Land of the Lost Review

Land of the Lost Review
Langdon Auger

Tonight Horace and I attended a sneak preview of the new Will Ferrell movie Land of the Lost. Despite unfinished special effects and soundtrack this movie was quite entertaining. Will Ferrell is able to do his shtick and this time he is joined by relative newcomer Danny McBride. (If you haven't seen his debut film The Footfist Way, rent it.)

Together the two bring a bit of fun to a horrible, fan-boy-infested show. There is something having to do with Sleestaks and some chimp thing named Chaka that gets old fast, but before you know it, Ferrell is running around in his underwear and having a good time. But I'm not quite sure what sport he was trying to spoof in this movie.

This was the first time I participated in a sneak preview where they take reviews. Horace and I were asked to stay behind and have a discussion of the film with about twenty other people. I follow films in production as a hobby and I know that this is the part where good movies get turned mediocre, so it was a little exciting to be there for it.

Sure enough they start asking questions and people start saying the best scenes were their least favorite. For instance, there was one scene where Anna Friel's character is misinterpreting Chaka's ape language and says he was expelled from his tribe for raping an apple. Turns out that wasn't the correct interpretation.

A girl at the screening says they shouldn't be making jokes like that in a movie and that rape is not something to be made fun of. First of all, as if it needed to be said, rape is absolutely wrong. Second of all, but he didn't actually rape anything. Third, it's funny scene because it is a rape of an apple. This is a victimless crime if i ever saw one. I doubt that the apple was really capable of resisting in the first place, or feeling one way or the other about the whole ordeal. And as for the blanket statement that something shouldn't be made fun of, well:

"I can prove to you rape is funny. Picture Porky Pig raping Elmer Fudd."- George Carlin

Then another woman chimed in and said how she shows the original television series to her fourth grade class and doesn't feel comfortable having them come to a movie with so much swearing and sexual innuendo.

Let's get something straight: kids are idiots and parents are panicky stupid morons (see Horace's post on a scary Duracell commercial). This is the reason why cool toys are taken off the shelf when some dope chokes himself. This is the reason we have zero tolerance policies in school that result in the valedictorian not graduating on time because of an aspirin in her purse. And finally (and most importantly) this is the reason we got rid of the dark Tim Burton Batmans and had to endure the cinematic fiasco of Joel Schumacher's technicolor cape and cowl. But Warner Brothers smarted up, told the four year olds and parents to go screw, put Christopher Nolan in charge, and made a Batman movie that was worth seeing.

But I digress. To be in a screening where this issue comes up was astonishing because I have seen so many movies with great potential crippled by an insistence on PG-13 ratings and family friendly fare. It would be so much better to make a more risky movie with sharp humor. The film will be more honest and true, and whatever box office you lose out on because of the children you will make up for in rentals when those kids get old enough to rent the movie on their own. Why is it that so many people still watch Animal House? Because they made their jokes and didn't apologize for it. Not that Land of the Lost is as good as Animal House, I'm just using it as an example.

But movie execs don't think this way, so i am dreading seeing the final product when it comes out on June 5th. Will it have the adult humor or will it be a bland, neutered piece designed to appeal to the largest and least specific market possible? I'm afraid I know the answer already.

-LA