Teddy Bears' Picnic (2001) Reviews

• As Much As One Could Expect From Harry Shearer

  RØB2001-12-22

  I was fortunate enough to see this film at one of its world premieres as part of the St. Louis International Film Festival. Unfortunately, Harry Shearer could not come and talk to us about it, as was scheduled, but from what I hear, his make-up Q&A session a few days later was riotous. Naturally, this comes as no surprise. In the fashion of earlier works such as *This Is Spinal Tap,* *Waiting For Guffman,* and *Best In Show* (not all of which had anything to do with Shearer himself, necessarily), the comedy relies heavily upon quirky yet somehow realistic characters in situations to match. Improvisation and satirical exaggeration combined with portrayal of bizarre characters by some unexpected performers and comic pacing that only someone like Shearer could pull off make this one of the better comedies of the year. While I'm unsure of how well-distributed the film will be, all fans of the aforementioned films should make an effort to see it.

• Shearer stumbles with Teddy Bears' Picnic

  VoxMoose2006-01-16

  The normally brilliant Harry Shearer stumbles with Teddy Bears' Picnic. All the components are present for a potentially hilarious and telling mockumentary-style satire on the famous Bohemian Grove, where an odd mix of New World Order power mongers, artists, pseudo intellectuals, and quasi-celebrity mix in a state of misogynistic, sophomoric, and fraternal abandon. An inspired and willing all-star cast combined with dozens of hilarious inside-joke instants, give the piece great scene-by-scene potential. But sadly, the work as a whole simply disintegrates into a surprising state of comic mistiming and sloppy direction. "Surprising" because of the intrinsic talent involved in the project. It seemed to me that this made-for-TV piece was conceived at breakfast and filmed by dinnertime, cobbled together and performed in one take. It is as if we are looking at the "dailies" rather than the final piece. With basically strong comic material, just a little TLC with the plot flow and a more careful tuning of the comic timing (in direction, acting, and editing) could have made this into a real cult classic. Should be remade to pack the real comic punch the material contains.

• disappointing

  tonerbomb2005-10-08

  The vitriol some folks have directed at this one is unwarranted - there are a few good moments - but the movie is certainly less than can be expected, given the quality of the actors and writers involved. The real problem is that (contrary to a key premise of the film) nothing "shocking" happens. Maybe we're all too cynical...but middle-aged and elderly men getting drunk and dancing in drag isn't even mildly disturbing or shocking. Perhaps if more comedy had been drawn from the general's mortification, rather than at being in drag itself, that might have worked better. Oh - and there were prostitutes. Two of them. If I got the impression that these guys were sober enough to actually patronize the prostitutes, I'd feel sorry for the two of them having to service the twenty or so men. But as it was, their role was pretty damned minimal. And again: wealthy powerful men patronize prostitutes? News flash! The political machinations, perhaps, would have been more shocking in 2002 - but after five years of Bush, no amount of corporate looting and law-evading is shocking anymore. Another lost opportunity: one scene features a character making racist remarks about the players on the sports team he owns - even though the bartender, standing right behind him, is African-American. Does the bartender react? Other than a roll of the eyes, no - no sense that any effect will come back to the sports owner, or that the bartender is more than mildly annoyed at the way he's invisible to these guys. Even the real damages these guys caused in the film - such as the forest fire - don't read as dangerous or damaging, because Shearer never gets the tone right so that we both care about these characters (or hate them) and feel any sense of outrage. Essentially, the whole thing just falls flat. Shearer wanted to make a Christopher Guest-like satire/pseudo-documentary. He's a talented actor - but clearly, he's not ready for the big leagues in directing yet. The failures of this film, though, make me appreciate what Guest has accomplished all the more.

• Take a chance - JUST RENT IT!!

  brickbats2004-03-06

  I didn't catch this in the movie theater - I was discouraged by the slam in the SF paper, and it came and went in the blink of an eye - but I was surprised to find it on dvd yesterday, and took a chance. My friends and I are glad I did - it was a hoot!. It seems the movie was heavily edited - some potential subplots fizzled out - but what is left is still a funny, fine satire of the news media, of the B.C.... and anything with Harry Shearer is certainly worth 90 minutes. It won't change your life - but hey, relax, it's a decent movie .... just rent it!

• Stifled giggles

  mackerm2002-04-28

  I found myself consciously suppressing chuckles because several of the early jokes were racial slurs designed to make you cringe, but the movie audience was decidedly multi-ethnic. I bet it fares better on home video where the audience won't be so self-conscious. George Wendt has the juciest role as a general who goes overboard in trying to cover up Zambizi Glen's, and his own, secret. My personal favorites are Howard Hessman's portrayal of a grossly-overqualified theatrical director, and the actress playing the TV news producer. Morgan Fairchild has a very welcome, if small role. I wanted to see this in a theater because it was shot in 480P video. My amateur's eyes couldn't see any difference between this and traditionally filmed movies-- quite surprising because this is lower resolution than even HDTV.