Category: humor

We rented an old favorite from Netflix the other day: Bugsy Malone, a canonical Chicago gangland story with some great musical numbers and one big twist: no performer in the film is over the age of 12. Instead of knives, rival mobsters eliminate each other with a pie in the face. Instead of bullets, the tommy guns fire creampuffs.

After watching it, I grew curious about the kids who starred in it. Where are they now? I went to the Internet Movie Database to look them up one by one.

To my surprise, nearly all of the cast had zero, one, or two additional film credits after Bugsy Malone, and that’s all. Scott Baio played the title role, and he of course enjoyed a steady trickle of fame for a while in the 70’s. Other than that, no one appears to have emerged from Bugsy Malone with any sort of acting career intact…

…except for four-time Oscar nominee (and two-time winner) Jodie Foster.

Jodie Foster is a huge star. Her Bugsy Malone co-stars are shriveled husks. Coincidence — or did she have something to do with the premature depletion of their careers? Has her fame been nourished by (what should rightly have been) theirs? Some of the kids in that movie were quite good, a fact that couldn’t have escaped young Foster’s notice. Did she gorge herself on their star potential and make it her own? We report, you decide.

(Incidentally, there is a new Coca-Cola ad [I saw it in the movie theater before the very-good-but-not-as-great-as-they’re-saying Children of Men] that uses the finale from Bugsy Malone as its jingle — “You give a little love and it all comes back to you, la la la la la la la.”)

Thanks to Netflix, I saw Superman Returns a few days ago. (It was pretty good, but I had some problems with it. Maybe in another blog post.) In the story, Superman has been absent from Earth for some years; the “Returns” in the title refers to the fact that he’s back.

This made me think of 1992’s Batman Returns. What “returns” in that movie? Nothing; Batman hasn’t been away since the events in 1989’s Batman. On the contrary, in that title, “Returns” refers to the fact that it’s been three years for the audience since the last Batman movie. Batman “returns” to moviegoers. (Or perhaps, more cynically, Batman provides “returns” on the studio’s investment. Hard to be too cynical about the studio [Warner Brothers] and the franchise that famously required director Joel Schumacher to make Batman & Robin “more toyetic.”)

It’s an annoying case of breaking the fourth wall with the film’s title — a trend begun, ironically, with 1978’s Superman: The Movie, closely followed by Star Trek: The Motion Picture in 1979. Hey — we know they’re movies. (Or, excuse me, motion pictures, as the case may be.) Tell me what happens in the movie. Fight Club, 12 Angry Men, Run Lola Run, those are movie titles. In a movie called Superman: The Movie, I’d expect to see Superman busting film-industry crooks on a studio backlot in Tinseltown.

The Batman and Star Trek franchises continued offending with Batman Forever (which can be interpreted no other way than as the producers thumping their chests in an “I’m king of the world!” moment) and Star Trek: The Next Generation (“next” after what? after the last time you folks watched a Star Trek TV show, that’s what). I’ve always found it strange that none of the gatekeepers of pop culture ever raised aesthetic objections to badly chosen titles like these (until now, of course, if we can agree to call me “gatekeeper”), whose conflation of the real and imaginary threatens to take the viewer out of the fictional world even before they step in.

I was pleased to see that the [Superhero] Returns title template has been redeemed by having “Returns” refer to events in the story. Maybe now we can work on redeeming …The Next Generation by having the story be about the actual children of characters from a prior story. Ugh, maybe not.