Sunday, May 25, 2008

Seventy Thirty?

DAMNIT. LOOKS LIKE The New York Times giveth and taketh away, depending on your perspective. There's a piece on the new Adam Sandler film, You Don't Mess With the Zohan. When I started reading the article, I think it's fair to suggest that I had less than zero intentions of seeing the film. But Damn you, Dave Izkoff. It actually sounds interesting. Some excerpts:

About eight years ago Mr. Sandler conceived of the Zohan character, an Israeli assassin who has been trained to hate and kill Arabs; exhausted by the ceaseless bloodshed, he fakes his own death and flees to New York to become a hairdresser. There he finds Jews and Arabs living together in grudging if not quite harmonious tolerance.

At the time, Mr. Sandler (who rarely if ever gives interviews to the print news media) delegated the script to Mr. Smigel, who had frequently written for him on “Saturday Night Live,” and Judd Apatow, a former roommate of Mr. Sandler’s, who was not yet the one-man comedy juggernaut of “Knocked Up” and “40-Year-Old Virgin” fame.

Both writers found “Zohan” a subversive, somewhat improbable assignment. “There was always this question of, can you make this movie?” Mr. Apatow said in a phone interview. “Because it is making fun of the fact that people are so mad at each other.”


In revisions of “Zohan,” the Mideast nations cited in the script were given fictitious names, and their ancient territorial feud became a dispute over orange groves.

However, Mr. Sandler and his team ultimately returned to a draft that did not disguise the political subject matter, believing that some filmgoers would be upset by it no matter how subtle their approach.

“Any time you do any version of comedy that has anything to do with race or prejudice, you’re always going to make some people mad,” Mr. Smigel said. “Whether your intention is pure or not, they’re going to find something to be angry about.”

To the extent that “Zohan” deals with the intractable cycle of violence in the Middle East, it is careful not to take sides, and mocks itself for making such perilous source material a subject for comedy. In the midst of elaborate fight sequences, its characters debate the region’s complex history of aggression and retribution, even as they continue to act it out. (“I’m just saying, it’s not so cut and dried!” an assailant shouts as he falls off a balcony.)

The movie does not dare to suggest solutions to these conflicts, or to offer false hope that they will soon be resolved: in one scene, three Arab New Yorkers attempting to take down Zohan call the “Hezbollah Phone Line” for instructions on how to make a bomb. In a recorded message, they are told the information is not currently available during peace talks with Israel, and are instructed to call back “as soon as negotiations break down.”


Even in satirical discussions of race and ethnicity, Mr. Smigel said, a certain amount of self-censorship might be prudent. “I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing that people can’t freely call me a dirty Jew, like they might have been able to 30 years ago,” he said.

For now, advocacy groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations are taking a wait-and-see attitude with “Zohan.” Given Mr. Sandler’s previous work, “I would say I’m a little worried,” said Ahmed Rehab, that organization’s national strategic communications director. He added that Mr. Sandler, like all artists, has a right to freedom of expression.

Mr. Badreya, who was recently seen playing an Afghan terrorist in “Iron Man,” said that by offering Arab or Muslim characters that are in any way divergent from the usual Hollywood stereotypes, “Zohan” is a step in the right direction.

“The movie presents what happened to me,” said Mr. Badreya, who grew up in Port Said, Egypt, during the 1967 and 1973 wars and emigrated to the United States in 1979. “Since it happened to me, it will work for someone like me.”

Mr. Badreya said that the comedy in “Zohan” was not quite evenly divided between ridiculing Arabs and ridiculing Jews. “The jokes are not 50-50,” he said. “It’s 70-30. Which is great. We haven’t had 30 for a long time. We’ve been getting zero. So it’s good.”

4 comments:

jimhenshaw said...

The screening of "Iron Man" I saw this week was preceded by trailers for Mike Myers' "The Love Guru" which threatens to be a painful viewing experience and "Zohan' which had the audience in stitches.

It was interesting that while both traded in ethnic stereotypes, "Zohan" obviously had much more to offer (in addition to the possibility of some laughter).

Dwight Williams said...

Jim: Our reactions to those two trailers are, I think, in agreement.

(On a superhero sidebar, the group I went to see Iron Man with got to see the Hulk and Dark Knight trailers as well. Not a total waste of time by any means...)

Steve Schnier said...

I agree. Judging from the trailers, "The Love Guru" appears to be purely situational comedy, while "Zohan" is more character driven.

I dunno about The Hulk, but Dark Knight rocks.

Unknown said...

They all pale in significance to the horror that is the Beverly Hills Chihuahua trailer. *shudder*

In all seriousness, though, I did go into the Zohan one going "ack, Adam Sandler back to broad comedy," and then kept getting pulled into it and thinking "Wow, that actually seems funny."

I almost never see a comedy in the cinema, because I need to be able to bail if something that exists to be funny isn't. But I would not have expected something with this description to look like something I would actually give a shot when it wanders onto my TV.