Movie Review: Tropic Thunder

Update: Legitimate concerns have been raised about how the mentally challenged are portrayed in Tropic Thunder. I don't think Ben Stiller is making fun of those who are challenged per se; rather he is making fun of the fact that the movie industry often rewards actors and actresses who take on those roles to gain "gravitas" within the industry. In fact, there is a scene between Tugg Speedman and Kirk Lazarus where Kirk explains why actors such as Dustin Hoffman (Rain Man), Tom Hanks (Forrest Gump), and Sean Penn (I Am Sam) did or didn't get nominated for the Oscar for these roles. During this discussion, Kirk utters the line, "They didn't go full retard."

Unfortunately, someone in Marketing thought "Don't Go Full Retard" would be a terrific line to license for t-shirts, etc. And it's now showing up at local malls. And, yeah, I can understand why that line would appeal to a certain segment of the population, especially young adult males who are not noted for their subtlety and empathy.

Apparently Ben Stiller is among them.

Mr. Stiller could have made his point about the movie industry honoring only those actors who make "serious" movies, about "issues" using a different example. In fact, he missed a great opportunity since Jon Voight, who made his film debut in Midnight Cowboy dealing with male prostitutes, makes a cameo in Tropic Thunder. He could have used gays or films where physically beautiful actors or actresses get into the gutter. Mr. Stiller would have upset a different population, but it would have been a population that could fight back on their own. That would have been the braver choice.

Also, Mr. Stiller mocks current celebrities adopting children from the Third World, fulfilling a need within themselves rather than any need of the child. Because Tropic Thunder is a spoof, this all goes horribly wrong and Tugg Speedman seems to be throwing a child off a bridge who, at the time, was stabbing Tugg in the back. To me and DD#2, it was obvious that he threw a dummy--but still.

Again, parts of this movie are funny. Again, I would not rate this movie a "must see." But there will be teens and young adults who see this movie and the above are issues that should be discussed.


Hubs saw Tropic Thunder first and then dragged me to theater to see it. DD#2, who is now 15, came along, too. Commercial reviews of the movie were mixed. But Hubs was adamant that I'd enjoy it, so we went.

Looking back, I didn't realize the movie was rated "R." Had I paid attention, I might have been more cautious about bringing DD#2 along.

The movie opens with a "commercial" for an energy drink and a series of "trailers" that are so seamless done I didn't realize the movie had started. My first clue was that they were really over-the-top. My second clue was one of the trailers featured Ben Stiller, only he wasn't called Ben Stiller.

Then comes a voiceover, reading the opening lines on the screen about a mission to Vietnam. Ten men went in, four came out, two wrote a book, only one was a bestseller and this is a movie about that bestseller. Jump to the movie s The director, Damien Cockburn (Steve Coogan) is shooting key scene and the leading actor, Tugg Speedman (Ben Stiller) can't bring the right emotion to the fore because the other actor in the scene, Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey, Jr.) is spitting on him. Cockburn has a meltdown, which causes the special effects director to blow up the jungle.

The movie is two months behind schedule and it's only the second day of shooting.

After Cockburn is royally chewed out by the studio head, the author of the book the movie is based on, Four Leaf Tayback (Nick Nolte), suggests that they go for more realism by setting up cameras in the jungle, dropping the actors off, and shooting the film as they make their way back to the helicopter. Cockburn thinks this is a wonderful idea.

At the dropoff, he collects the actors' cellphones, hands Speedman the outline of the script and a map, tells them he has the only radio that can summon the chopper, and steps on an old French landmine, blowing himself up. The actors are appalled--except for Speedman, who thinks this is a stunt. But he needs to make this movie, so off the band goes.

And a what a band it is. Tugg Speedman is the star of a disaster movie franchise who also played the lead character in Simple Jack, who is retarded--a performance ignored by the Academy. Jeff Portnoy (Jack Black) is noted for playing multiple characters in a series of comedy movies where the main jokes--the only jokes--revolve around farts. He's also a drug addict. There is a young black rapper, Alpa Chino (Brandon T. Jackson) whose only acting experience is in music videos and advertisements for an energy drink called "Body Sweat." He resents that Lazarus is playing a black man when he is, in fact, white and an Aussie. Lazarus is a "serious" actor and never drops out of character, even when the cameras are not rolling. Problem is, his character is a stereotype. Finally, there is Kevin Sandusky (Jay Baruchel) who is the straight guy. He's read the book, the script, the in-flight magazine. He's also been in the Army and is the only one who can read a map.

