• Literally Anything: Movies
  • Film Index
  • The Criterion Collection
  • Collections
  • Academy Award Nominees
  • Notes and Links
  • About
  LITERALLY ANYTHING: MOVIES

Updates

Spies in Disguise (2019)

10/5/2020

Comments

 
Picture
Rated PG.  Now, I'm all for the PG rating.  After all, it is an action oriented kids' movie.  But I almost want to aggressively fight for the G rating on this one.  If anything, the movie has a strong nonviolent stance in it, which as the family's pacifist, I kind of ABSOLUTELY DUG!  But there are scaryish bad guys.  There are moments of intense peril, so I'm not going to get all in arms about a G rating in the fact of bigger evils.  Regardless, it is a PG film that can be enjoyed with the family.

DIRECTORS: Nick Bruno and Tony Quane

Dear Lord, grant me the willpower and Internet to get through a blog about Spies in Disguise, a perfectly fine movie that probably deserves more attention than I'm willing to give it at the end of a long work day.  It's one of those movies that just doesn't get you excited to write.  Really, most of the movies that my kids pick for family movie night fit that description.  But if I only wrote about movies that excited me to write, I wouldn't have any kind of challenge or obligation to write.  So here goes...

I don't know why I was low-key excited to watch this movie on HBO Max.  I really don't.  I remember seeing the trailer and thought, "What an absurd concept."  I mean, seeing that this film had both Will Smith and Tom Holland was even more confusing.  Part of me wonders if Will Smith plays the game so hard that he doesn't really get passionate about any of his film choices anymore.  (Again, I'm sorry to Mr. Smith.  I don't know you, sir.  I can just reflect on the fact that I see safer choices down the line.)  On the other end is Tom Holland, who is probably just looking for non Peter Parker roles. I mean, the movie ended up being pretty charming.  I can't complain one single bit about the quality of the movie because it did exactly what it was supposed to do.  It was meant to be an entertaining kids movie that grabs attention all the way through.  It safely did that and I'm pretty happy with it.

But can I preach for a moment?  After all, I abandoned any hope of hiding my personal politics while writing my daily blog.  After all, this is my own private hideaway on the Internet.  I adore how this movie is an open-booked film advocating pacifism.  It wasn't the pigeon thing that threw me when I saw the preview.  It was the lazy James Bond knock off stuff that turned me off from the movie initially.  Lance, walking around in his tuxedo, regardless of contextual situation, just felt like a spy's uniform is the tuxedo.  He was using lasers and kung-fu against spy-fi villains and I think I'm just a little tired of it all.  It's kind of like taking a shot at Star Wars.  We get that Star Wars and James Bond are both cultural touchstones and people like poking at the conventions contained within. (Not like a sci-fi convention where you can buy bootleg DVDs, but the other kind.) The action spy genre is so much more than James Bond.  James Bond is more than gadgets and tuxedos.   But the movie started off with a stylized opening credit sequence that made me happy and then Tom Holland talks a lot about how violence isn't the answer.

While it is absurd to try to tell an action spy story without violence, the movie also has the protagonist turn into a pigeon for the majority of the film.  The even concept of formula playing an active part in this movie is absurd.  So with that in mind, the James Bond background kind of works.  Yeah, it's lazy.  But the laziness serves another function.  Because Bond has been spoofed so many times, what the result is involves a kind of shorthand to the universe.  The "Death for Breakfast" attitude that Bond style movies have had on hand allows the movie to critique if the violence of Bond and his ilk is doing more good for the world or creating the very monsters that they hope to destroy.  Walter places the role of the Quartermaster in a place of responsibility.  Choosing to build weapons that are non-lethal is an overt statement about the nature of violence, and, with a meta-textual element involved, a commentary on the nature of children's access to violence.

Because the movie isn't boring.  At no time does it get boring.  A bit easy and lazy, sure.  But the movie still provides thrills and action without having these characters kill the bad guys.  But is that enough?  Like, I'm going to preach how much I like the counter-culture message of the film.  But really, Walter's weapons incapacitate in ways that are more effective than lethal weaponry.   The real world probably doesn't work like that.  As much as Walter preaches of a better world with his lovable goofballs experiments, these weapons are the world of spy-fi.  It actually makes everyone else come across as a huge bully.  Walter's weapons definitely work better than a traditional gun or a grenade, so why wouldn't people use them?  It's not like spies are itching to kill folks.  They are there to take out threats.  Heck, while I'm not exactly a spy or something (EXACTLY WHAT A SPY WOULD SAY!), I'm sure that capturing enemy hostiles alive would be an asset.  There's interrogation.  There's the moral high ground.  There are just a lot of wins doing it Walter's way.  Why would Lance disregard these options when they are so darned effective?  

Part of what this world offers is a wealth of pride.  Lance is this character who does the right thing, not because it belongs to the objective good.  Instead, his ego is inflated with every mission he completes.  He is a James Bond fan who just happens to be James Bond.  He knows how Lance should do things.  So when Lance does things the way that they are supposed to be done, there's a mental dopamine celebration that gets him jazzed.  (This is all kind of going some place...I think.)  So when Walter's weapon creates adorable kittens, it's not that it is actually more effective than a grenade.  It's just that he knows that James Bond wouldn't do things that way.  I'm actually kind of surprised that the film didn't even drop the name James Bond because Lance almost seems self-aware of what character he is parodying.

I don't quite get the pigeon thing.  Like, it's very funny and I enjoy a lot of the jokes involving the pigeon.  But...why?  There's some kind of disconnect.  The central conceit of the film, Will Smith being turned into a pigeon, doesn't really have a message.  I mean, we get the buddy comedy of the over-the-top expert in his field coupled with a naive nerd thing that we've dealt with a dozen times.  The pigeon thing makes him dependent.  But my specific question is...why the pigeon?  Do pigeons make people laugh or something?  It's just so specific and I can't really tell why things are the way they are.  Maybe the artist was just good at rendering pigeons, so they adapted a movie out of this.  (Oh that's right.  This full length feature film is adapted from a short, I believe, named "Pigeon: Impossible,"  which is a way better name for this movie that probably opened the door to a lawsuit from Tom Cruise.)

But the movie is fine.  I love that it is about nonviolence and solving problems other ways, even if it does so in the laziest fashion ever.  It's entertaining for a kids movie, even if it doesn't offer as much substance as I would have liked.
Comments

    Film is great.  It can challenge us.   It can entertain us.  It can puzzle us.  It can awaken us.  

    It can often do all these things at the same time.  

    I encourage all you students of film to challenge themselves with this film blog.  Watch stuff outside your comfort zone.  Go beyond what looks cool or what is easy to swallow.  Expand your horizons and move beyond your gut reactions.  

    We live in an era where we can watch any movie we want in the comfort of our homes.  Take advantage of that and explore.

    Author

    Mr. H has watched an upsetting amount of movies.  They bring him a level of joy that few things have achieved.

    Archives

    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly
  • Literally Anything: Movies
  • Film Index
  • The Criterion Collection
  • Collections
  • Academy Award Nominees
  • Notes and Links
  • About