From rec.arts.sf.reviews Tue May 14 16:56:46 1996 Path: news.ifm.liu.se!solace!eru.mt.luth.se!news.kth.se!nntp.uio.no!Norway.EU.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!cbgw2.att.com!nntphub.cb.att.com!not-for-mail From: marcuss@shadow.net (Scott Marcus) Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: REVIEW: KIDS IN THE HALL: BRAIN CANDY (1996) Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films,rec.arts.sf.movies Date: 7 May 1996 17:13:03 GMT Organization: Shadow Information Services Inc. Lines: 57 Sender: ecl@mtcts1.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) Approved: ecl@mtcts1.att.com Message-ID: <4mo0av$6cr@nntpb.cb.att.com> Reply-To: marcuss@shadow.net (Scott Marcus) NNTP-Posting-Host: mtcts2.mt.att.com Summary: r.a.m.r. #05152 Keywords: author=Marcus Originator: ecl@mtcts2 Xref: news.ifm.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:4426 rec.arts.sf.reviews:943 KIDS IN THE HALL: BRAIN CANDY A film review by Scott Marcus Copyright 1996 Scott Marcus Cast: David Foley, Bruce McCulloch, Kevin McDonald, Mark McKinney, Scott Thompson Director: Kelly Makin Writers: : Norm Hiscock, Bruce McCulloch, Kevin McDonald, Mark McKinney, Scott Thompson Running Time: approximately 90 minutes Grade: C- The Kids in the Hall are an acquired taste. It took at least a season of watching their show on HBO before I became a believer. Maybe after watching a half dozen Kids in the Hall movies, they would grow into the big screen. My recommendation is that, unless you are a big fan of The Kids, skip the film. As it is, their first--and most likely only--attempt at a full length film lacks the qualities that made their comedy work on TV. A big-budget and glossy production can not make up for a lack of spontaneity that permeates their TV show. The Kids go through the motions, but you get the feeling that they arent really having fun doing so. And this makes it more difficult for the audience to enjoy their antics. BRAIN CANDY is a bunch of skits tied together by the story of a pharmaceutical company that develops a new drug to cure depression. In typical sketch-comedy tradition, each actor plays several roles. Doctor Cooper (Kevin McDonald) and his team create the drug. Then, under pressure from Don Roritor (Mark McKinney), founder and president of Roritor Pharmaceuticals, Dr. Cooper releases the drug into the marketplace. The ensuing distribution of the new happy pill throughout the populace drives the rest of the film. At about 90 minutes, BRAIN CANDY still seems long. The best thing about sketch comedy--and The Kids are no exception--is the ability to quickly deliver the laughs, then go on to another quick skit. But with the additional set-up necessary in telling a longer, coherent story, the laughs just dont come fast enough. Strangely, the show is even more tame than it was when on cable TV. The movie makes several attempts at risqueness--mostly by pointing up the gayness of one of Scott Thompsons characters--but they seem almost forced; As if they have to live up to a PG rating. One of the best bits, though, does make use of Thompsons naked buttocks; we see him charging into battle--going to have sex with some guys taking a shower. In the classic of this genre, Monty Python pulled off this delicate balancing act between plot advancement and punchline delivery for most of THE HOLY GRAIL. The Kids, unfortunately, are not up to the task. There are some amusing moments, to be sure, but not enough to make the experience an enjoyable one. Revision date: 29 April, 1996 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Tue May 14 16:56:56 1996 Path: news.ifm.liu.se!solace!eru.mt.luth.se!news.kth.se!nntp.uio.no!Norway.EU.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!cbgw2.att.com!nntphub.cb.att.com!not-for-mail From: 401@myna.com (John Robertson) Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: REVIEW: KIDS IN THE HALL: BRAIN CANDY (1996) Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films,rec.arts.sf.movies Date: 7 May 1996 17:13:38 GMT Organization: ? Lines: 83 Sender: ecl@mtcts1.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) Approved: ecl@mtcts1.att.com Message-ID: <4mo0c2$6d6@nntpb.cb.att.com> Reply-To: 401@myna.com (John Robertson) NNTP-Posting-Host: mtcts2.mt.att.com Summary: r.a.m.r. #05153 Keywords: author=Robertson Originator: ecl@mtcts2 Xref: news.ifm.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:4427 rec.arts.sf.reviews:944 KIDS IN THE HALL: BRAIN CANDY A film review by John Robertson Copyright 1996 John Robertson Directed by: Starring: The Kids in the Hall (David Foley, Bruce McCulloch, Kevin McDonald, Mark McKinney, Scott Thompson) Perfect Person Rating*: The Perfect Person for this film is a devotee of The Kids in the Hall, or someone in the mood for their comedy served up with doses of satire, sarcasm, and occasionally poor taste. The Perfect Person would probably give this film a rating around 7 out of 10. ---- Ever since the Kids in the Hall went off national TV here in Canada, devotees of the group have been waiting for the Kids in the Hall movie to come out. Since they stopped making new shows for the CBC in Canada, the Kids have actually gotten bigger, through reruns on cable in the US. All this has led to terrific anticipation from fans north and south of the border. With the release of Brain Candy, that anticipation has been lessened, but not without some surprises. The Kids in the Hall's television show was sketch comedy, where the five members played various roles, some recurring, some in drag. In recent years, where Saturday Night Live has been terrible, The Kids stood out like a bright light. Always on the edge, sometimes over it, it was always trying new things, and though it sometimes missed a mark tastewise, it was never unfunny because it was just plain lame. The same can be said of The Kids' new movie, Brain Candy. Although I don't know if I could say in all honesty that it was always funny, I can say that it was never unfunny because it was lame. If anything, the movie was too subdued and satirical and even too artistic for what I had expected from the Kids. Plot summary: The company who make and market Stummies (tm) is on the rocks, and they need a new product to put them back on top. Combing their R&D division, they discover that a bright young scientist has developed a drug that completely cures depression. They pressure him into giving it the thumbs up, and then market it as Gleemonex, the drug that makes you feel like it's 72 degrees in your head all the time. Of course the drug has side effects, like putting its users into blissful comas some of the time, but that's not important to a multinational corporation only interested in greed is it? As mentioned before, one of the things that caught me off guard about this movie was the fact that at times it was so serious. The Kids obviously made this film to have a serious message, and they deliver it through satire. One of the things that I liked about the Kids in the Hall television show was that they were so over the top, and they have gone over the top in this movie as well, but not in a comedic sense. To push home their message, they went a little too far over the top in satirizing drugs like Prozac, and didn't spend enough time being farcical. As usual, the actors play a multitude of roles, and all of them are well done. There aren't as many characters from the original series as the audience seemed to want, but the ones that were there were a welcome sight. Bottom line: If you're in the mood for a clever satire of the drug industry, or you're a self-professed die-hard Kids in the Hall fan, don't miss it. If you're just looking for a good comedy, find a Kids in the Hall rerun on TV, you'll probably be far more pleased. ---- Copyright 1996 by John Robertson. Retransmit freely if unedited. My opinions are solely my own, and in no way reflect those of my employer. * Perfect Person Rating: The Perfect Person Rating is an attempt to give the reader a new way of understanding my rating. Rather than give a film a score, either overall, or on several attributes, the Perfect Person Rating tries to identify the type of person would enjoy this movie the most. Since a reviewer is by nature someone with a great deal of experience in what they are reviewing, their experience may not be the same as someone who is less informed, less jaded, or more attuned to the subject. Hopefully the Perfect Person Rating will go further toward eliminating reviewer bias than a simple rating scale. Comments are appreciated.