They are not alone, however. They have been dropped in the midst of territory controlled by the Golden Dragons, a drug cartel who think the band of actors are D.E.A. agents.

What happens next is pretty predictable. The band splits up, with Speedman insisting that this is a movie set and the helicopter is one way and the rest of the crew going the other. Speedman is captured and taken to the headquarters of the drug cartel. The rest of the group finds him by accident.

Meanwhile, the special effects guy and Tayback go looking for the Cockburn and the band, finding only the site of the explosion and the walkie-talkie.

At the drug cartel HQ, Speedman is recognized as the lead in Simple Jack. Turns out it's the cartel's favorite movie and they want him to reprise his role. In turn, Speedman re-evaluates his life and decides to "adopt" a cute little toddler living at the compound.

Has the movie taken a turn toward the Serious and Introspective?

C'mon! This is Ben Stiller!

Tropic Thunder is rude and crude. The "F-word" is used liberally. Ben Stiller uses a sledge hammer to make his point about race, sex, drugs, and Hollywood.

I found myself laughing out loud. Several times.

The actors look like they were having fun on the set (I'd love to see the outtakes--this was filmed in Kau'i). Lots of cameos by different actors who played off their public personas. Nothing is sacred; no one is safe.

Did Tropic Thunder deserve an R rating? Yes, due to language, over-the-top violence, and portrayals of drug use (although those were not sympathetic--Jeff Portnoy is shown as being out-of-control). Although there are no scenes of explicit sex, there is much discussion about it, usually at the "locker room" level.

Overall, I enjoyed the movie, though I wouldn't rank it as a "must see." DD#2 enjoyed it as well, although I'm glad she's not any younger.

crossposted at The Mad Tea Party

Name 20 films that portray Christianity in a positive light.

That's the challenge that Steven Greydanus answers and that Jeffrey Overstreet tells us about. I'm delighted to share Jeffrey's post as a guest blogger at Catholic Media Review (yes, I'm a fan). I see that the movies that instantly sprang to my mind are included ... Serenity, World Trade Center, The Count of Monte Cristo, Signs, Return to Me. Enjoy, and make your own additions in the comments box. I'm mulling this one over ...

I frequently receive mail from readers who argue that we should ignore “Hollywood’s output” because of the ways in which Christians are negatively portrayed.

But I know many Christians who are devoting their lives to developing meaningful movies in Hollywood. I frequently participate in fruitful, enlightening discussions about films that explore issues of faith. And I frequently see movies that present Christianity, Christians, and truths fundamental to Christian faith in a positive light — not just from Hollywood, but from all over the world. So I have a hard time taking such complaints seriously. Of course we should be discerning. But just boycott or condemn the whole endeavor? Might as well boycott grocery stores. Or public libraries. Or public schools. Grocery stores stock products owned by organizations that are unfriendly toward Christianity. Public libraries are full of books that portray Christianity in a negative light. Public schools often employ teachers who are hostile toward Christianity.

I was delighted to discover a useful list to keep on hand when I receive such complaints. My friend and colleague Steven D. Greydanus, who publishes reviews at Decent Films and at Christianity Today Movies was challenged, at artsandfaith.com, to “name twenty Hollywood movies made since the turn of the millennium that present Christianity in a positive light.”

He took a stab at it, and came up with this list:

1. Amazing Grace
2. America’s Heart and Soul
3. Because of Winn-Dixie
4. Bridge to Terabithia
5. Charlotte’s Web
6. Cinderella Man
7. Count of Monte Cristo, The
8. Daredevil
9. Exorcism of Emily Rose, The
10. Ladder 49
11. Lars and the Real Girl
12. Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World
13. My Big Fat Greek Wedding
14. Nativity Story, The
15. New World, The
16. Patriot, The
17. Return to Me
18. Rookie, The
19. Serenity
20. Signs
21. 6th Day, The
22. Spider-Man
23. Tears of the Sun
24. Walk to Remember, A
25. We Are Marshall
26. World Trade Center
27. X2: X-Men United

Thank you, Steven!

