The Great Failure of Adam Sandler

Billy Madison, Happy Gilmore, The Waterboy – Adam Sandler has made a career out of portraying brash but lovable underdogs. In fact, his early box office success was so bankable that it paved the way for his own production company, Happy Madison Productions, in 1999. More than simply earning an extra title card in the credits, the company became a sheltered cinematic playground for Sandler and his friends to freely create without overwhelming studio interference.  

Financially speaking, the gamble paid off big time. Of the 46 features released over the next twenty years, only four of them were unable to turn a significant profit (That’s My Boy, anyone?). Any studio executive worth their pending sexual assault lawsuit claims would kill for a 91% recoup rate. So how does the idea of failure even dare to enter the equation?

Pop quiz time: Can you name a female lead from any Happy Madison Production that was NOT treated like a prize or sexual object?

…

Exactly.

Paul Blart: Mall Cop? Jayma Mays nailed the role of mall kiosk vendor, but could Paul Blart (or the viewer) describe any aspects of her character aside from her being “pretty” or “nice”? 

The Ridiculous 6? Julia Jones is a phenomenal dramatic actress with meaningful roles such as the redemptive farmer in The Mandalorian and pained sentient AI in Westworld, but this stunted flick reduced her character’s entire existence to her sex appeal as Smoking Fox. You can draw your own conclusions for the quality of this role.

Pixels? Michelle Monaghan started the movie as a Lieutenant Colonel in charge of the US military’s weapons’ program, but by the end, she was Sandler’s prize for saving the world. (Not-so-Fun fact: this movie also features Serena Williams and Martha Stewart…as sexual trophies won by Peter Dinklage. And don’t even get me started on the awkwardness of Q*bert!)

Which brings us to 2020’s The Wrong Missy. David Spade plays a stuck-in-a-rut businessman who sees his whole life flipped upside down when he accidentally invites the wrong date to join him on his corporate retreat (the free-spirited Lauren Lapkus). Despite the interesting idea, the entire film drags on like one long cameo conga line of Sandler’s day players only briefly interrupted by stints of unnecessary and uninspired sexual exploitation of the female cast. From uninvited intimacy advice to demanding group sex with an ex-fiancée, there is not a single woman in the entire film that is not juxtaposed with painfully overt sexual dialogue or action. 

How does this happen? Aren’t we living in the era of heightened awareness and representation? Well, yes and no.

While Happy Madison Productions shielded Sandler and friends from studio oversight, it also isolated their creative minds from new ideas and diverse insights. Of their entire catalog of 46 films, do you know how many were written by a woman?

One – The House Bunny featuring Anna Faris (written by Karen McCullah Lutz and Kirsten Smith).

Do you know how many of those 46 title were directed by a woman?

Zero.

That’s right. Because who knows how to capture a female-centric story of rejection and self-discovery better than a man?

Now, don’t get me wrong. I understand that Happy Madison is far more than Mr. Sandler’s influence, but his influence is what makes everything this company does possible. It is in his name that they continue to produce.

And even though Sandler has evolved as an actor, garnering well-earned praise for his turns in Uncut Gems and Reign Over Me, his voice and creativity have remained stagnant – still facilitating the fantasies of immature teenage boys everywhere. In his twenties, it was fun. In his thirties, it was stretching. But in his fifties, it just feels sad and creepy.

So why does it matter what kind of films are created? His films aren’t for everybody so just go watch something else, right?

Well, this environment of objectification impacts far more than what you see at the theater. In 2015, the delightfully witty actress Rose McGowan of Charmed fame was on her way to audition for a role in one of Happy Madison’s productions when she received a brief wardrobe note with her script encouraging her to wear a “form fitting tank top that showed off cleavage (push up bras encouraged). And form fitting leggings or jeans” (McGowan’s Twitter – link below). While it’s not uncommon to make wardrobe requests to aid final casting decisions, keep in mind this was a FIRST READING. McGowan refused to audition, and her agent dropped her. She was labeled “hard to work with” and struggled to find representation for a bit – all for refusing to allow herself to be objectified.

And that’s the great failure of Adam Sandler: what’s on the screen mirrors what’s behind the scenes.

At a certain point, a person’s body of work betrays their true nature. For example, it’s no secret that Alfred Hitchcock preferred blondes to an unhealthy extent both on and off the screen. Yet when his platinum-plumed love interests dared to stand up to the famed director, he took out his frustrations on his casting choices as “his way of creating perfect women whom he could control” (Jeff Saporito, Screen Prism’s The Take). On the other hand, the legendary Cary Grant had it written into his contract that women had to chase him in his films (instead of the man-chasing-woman romantic standard of the day) so that he could seem more desirable to the public. Any surprise that Grant struggled with personal identity, value, and acceptance his whole life?

And finally, the hallmark of an Adam Sandler movie is the objectification and sexualization of women. From Click to Grown Ups, a depressing number of talented actresses have had their human identities reduced to the sum of their curves for the greedy, guilty pleasure of immature boys masquerading as men. As horrendous as this practice is for actresses in the moment, it lastingly degrades femininity for the next generation of filmmakers and audiences.

After nearly thirty years as the brash but lovable underdog, maybe it’s time for Sandler to mature.

 

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/rose-mcgowan-fired-for-calling-out-sexist-adam-sandler-movie-role-2015-6

http://screenprism.com/insights/article/what-does-the-term-hitchcock-blonde-mean-who-were-the-most-famous-and-what

Theme and Character in Star Wars Episode 8 - The Last Jedi (Review)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGSnps72JCM&feature=youtu.be

Imagine Imagination

Hello. My name is Aaron, and my world is film.

