“Tammy” is an uneven film that still manages to deliver the best of McCarthy.

If there was ever any doubt that women could be genuinely funny, Melissa McCarthy’s past few films have proven them wrong. With films like “Bridesmaids”, “The Heat” and “The Identity Thief”, she has managed to carve out a niche in comedy that blends her hilarious quirkiness with a genuine pathos and depth.

In her latest film, “Tammy”, McCarthy teams up as a writer with her husband Ben Falcone directing the film. I wasn’t entirely sure what to expect from this film, as the trailers did not really give much information on the plot, relying instead on McCarthy’s current popularity to drum up interest. This was not the best marketing decision on their part. The film is less of a mainstream comedy like “Bridesmaids” was, and more of an independent road trip film which is only one of the problems with it.

Don’t get me wrong, it is a funny and enjoyable film but only if you look at it in pieces like a series of vignettes rather than as a whole. The film seems to have a bit of an identity crises as well as some pacing issues. The cast however, more than make up for the problems with the film causing it to be another win for McCarthy, though definitely not her best work to date.

The film’s plot is standard road trip fare. McCarthy plays the titular character, Tammy, a woman who has her life fall apart in the space of a day with her car hitting a deer, which leads to her losing her crappy fast food job and arriving home early only to find her husband cheating on her with the neighbour. She decides to leave town to try to start over, but is unable to do so as her mother (who lives down the street) refuses to lend her the car. The only vehicle available to Tammy belongs to her grandmother (played expertly by Susan Sarandon) – an unstable drunk who demands to go with her as payment for use of the car.

What starts out as a humorous road trip, quickly devolves into something a bit darker –less of a slapstick comedy and more of a black dramedy. This wouldn’t be a problem if the film makers had just picked one and stuck with it, unfortunately the constant back and forth causes the film to feel unfocused. Despite this however, the film remains most entertaining when McCarthy and Sarandon are able to just be real, rather than cartoon caricatures of themselves.

The Good:

1. Melissa McCarthy. She is brilliant, both as a comedian and a dramatic actress. She is at her best when she is allowing her vulnerability to show through. Don’t get me wrong, there are moments of laugh out loud hilarity. The opening scene where she is fired is the perfect embodiment of the fantasy we have all had of telling him off, throwing condiments and generally just having a tantrum. However, it is not here where she is at her best. The more her character suffers, the more we see a real person underneath. She has a brilliant way of making her protagonists come to life with real quirks, real fears, and genuine humanity. She is the perfect embodiment of the every woman – with real insecurities and real weaknesses. Despite this, she projects strength of character, purpose and genuine likability.
2. Susan Sarandon. She is always brilliant, but here she manages to give an almost perfect performance. Again the film itself may be uneven, but the reality of Sarandon’s character never changes. We start off thinking she is funny. She is the trash talking, hard drinking, crazy living grandmother and it seems like she would be a blast to party with. However, it isn’t long before we see that she is in fact an alcoholic and her actions, while amusing, are also incredibly cruel and hurtful. Sarandon has this way of making her character come off as funny and also incredibly awful. She genuinely cares for her granddaughter, but is unable to remove herself from her own toxicity. If the film had simply been a black dramedy it is the scenes between her and McCarthy that were the most touching and the most effective.
3. The lighting and framing of the shots. The film’s visuals are very well done. It feels more like a documentary than a fictional story which is what they were going for. We are literally following these characters on this road trip, rather than feeling like a fictionalized perfect Hollywood adventure.
4.  The romance between Tammy and Bobby (Mark Duplass). It starts out as a joke played for laughs when Tammy comes on to him in the bar, and indeed Melissa McCarthy has frequently made jokes about her own physical appearance in other films. She knows she is not a Hollywood starlet by the conventional standards and most of her roles are very self deprecating in that respect. It’s almost as if she knows that critics and others might make fun of her looks so she does it first. The scene between her and the US Air marshal in “Bridesmaids” is proof of that, as is the scenes in “The Heat” when she constantly runs into old lovers who have been jilted by her character. The scenes between her and Bobby start out much the same way in this film as well, however over the course of the storyline a real connection is able to develop and they genuinely begin to see one another for who they are. It is an extremely touching story and the ending at Niagara Falls will truly make you smile.
5. The darker parts of the storyline. When the film is not following the slapstick silliness we saw in the trailer (Tammy knocking over a Topper Jacks, for example), the film has something genuinely unique to offer. It’s touching when it is at its darkest moments. The moments between Tammy and her grandmother are interesting when they are being the most real and the most raw.

