I am already on record as being a huge fan of the Muppets,
going back to the early days of The
Muppet Show. And I wasn’t shy about professing my love for the recent
Muppets reboot (2011) starring Jason Segel and Amy Adams, because it
resurrected so much of the pure whimsy, joyful exuberance and gently caring
spirit of the first and best Muppet film, 1979’s The Muppet Movie.
So how does the new film, Muppets Most Wanted, fare in comparison? Well, let’s just say that
it’s a frog of a different color. Not a completely different color. Just a few
shades off. After the opening number, MMW
never quite rises to the level of its predecessor. It’s not that it can’t quite
hit the high notes; it’s more like it’s not clear that they’re trying. Generally
speaking though, it does meet the Muppet standard for entertainment value, and
that means kids and adults alike will enjoy the film, in their own ways. Grown-ups
will guffaw at the moments of parody, the playful pop-culture references and the
quick one-liners, while kids will have fun watching the silly and colorful antics
of the characters. It may not be the Muppets at their best, but it is them in
their most familiar habitat.
One thing I confess I don’t understand about Muppets Most Wanted is the intentional
decision by the filmmakers to loosely shadow the storyline of The Great Muppet Caper (1981). In The Muppets, the theme of reviving past
greatness by getting the group back together again naturally lent itself to
multiple parallels to the original, which was the story of Kermit and how he
gathered the group together in the first place. MMW does something similar with its call-back film. Both are
predicated on the Muppets venturing overseas and getting entangled in a major heist.
But why? The Muppets
had something to say about reinvention and facing the future that actually builds
upon the original, but that is not the case for this newest film. Both Muppets Most Wanted and The Great Muppet Caper are varieties of
caper film, but there is no necessary link between them. So what’s the point?
Why not set off in some new, different direction with MMW? The Great Muppet Caper wasn’t that great to begin with. Why use
it as a model? And does this mean the next film is going to be The Muppets Take New Jersey ?
That aside, Muppets
Most Wanted as a film is not interesting enough to warrant much discussion.
In fact, I wouldn’t have made a point to comment on the movie at all, except
for two things about it that have been festering in my mind all week. One of
them is merely annoying, but the other is somewhat disturbing.
Let’s address the merely annoying first. So, is Celine Dion
actually a long-lost Muppet, or did she donate a ton of money to the Muppets
future re-retirement fund? Those are the only two explanations I can come up
with to explain her dull (black and white
in a Muppet movie?!) and completely unnecessary appearance in the film. I
mean, I’ve heard that she’s capable of delivering a show-stopping performance,
but this one brought the movie to such a complete and screeching halt I could swear
I smelt the burnt rubber coming through the screen. In the film, Ms. Dion
serves as some kind of sparkly, magically-appearing mentor to Miss Piggy, kind
of a cross between the Fairy Godmother from Cinderella
and Obi-Wan Kenobi from The Empire
Strikes Back. Except she sings a song and then disappears without either waving
her wand or telling Piggy to go to Degobah.
It certainly doesn’t advance the story or add anything of value to the
movie, unless you count the slight uneasiness that comes from listening to
Piggy and Celine trying to harmonize.
I don’t know if the filmmakers involved realize this, but since
Jim Henson’s death, those of us who love the Muppets are continually asking
ourselves WWJD (as in What Would Jim Do?) whenever we watch
something Muppet-related. And I can’t
help but think that if Mr. Henson were the one pulling the strings (forgive the
pun) on this production, he would’ve avoided a scene like this.
There’s something else, though, that isn’t as minor, or as
easily dismissed. The film’s villain, Constantin, is an escaped criminal
mastermind who happens to bear an uncanny resemblance to our favorite frog.
Seeing an opportunity to do more evil, he has his agent (Ricky Gervais) coax
the Muppets into going on tour in Europe , where
they hope to build on their sudden, but possibly fleeting, resurgence of
popularity. Once there, Kermit is quickly framed, captured, and returned to the
Russian gulag Constantin hailed from.
And here’s where things went a bit off
the rails for me. For starters, they show Kermit being wheeled into the gulag Hannibal Lecter-style down
the long hallway to his cell. That was a really disturbing image. Granted, I
think it disturbed me more than it did my daughters, but that’s because my
emotional investment in Kermit is much stronger than theirs. There are certain
things you just don’t do to Kermit, and one of them is to treat him like a brutal
serial murderer so you can reap a cheap movie parody laugh. It’s wrong, and I
didn’t like it. So there.
But much worse than that was the portrayal of the gulag in
the film. As we follow Kermit through his ordeal, we see him confronting the
other prisoners, languishing alone in his cell, and trying various manners of
escape, all of them foiled in light-hearted manner by the gulag’s commander
(Tina Fey). We see other prisoners treated even worse. One is locked in an
isolation box in the yard (although one of the funnier surprises in the film
comes when we see just who it is who has been locked away the whole time,
prompting me to remark, “So that’s where he’s been…”). Others are left chained
to a wall in uncomfortable-looking poses. Eventually, Kermit is able to win the
hardened prisoners over, even after they realize he is Kermit the Frog and not
Constantin the arch-criminal. The gulag commander, who secretly adores Kermit, even
puts him in charge of the annual prisoner show.