During the day, my mild-mannered, film professor self blows the artistic minds of college students; but when the sun goes down, I don my cape of academia yet again, this time as grad student Aaron. Every waking hour (and most sleeping ones too), my brain overflows with visions of Hitchcock vs. Tarantino, Scorsese vs. Spielberg, and Kurosawa vs. Miyazaki.
Now those are some Celebrity Deathmatches to get oddly excited about.

To be fair, burning a candle at both ends is quite a trick.And as soon as I find out how to do it, I'll let you know (Thank you, Groucho Marx).

And there it is: the way my brain works. A stray comment in conversation about butternut squash immediately finds new life as the start to a BAFTA winning indie film. (To Squash a Squash - yes, I'd like to thank the academy ... and farmers everywhere.)

That unbelievably small town we just drove through while searching for a farmer's market? A few moments in my imagination and it's now the setting of a murder mystery so viciously imaginative that even Jack Nicholson would come out of retirement for the leading role.

Even the simple act of walking through a store whose decor whiplashes between Halloween and Christmas sparks tremors of ideas in my lightning rod brain.

It's great to have ideas and, wow, can they come from anywhere; but none of those concepts could have even been introduced to my brain bin had I not been open to them.

Everyone has an imagination when they're born, but somewhere along the way, many people lose it.  Life is a draining experience - bills, family, calling in sick with just the right amount of faked, over-the-phone symptoms to be believable but not cause a panic. Just like it takes work to become good doing things, it also takes planning to stop doing and listen.

 Deep down, we all want to be creative in some small way, but few take the time to listen for it.

Where is your creative voice? What inspires/excites/angers/touches you?

I encourage you to breathe in the midst of your wild life and listen for creativity.

If I'm being honest - and I am - the film world is not always creative. The simple act of spending a large majority of my conscious life studying the good with the bad, the visionaries with the vision-less, weighs on my own creativity. It's hard to breathe when you have deadlines coming out of both ends.

That's why this blog exists - to maintain an outlet for honesty in the face of insanity. To inspire you and myself toward creativity. We can do it.

Now go out there and find your idea. I would take the time to encourage you more, but I just had an idea...

Spider-meh: Homecoming

Hello…again:

Spider-man: Homecoming faced a tough task: How do you make the 3rd reboot in a decade successful? Everyone’s already familiar with the character and his backstory. And if you mention Uncle Ben’s death one more time, you’re venturing dangerously close to Batman territory. Essentially, what do you do when the low hanging fruit’s already been plucked?

At the end of the day, there are two options: carbon copy what worked before or venture deeper into your own unique narrative. Every reboot, remake, sequel, and prequel faces this same dilemma. Whether it’s Ron Burgundy reuniting his news team or the sisterhood sharing a new pair of pants, the bottom line will always be safety versus creativity.

Welcome to the show:

Sony's answer to this riddle was…SHOW ME THE MONEY! They elected to shoehorn Spidey into Marvel’s money factory instead of allowing him to be his own unique personality.

I know, I know – we waited years to see the world famous web-slinger accept an invite to the spandex slumber party. Why rock the Staten Island ferry?

I acknowledge your fury, but here’s the point: studios will always produce films to the level of their audience’s expectations because that’s how they maximize profits. If we are just happy to see our favorite characters on screen and ignore the quality of the story, then we will get low quality movies that collect dust on the shelf.

Expecting more:

Compare that to the movies that inspire us, change us – the ones we truly dive into again and again; those world-changing films are worth more because they HAVE more. And the only way to get more is to EXPECT more.

So how do you construct a worthwhile sequel that progresses your narrative in a positive way? It comes down to three essentials: setup, setting, and character.

Setup:

He’s rubbed shoulders and traded punches with the greatest heroes in the world, but with the battle over just as quickly as it began, how does Peter Parker go back to his oh-so-ordinary life? Who is “everyday Spider-man”?

It’s a pretty solid setup and one of the strongest elements of the entire film. There’s a past, present, and future all built into the very DNA of the story. The audience is on board and invested in what happens next. So, how do we transition to the meat of the story?

Setting:

A good setting subconsciously whispers details to the viewer about a character and their plight. For instance, if a scene opens on a messy bedroom, you know the inhabitant is most likely single and leans toward lazy. Based on what you see, you know what to anticipate. Like when it’s your birthday, you can expect presents and once-a-year, awkward family phone calls.

So, after the introductory setup, where does Spidey spend his time?

Anywhere but NYC.

He bounces from a house party in the burbs, to a warehouse in Maryland, to the incredibly un-New York Washington Monument. Just a reminder, the setup supposedly established that the main theme of this movie is “who is ‘everyday Spider-man.’” On the other hand, the setting suggests that Parker is more jet-setting James Bond than friendly neighborhood Spidey.

Character:

The contradictory paradox folds in on itself yet again when you consider the final foundational element: character.

In short, this was not a Spider-man movie; rather, it was an Iron Man Jr. movie. Not only does he inherit his actual costumed identity from the elder Avenger, but the narrative itself shifts into a rehash of Iron Man 3 – does the suit make the man or the man make the suit? There was nothing truly unique or special connected with the personality of Peter Parker outside of high school awkwardness.

For those of you playing along at home, we are up to 3, that’s right, THREE wildly divergent concepts all vying for the title of main storyline. To be fair, each one of these ideas has the potential to guide a robust story; yet when they are packed into the same feature film, the competing themes tend to muddy the narrative instead of enhance it. The same character that exploded off the screen in Captain America: Civil War now wanders the wastelands of mediocre movies.

So what:

In the end, Sony and Marvel will count their millions as audiences amble on toward the next over-hyped summer blockbuster. The debate between safety and creativity will begin anew. And just in time for Christmas, Spider-man: Homecoming will take its place on DVD shelves and Netflix cues, but it will gather only dust instead of value.

Expect more. Let’s take back art.