Date: Fri 08-Mar-1996

By Previous Employees

Published: Aug 11, 1999 12:00 am

Publication: Bee

Author: SHANNO

Illustration: C

Location: A-10

Quick Words:

Playing-Father-Bride-Martin

Full Text:

(rev "Father of the Bride Part II" for Now Playing, 3/8/96)

`Father II' Way Too Mushy!

By Trey Paul Alexander III

You can be assured Father of the Bride Part II is not striving for road

scholar status when its pedigree marks it as the sequel of a film which itself

was a remake of a 1950 flick which also featured a follow-up, on which this

movie is loosely based. Did you grasp all that?

Father of the Bride Part II (FOB II) was first shipped during the holiday

season as a feel-good comedy sure to leave all patrons exiting the moviehouse

with a smile. This reviewer is one of the last people to scold a motion

picture for bearing its heart on its sleeve, but this movie's gushing

sentimentality and overt predictability will not be excused, no matter how

well-intentioned.

Such a harsh assessment of this film begs the wrath of a number of folks who

have exclaimed how much they enjoyed the picture (I'll say! It proved to be

one of the winter's top box office successes, garnering over $70 million in

ticket sales). Begrudgingly, one can concede FOB II is not a complete waste of

time; yet it would be unfair and overgenerous to declare it an artistic

success.

Father of the Bride (the 1991 version) was a light, bouncy and delightful take

on the 1950, Spencer Tracy-Elizabeth Taylor original. Steve Martin, as the

sheltering father who could not bear to see daddy's little girl (Kimberly

Williams) get married, was surprisingly restrained and touching as he wrestled

with his emotions about giving his daughter away. Martin was also reliably

funny when it came time for the misadventures of wedding ceremony planning,

but the true hilarity was left to Martin Short, a riot as Franck, a flaky

wedding coordinator who spoke in an incomprehensible dialect.

For FOB II , George Banks (Martin) is back, and the poor guy is once again a

nervous wreck, this time due to the distressing news that daughter Annie

(Williams) is pregnant. How can this be?! He had just gotten used to the fact

she is a married woman... and now this! The dreadful thought of little tykes

grinning the "g-word" sends George spinning into a mid-life crisis.

Although Martin makes the most of the material, the audience will be one step

ahead of the script the whole way. When George's dilemma is exacerbated after

his wife Nina (Diane Keaton) delivers some astounding news, you will no doubt

guess the direction of this whole enterprise.

The problem with FOB II is not with the performances, but in the producers'

lack of ingenuity. Martin's effort is no less energetic than in the first

film, but it covers the exact same tracks and therefore renders this picture

stale and uninteresting. Plus, this installment piles on the schmaltz,

including a cloying subplot in which George and Nina may be forced to part

with the beloved family home (oh horror of horrors!).

Even when Franck makes an appearance, his comic presence is dulled by the

writers' sole dependency on Short's crazy characterization without much

substantive material to buoy his genius.

However, the film does have intermittent moments within which it attempts to

capitalize on some inventive scenarios involving its likable cast. One of the

best is an extended sequence in which Franck attempts to assist George and

company when Annie goes into labor and they must rush her to the hospital.

Martin and Short are at their best here, and for once during the film's 106

minutes, they are provided with worthwhile, screwball stuff.

Father of the Bride II is rated PG for scattered sexual references and some

mild profanity. In terms of content, it may be suitable family viewing, but

its caliber is not of a genuine high grade.

Next HRRA Household Hazardous Waste Drop-Off Event Scheduled In Newtown

Genealogy Club's Next Program To Dig Into 'Dissecting A Civil War Pension Record'

Choral Society Planning ‘Voices Of America’ Performance

Newtown Earth Day Festival Was A Success

Local Fourth Grader To Host ‘Gaming For Change’ On May 16

The editorial took no position on the budget going up or down so you're reading things into the editorial that simply aren't there. The turnout is tied to the lack of passage, in that people who came out to vote last time did not this time, indicating a lack of support on their part. Perhaps it wasn't spelled out clearly enough, but that's what the editorial was driving at, people showing lack of support by not casting a vote. The editorial did address likely concerns among voters that may have led to lack of support and lack of turnout. This lower turnout also follows increasing turnout over the past four referendums in three years (meaning it is an aberration from that), and increased turnout is something that I do push for regularly in editorials. Any disappointment you might be seeing is at the break in that trend, not at whether the budget passed or not. I'd rather see more people come out and vote "no" then not vote at all.