 

The Bad:

1. The pacing. This ties into the uneven feeling of the overall film, but there are some scenes that feel like they go on far too long, or the content of them just takes you out of the story itself. There are various scenes in the film which either drag on or just don’t fit the tone of the film, and that is never quite addressed.
2. The scene at the beginning where she discovers her husband with the neighbour. It is unclear whether they were going for slapstick comedy or something with more depth, but neither one quite works. The scene drags on far too long, and the characters don’t really seem to gel at all. The whole thing feels off and one cannot help but wait for it to end. It feels like there is something missing with that entire plot that is never quite addressed. Tammy’s character never seems to quite fit with the life she supposedly had, and since the husband barely speaks two words throughout the entire film, it’s difficult for the viewers to see it as real. At the end of the day it is obvious that the subplot of her marriage breaking up is meant purely as a plot device meant to compel the narrative which only ends up doing it a disservice.
3. The casting of Tammy’s mother and her involvement in the film. The first problem is with their ages. Susan Sarandon is 68 years old, and Allison Janney is 55. Melissa McCarthy is 44 years old. Doing the math on that, Sarandon’s character Pearl would have had to have been 13 years old when she had Tammy’s mother, and Tammy’s mother would have had to have been 11 years old when she had Tammy. That means there is a total of 24 years between McCarthy and Sarandon. Unfortunately the lack of difference in their ages is obvious and causes a real problem with believability. It also seems like one relative too many in the film, since her mother doesn’t really have any real purpose within the narrative. It would have worked far better if Sarandon had been her mother instead of her grandmother, as it would have allowed the family dynamic to really settle in as well as cause the ages of the characters to appear more realistic.
4. The wacky slapstick humour. While perfect in her other films, this one never seems to be sure of what it wants to be and therefore never really appears to fit properly. It’s disappointing because McCarthy is hilarious when she wants to be, but the tone of the film is at odds this time with the brand of comedy she is used to.

 

Overall, the film was enjoyable despite its flaws. It was still miles away better than a lot of the schlock that is in theatres right now and extremely refreshing to see McCarthy consistently playing female leads with genuine substance. I am glad to see her paving the way for more films of this kind.

“The Heat” is quite simply, one hilarious movie.

If there is one name that brings in money at the box office right now, it’s Melissa McCarthy. Although she has been on the comedy scene for a while now (she was fantastic in Gilmore Girls), it’s only been in the last couple of years that she has really started to make a comedic splash.

I have been looking forward to this film in particular, ever since I saw the first trailer for it – so much so, that I was worried I would be seriously disappointed. After all, so many other films often fail to live up to promising trailers. It happens all the time, right? Most of the time we sigh, grumble at the loss of our $11.50 and move on. This film, however, carried more expectations with it, in my mind for many reasons, the main being that it was attempting something rarely seen in film – a female buddy cop movie.

We have seen women play cops before. But there is usually a male counterpart – a partner, or a romantic interest to balance it out and do the “heavy lifting”. Not so, with “The Heat”. This is a buddy cop film courtesy of Paul Feig who struck comedy gold with “Bridesmaids” and proved to naysayers everywhere that an all female cast CAN be funny.

He definitely didn’t have anything to prove on his second outing, and I think that took some of the pressure off. This was quite honestly one of the funniest films I have seen in a long time. It was funny because it was funny, and that was what I was hoping for. Not funny because it was a ‘female’ buddy cop film, but funny simply because it was good comedy.

