I haven’t seen in years. Second, I enjoy having these movies on hand that allow me to shut off my brain and just watch them. Finally, it’s interesting to see what jokes I missed years ago and what I find funny today compared to back then.

Random Thoughts

I wonder how often people confuse this with Nothing but Trouble?

Main characters working at ad agencies seems to be a very '90s trope.

I'm basically obsessed with movie music at this point, but the music in this film also screams '90s comedy. I kind of miss music like that.

So the two people banging at the house are his sister-in-law and her fiance. Fine, but why were they in their bed? They don't have a guest room? What a couple of dicks!

It's a bit racist that as soon as he drives into the "bad part" of town, rap music starts playing, and he's carjacked immediately.

God, I love Martin Lawrence in this movie: "Welcome to hell, biiiiiiiiiiiiiiitch!"

"Helen Keller, I'm talkin' to you!"

"Hey, please don't kill me, freaky Jason."

"I'm gonna 'one time' yo ass."

"That's what I'da told the bitch."

"Persistent hillbilly motherfucker!"

This movie makes Arizona seem like Alabama with that cop and persistent hillbilly motherfucker.

Seeing Gus Fring play such an unhinged character is funny now that he's known for playing one of the most calculating characters in TV history.

Why does Martin Lawrence only notice the gas smell after hours in the car?

"I am not up on all this jive-talkin', homeboy lingo. What's that supposed to mean, 'There's s spider on your head'?"

"It means there's a spider on your motherfuckin' head."

"Yo, that's a big fuckin' spider!"

John C. McGinley wastes two cigarettes in five minutes. As a former smoker, I find that unacceptable.

I love Martin Lawrence's crab walk as he goes to shoot out Fring and McGinley's tire.

Blue! I didn't know he was in this. This must be the first time I've watched this since Old School came out.

"Freeze, sucker-bitch!"

Not all of Lawrence's adlibs work: "You win at what? Climbing stairs? I guess we'll call you the step king."

You can see why Oedekerk starred in his next movie. He devotes a lot of screen time to himself in this as the dancing, lip-syncing security guard.

That hotel bartender has an all time great disgusted look.

I guess Nick needs to find a new flower shop. It would be pretty damn awkward to go back to Gayheart after their almost hookup.

McGinley's celebration is great: have your partner smell money while you yell, "Hookers!"

That ending is like the ending of an SNL skit. It's just random and clear they couldn't think of a good way to wrap things up. Why not bookend the movie and end with another scene of Nick and his wife "divorcing" each other, especially now that she has more material to use against him?

That scene after the credits makes up for it, though. Seeing a letter addressed to "Hillbilly Motherfucker" makes it one of the better end credits scenes.

..