Now, I don’t think Greydanus is claiming that these films qualify as profound spiritual explorations. But they do stand in stark contrast to the claim that “Hollywood” (as if that was just one company, united under Satan) is operating under a mandate to slander and destroy Christianity.

Can you think of other titles that qualify? Name them! (Remember, they need to qualify as “Hollywood movies.” In other words, from a major American studio. If we were to expand this list to include independents and international film, the list would expand significantly.)

Hollywood and Me: my journey towards engagement in the culture wars

I used to be completely hostile to Hollywood, since I grew up in the late 1960's and saw Gidget replaced with "Hair".

Gone were the days of innocence and in were sex, drugs and hedonism.

This bitterness was confirmed after viewing Michael Medved's video based on his bestselling book, "Hollywood vs Relgion", which is valuable as it's from a former atheist insider who rediscovered his Jewish faith and how it opened his eyes about the prevailing secularist hostility toward religious people there.
Then, "The Passion of the Christ" showed me that some good could come through Hollywood,and I began to look to support worthwhile projects, just around the time Hollywood smelled the money from Christian market. New groups like Fox Faith, Walden Media, and Grace Hill Media sprang up to meet the demand. Their attempts have been somewhat lame, (Evan Almighty, The Nativity Story) with noteworthy exceptions, (Amazing Grace, Chronicles of Narnia) because they know not what they do, and don't get the right people to consult. I'm hoping someday we Catholics will be asked in on a project to tell what Catholics really want. Walden has already done that, thus my friendship with Dr. John Seel.
Then, I saw "Bella" and realized we Catholics don't have to be outside the studio gates, begging Hollywood for crumbs, we can sit in the director's chair. I am appalled at the snobbery of some Catholic critics towards "Bella". A prominent blogger friend refused to see it because another prominent Christian critic panned it sarcastically. It may not be the best film of all time, but considering the low budget ($200, 000) it is durn good. Who defines good anyway? Taste is a rather elusive idea among film critics.
Have you seen "Please don't Eat the Daises" with Doris Day and David Niven? I highly recommend it. Niven is a struggling Broadway critic, loving husband to Doris and father of several boys, UNTIL he becomes successful and realizes that he is now a kingmaker in Broadway, and just relishes the opportunity to destroy a show with a snide remark. This power changes his character, and his new overblown pride pulls him toward adultery, and away from his family, until his wife brings him down to size.
While the nature of criticism is to find fault, and I certainly don't want to encourage mediocrity in film, to destroy efforts to uplift the media by independent filmmakers is counterproductive. Say what they're doing right, and encourage them to improve. That's why I reviewed "Facing the Giants", which many Christian critics eschewed. Sure it was schlocky in parts, and all turned out well in the end, but something in that film which featured real men and women in pain praying, which touched thousands of moviegoers and we have to acknowledge that. And replicate it, with better scripts and actors.
My point is that we Catholics aren't in charge of Hollywood, as we were during the Legion of Decency days, and we are emerging from the dark days of begging for scraps, so just where is the Catholic film critic? Our job is to discern for the Catholic viewer what films are good and which are harmful, to save moviegoers and their children from falling victim to soul-damaging films or giving up on Hollywood altogether. We don't have to settle for condescension and mediocrity, but we have to get used to the director's chair. It's been a long time since Frank Capra directed "It's a Wonderful Life". (Did you know it was panned in 1946 for being too sentimental?)
We Christians, after all, are masters of the arts, as we were in the heyday of Renaissance masterpieces, as we worship the Master of all beauty, and Truth Himself. We know true beauty when we see it. We see Christ in the Church, in the Eucharist, in His Blessed Mother, in nature, in the poor, and in the love of our families.
Film is just another art form, the most powerful form and we MUST engage the culture of death or lose millions more souls to it.