And yet it DID break down gender barriers, so it is hard to ignore the feminist aspect of this film and what it can do for future films.

Yes, there are female action heroes out there, but the bulk of them are still men. Most action films involve a male hero, who does all the work, fights the battles, cracks the jokes and saves the woman. Yes, some of the females of these films might have more to do than they used to (most of them are scientists, or hold some other intellectual position) so they do help out in some way, but they still have a particular “position” within these films and conform to certain gender expectations.

These women are generally held as a “reward” for the male action hero, who after saving the day, gets to have them romantically. Very rarely does a woman have a place in an action film other than to be someone’s romantic interest.

This is one of the reasons I adored this film. Aside from a brief flirtation with a fellow FBI agent, there is zero romance in this film, and neither of the characters’ goals or aspirations are tied into being someone’s ‘trophy’.

The plot of the film is simple, and buddy-cop formulaic. An uptight by-the-book FBI agent played expertly by Sandra Bullock is forced to pair up with a brassy, foul mouthed slightly insane Boston Cop played by Melissa McCarthy to take down a drug kingpin.

Given all the praise I am giving the film, one would think it was without flaws. Not true. I will break down the flaws as well as the positive aspects of the film as per usual. So here goes:

The Good:

1.      Melissa McCarthy and Sandra Bullock. I have seen a lot of criticism claiming that their performances were clichéd and that they had played these characters before, so it was nothing new. And to that, I agree. Sandra Bullock has done the uptight cop before, and Melissa McCarthy has done several films as some kind of foul mouthed character or another. In that sense, this wasn’t ANYTHING new. However, I don’t see that as a bad thing. Why? Because this is what they are GOOD at. Sandra Bullock is fantastic at this type of comedy, as is McCarthy. I have seen some critics suggest that they should have switched roles, but that seems bizarre to me. If you are good at something, then why would you mess with that? Many actors make their careers on portraying certain types of characters in film, and it works for them. I personally loved their performances. McCarthy nailed that combination of foul-but-funny-with-a-touch-of-vulnerability that she does so well, and Bullock was hilarious at being arrogant, but awkward as FBI agent Sarah Ashburn.

2.      The fact that the film made people uncomfortable in some places. Again, this is a bit of response to some of the criticisms I have seen, but I find these criticisms to be very telling. The first kind of criticism I have seen has been people who have felt that McCarthy’s character was too vulgar and foul mouthed. Several of the reviews I read claimed it was off putting and gratuitous. I found this to be an incredibly frustrating double standard that speaks to these preconceived notions of how women are expected to behave in film. The main “rule”, it seems, is that they are not supposed to behave like men. In film, it is not uncommon to see a male cop have sex with multiple partners, swear a lot, behave insubordinately to his superior officers and beat up on suspects. It is the very essence of the buddy cop formula. It’s expected. Eddy Murphy did it, Mel Gibson, Bruce Willis, the list goes on and on. And yet women are not supposed to behave the same way. Even female cops. Except that in this film, she does. In this film, McCarthy’s character runs into several ex one night stands and treats them with the same contempt that we have often seen men treat their conquests in film. She swears like a sailor, tells her boss he has no balls, and threatens to shoot a suspect’s dick off. Many have shown extreme aversion to her behaviour. Where Eddy Murphy’s liberal use of the ‘f’ word is found funny, McCarthy is called “gratuitous” for the same. While Mel Gibson can get as rough with his suspects as he pleases, we get uncomfortable when a woman threatens or carries out physical violence. Translation: according to society, it is acceptable for men to behave this way, but not women. I find these criticisms to be important, because it allows us to address these issues within society and point out the double standards where we see it. It allows us to examine why we feel uncomfortable with these images and portrayals. Women are so often seen as the nurturers that behaving in these ways can be off putting. I found a good litmus test to figure out whether the behaviour was gratuitous or not, was to ask oneself whether you would think or feel the same way if it were Mel Gibson or Eddy Murphy in the same position. For this film, I found the answer was no.

