Lidded cup and saucer, India, c. mid-17th century, fabricated from gold withchamplevé and painted enamels, courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Atharal-Islamiyyah, KuwaitPhoto courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait
Emerald inscribed with the Throne Verse from the Qur’an (II:255), India, 17thcentury, emerald, courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Atharal-Islamiyyah, KuwaitPhoto courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait
Gary TinterowPhoto by F. Carter Smith
Gold mohur (coin), India, struck 1639, courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Daral-Athar al-Islamiyyah, KuwaitPhoto courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait
Pair of vases, Afghanistan, 12th century, bronze, silver and copper, courtesy ofThe al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, KuwaitPhoto courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait
Inkstand,. India, c. mid-17th century, carved from nephrite jade, inlaid withgold and set with rubies and emeralds, courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Daral-Athar al-Islamiyyah, KuwaitPhoto courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait
Folio from a Qur’an manuscript, Afghanistan, 9th-10th century, ink, colors andgold on vellum, courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah,KuwaitPhoto courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait
Folio depicting a water clock from the treatise of automata Kitab fi Ma’rifatal-Hiyal al-Handasiya (The Book of Knowledge of Ingenious Mechanical Devices) byBadi’ al-Saman ibn al-Razzaz al-Jazari, Syria, dated Ramadan 715 AH/December1315, ink, colors and gold on paper, courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Daral-Athar al-Islamiyyah, KuwaitPhoto courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait
Turban ornament, India, second half 17th century, fabricated in gold withchamplevé and over-painted enamels set with emeralds and diamonds, courtesy ofThe al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, KuwaitPhoto courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait
Candlestick, Egypt, 14th century, brass inlaid with silver, courtesy of Theal-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, KuwaitPhoto courtesy of The al-Sabah Collection, Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyyah, Kuwait
news/entertainment
Photo by Matt Grace
Jack Black and Paul Rudd in Anaconda.
In Hollywood’s never-ending quest to take advantage of existing intellectual property, seemingly no older movie is off limits, even if the original was not well-regarded. That’s certainly the case with 1997’s Anaconda, which is best known for being a lesser entry on the filmography of Ice Cube and Jennifer Lopez, as well as some horrendous accent work by Jon Voight.
The idea behind the new meta-sequel Anaconda is arguably a good one. Four friends — Doug (Jack Black), Griff (Paul Rudd), Claire (Thandiwe Newton), and Kenny (Steve Zahn) — who made homemade movies when they were teenagers decide to remake Anaconda on a shoestring budget. Egged on by Griff, an actor who can’t catch a break, the four of them pull together enough money to fly down to Brazil, hire a boat, and film a script written by Doug.
Naturally, almost nothing goes as planned in the Amazon, including losing their trained snake and running headlong into a criminal enterprise. Soon enough, everything else takes second place to the presence of a giant anaconda that is stalking them and anyone else who crosses its path.
Written and directed by Tom Gormican, with help from co-writer Kevin Etten, the film is designed to be an outrageous comedy peppered with laugh-out-loud moments that cover up the fact that there’s really no story. That would be all well and good … if anything the film had to offer was truly funny. Only a few scenes elicit any honest laughter, and so instead the audience is fed half-baked jokes, a story with no focus, and actors who ham it up to get any kind of reaction.
The biggest problem is that the meta-ness of the film goes too far. None of the core four characters possess any interesting traits, and their blandness is transferred over to the actors playing them. And so even as they face some harrowing situations or ones that could be funny, it’s difficult to care about anything they do since the filmmakers never make the basic effort of making the audience care about them.
It’s weird to say in a movie called Anaconda, but it becomes much too focused on the snake in the second half of the film. If the goal is to be a straight-up comedy, then everything up to and including the snake attacks should be serving that objective. But most of the time the attacks are either random or moments when the characters are already scared, and so any humor that could be mined all but disappears.
Black and Rudd are comedy all-stars who can typically be counted on to elevate even subpar material. That’s not the case here, as each only scores on a few occasions, with Black’s physicality being the funniest thing in the movie. Newton is not a good fit with this type of movie, and she isn’t done any favors by some seriously bad wigs. Zahn used to be the go-to guy for funny sidekicks, but he brings little to the table in this role.
Any attempt at rebooting/remaking an old piece of IP should make a concerted effort to differentiate itself from the original, and in that way, the new Anaconda succeeds. Unfortunately, that’s its only success, as the filmmakers can never find the right balance to turn it into the bawdy comedy they seemed to want.
---
Anaconda is now playing in theaters.
news/entertainment
Loading...