Lower Turnout Results In Two Budget Defeats

Clearly, property owners no longer want to bear the burden of expenses while the state does not meet it’s responsibilities. Rising costs must be addressed by actions that do not include yearly increases of property owners’ taxes. The state of CT must meet its share of the educational costs, and other costs.

Town And School Budgets Fail At Referendum

This feels like an oddly misleading headline and narrative, particularly coming from the Editorial Board. The headline "Lower Turnout Results in Two Budget Defeats" pushes a misleading narrative regarding voter turnout, and then seeks to tie the outcome of the referendum to that misleading narrative. Sure, voter turn out for this year's referendum, 18%, was lower than last year's. However, last year's turnout, 25.4%, represented the highest turnout in the most recent 10 budget referendums. If you take the time to examine turnout percentages between 2017 and 2026 (2017: 19.9, 2018: 15.7, 2019: 17, 2020: 0, 2021: 8.98, 2022: 7.7, 2023: 8.8, 2024: 15.1/17.49, 2025: 25.4, 2026: 18), this year's turnout was actually the third highest in the past 10 cycles. Perhaps the headline of this article should say "Lower Voter Turnout Than Last Year", which is more accurate, rather than creating an impression that this year's turnout is some type of aberration - a narrative that the turnout numbers, in all their binary glory, simply do not support. Further, the headline of this article appears to tie the "lower turnout" to the defeated budgets. Sure, that could be true. But, perhaps, its more likely that Newtown residents are feeling the squeeze of multiple economic influences. In Newtown, we've experienced property revaluations and increased municipal spending. Eversource continues to raise rates. The state legislature gives PURA the authority to impose Public Benefit charges that benefit a tiny percentage of the public (and subsequently burdening the rest of us). At the national level, inflation has run rampant for years and many of those costs remain high to this day. In short, the data tells a far less dramatic—and far more honest—story than the headline suggests. This wasn’t an electorate vanishing in apathy; it was a fairly typical turnout delivering an verdict that, perhaps, some at the Editorial Board didn't like. At some point, it’s worth considering that residents aren’t confused, disengaged, or misled by turnout; they’re simply doing math at their kitchen tables and concluding that “no” is the only responsible answer left.

Enjoyed the forum which only confirmed my support for Brandon Moore as the Democratic candidate to run for the state representative position. Brandon Moore did not waiver about his duty to all the people, if elected, when an issue presents itself that requires that he voice a difference of opinion for the wellbeing of Newtown residents. If Michelle Ku’s 16 years have led to her loyalty being to other elected officials, as she implied, then Newtown is going to continue to witness actions that do not protect its residents. She could not unseat republican, Mitch Bolinsky, during a Blue Wave, and once again, will not do it now. Winning that seat is critical for all. That explains why her previous campaign committee now campaigns for Brandon Moore. It explains all the endorsements he has received from local elected democratic officials. It’s why we need Brandon Moore to be the democratic candidate to run for state representative.

Second Newtown DTC, League Of Women Voters Candidates Event Planned

Appreciated the opportunity to hear from both candidates as we were present for the College Dems forum but only heard from Brandon Moore. It was an opportunity to see who can unseat the Republican incumbent and there is no doubt that Brandon Moore should be the Democratic candidate. One concerned parent posed a question about discrimination unaddressed by the school district and interestingly enough, Michelle Ku, who proudly speaks of her Board membership years, said little, while Brandon Moore passionately addressed the issue along with his experience as an Apache Helicopter Commander. This family is supporting Brandon Moore. We need change and someone who is not afraid to disagree, especially about the rising costs of living in Newtown.

Log In

Date: Fri 08-Mar-1996

Leave a Reply Cancel reply