3.      It was genuinely funny, but the characters felt real. There was just enough written into these women’s characters to make them more than just mere caricatures. Yes, they were tough as nails and equally as suited to the position as their male counterparts, but they were also vulnerable, with real insecurities and connections that drove their actions. McCarthy’s character is a brassy no-nonsense Boston cop, who put her brother in jail in an attempt to keep him from dealing and using drugs. At first she appears to be all mouth and little else, but as the layers are peeled back we see a woman who cares deeply for her (hilariously dysfunctional) family and would do anything to protect them.

4.      This film challenges the stereotypes one by one: Bullock’s character is an incredibly talented FBI agent eager to be promoted, but held back by her apparent “inability to get along with her co-workers”. Once again, with this personality issue we are confronted with another gendered double standard. The ‘loner who doesn’t work well with others’ is an often used action archetype. These men are arrogant. They know how good they are and want others to know it too. The difference between them and her, however, is that it is not seen as a personality flaw. Rather, it is something that makes these men more appealing, not less. When Ashburn goes after the promotion she wants, her boss tells her she might not get it because she is too arrogant and cannot play nice with others. This is a very applicable lesson not only in film, but in real life. Here we are shown that no matter how good a woman is in her field, she must still conform to the ideas of modesty and humility in order to achieve what she wants. The men are allowed to be arrogant and cocky, but on a woman, it’s unbecoming. I believe that Feig intended to make a point on this issue with this film. At the end, Ashburn decides not to subdue her personality in order to do her job.

5.      The bond between the two women is incredibly well done and very affecting. That is generally the purpose in buddy cop films, and sometimes the chemistry works, other times it doesn’t. Bullock and McCarthy have excellent chemistry. The scene in the bar in which they get ridiculously drunk is beyond funny.

The Bad:

1.      The scene in the Dennys diner, in which Bullock’s character attempts to give a choking man an emergency tracheotomy. This entire scene fell incredibly flat for me. I understand the purpose of it. It was meant to be a moment of self realization for Ashburn, showing her that no matter how good she believes she is (and she is), that she is not an expert in everything and allowing her arrogance to rule her, can end up getting others hurt. It was an interesting concept, but the actual scene itself was very poorly done. Ashburn learns that lesson later in the film in a much more poignant way, when her idea of using Mullins’ brother as an informant ends up landing him in a coma. The Dennys scene on the other hand, was not only visually alarming, but poorly paced and even more poorly written.

2.      The scene at the beginning in which Ashburn leads a raid on a house in which she shows up her male colleagues by recovering an enormous stash of drugs and weapons that her co-workers could not find. The scene is meant to showcase how much better she is at her job, and how arrogant and cocky she can be while doing it. This is well enough, and I really don’t mind the fact that she is all of these things. The problem I had with it was how dumb and inept that made her male colleagues out to be, in order to show that juxtaposition. I don’t understand why they could not have managed to showcase how talented she was without making her male co-workers out to appear as if they hadn’t passed the first grade. I found it somewhat of a disservice to both the men and women in the film.

3.      I wanted to see the main characters beat up a bit more at the end. You get a film like “Die Hard”, or “Lethal Weapon” and by the end of the film, there is usually a punch for punch showdown and/or gun fight between the main character and the villain. Usually for dramatic effect,  the hero takes quite a beating. They are usually battered, bloodied and unrecognizable. I don’t know if it is because it would have been uncomfortable for viewers to see Bullock and McCarthy being beat on/shot by the men they were after, but the most we got in the sense of a physical confrontation was Bullock’s character getting stabbed in the leg with an Oyster shucking knife. These women were tough and I would have liked to have seen more of a fight at the end.

All in all, I found this film to be not only incredibly funny, but a breakthrough in terms of women in film. Feig seems to know how to get the very best out of his actresses and I can’t wait to see what kinds of films he makes in the future. This one was AWESOME.