Now, if you think that ‘gulag’ is just the Russian word for
prison, none of what happens there is likely to bother you much. It’s basically
a Muppet version of Jailhouse Rock, a song-and-dance version of the big-house.
All good, clean fun.
The problem is, the gulag as it existed wasn’t any of these
things.
Here’s a small sampling of what the gulag was:
In what I suspect is a stupendous example
of understatement, the Library of Congress offers the following description of the gulag: “Conditions in the camps were extremely harsh. Prisoners received
inadequate food rations and insufficient clothing, which made it difficult to
endure the severe weather and the long working hours; sometimes the inmates
were physically abused by camp guards.”
Encyclopedia Britannica
offers these tidbits:
“Besides rich or resistant
peasants arrested during collectivization (after the Bolshevik Revolution),
persons sent to the Gulag included purged Communist Party members and military
officers, German and other Axis prisoners of war (during World War II), members
of ethnic groups suspected of disloyalty, Soviet soldiers and other citizens
who had been taken prisoner or used as slave labourers by the Germans during
the war, suspected saboteurs and traitors, dissident intellectuals, ordinary
criminals, and many utterly innocent people who were hapless victims of
Stalin’s purges.”
“Long working hours, harsh
climatic and other working conditions, inadequate food, and summary executions
killed off at least 10 percent of the Gulag’s total prisoner population each year.”(emphasis added)
“Estimates of the total
number of deaths in the Gulag in the period from 1918 to 1956 range from 15 to
30 million.”
A brave man named Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn exposed the true magnitude
of the gulag’s abuses when he published “The Gulag Archipelago,” which
documented the stories of 227 prisoners, as well as his own. Here’s a great, fast
article from Slate written in 2008, just after the death of Solzhenitsyn,
that’s well worth reading. Also, there’s a NewYork Times book review from 1974, when the first two parts of the enormous
project were initially published. Those interested in learning more might want
to check it out. Here’s a quote from that article which summarizes Solzhenitsyn’s
description of what it was like for those targeted for the gulag:
“The reader
follows scores of victims, their biographies effectively generalized, from
arrest to first cell and "interrogation," then onward through transit
prisons, across the vast country in overcrowded, pestilent trains, to the ports
and ships of the Archipelago. It is a journey into debasement and death, into
grotesque torture, execution, rape, starvation, thirst, disease and more.
Reduced to "a caricature of humanity," millions somehow survived the
journey, other millions did not. The journey and book end upon arrival at the
forced labor camps (the gulag). Solzhenitsyn presumably will describe life and
death there in subsequent volumes. Here he remarks only, "In camp it will
be. . . .worse."”
I don’t know about you, but that doesn’t sound like any
plain old prison. It sounds a bit like what was going on just on the German
side of the Russian border during the 1930’s and 40’s. I’m not suggesting
they’re exact equivalents, but I wonder what the audience’s reaction would have
been if Kermit had been sent to a concentration camp instead of the gulag.
What, because it’s in Russia
that somehow makes it funny? I don’t think so.
At the theater where we saw the movie, one gentleman got up
and left the auditorium just after the scene where Kermit is repeatedly caught
trying to escape the gulag. This person exited to the parking lot, not the
lobby. Perhaps it had nothing at all to do with the scene, maybe the guy just
felt a sudden and overwhelming need to drive. But could you blame someone for
being upset at the movie’s depiction of the gulag if, let’s say, one of their
relatives or ancestors had experienced the real thing? I know I couldn’t. Even
before the man left, I was already feeling pretty uncomfortable about seeing the gulag treated in such a offhanded and tone-deaf manner.
The gulag system went extinct around 1960, so in Muppets Most Wanted we are most likely talking
about the Russian equivalent of a prison. But the Russians didn’t refer to the
gulag as the gulag, and as far I can tell, they don’t refer to their current
prisons as the gulag either. So why did the movie feel it necessary to characterize
it that way? It gives a distorted sense of history, doesn’t it, to call what
was seen in the film a gulag? Don’t get me wrong; I’m not counting on the
Muppets to teach history to my kids, or anyone else’s, but I have to say I’m
disappointed that they didn’t have the sense or sensitivity to avoid this kind
of mistake. Getting back to WWJD?, I don’t
think I’m going out on any limbs when I say it’s the kind of mistake we’d never
see Mr. Henson make.
For that reason, Muppets Most Wanted deserves to have a penalty called
on it.
This is a bit late to the party but just wanted to say I googled immediately after finishing to see if anyone else felt extremely uncomfortable about the "ha ha wacky gulag humor!" ongoing theme. I didn't like the movie overall, but that was the thing that stuck like a sore thumb among other stuff that was just "meh". As I said in my own review, you might as well throw Fey and Kermit into a concentration camp and have them do an upbeat trio number with Anne Frank. It was SO confusing, wondering why this, of all things, is what they chose to go with out of the countless ways they COULD have gotten Kermit out of the way for most of the movie.
ReplyDeleteHi Anonymous-
ReplyDeleteSorry it took so long to post your comment. I'm right there with you. 'Upbeat trio number with Anne Frank,' exactly (loved that, by the way). Somewhere in Hollywood, there's a writer smacking his or her respective head and saying, "Geez, why didn't I think of that?" Tone-deaf, thoughtless, and sloppy. Three things that did not typify Jim Henson's work, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, nice to know there's someone else out there who shares my sentiments on the matter. Thanks for chiming in.