MaryAnn Johanson at FlickFilosopher linked to this article about the upcoming, long-delayed Eddie Murphy film, A Thousand Words.
“This is a sweet, heartfelt movie, and it’s a chance to see Eddie do some very physical comedy,” said Megan Colligan, Paramount’s president of domestic marketing and distribution. “He’s really funny in this film.”
OK, funny Eddie Murphy — we all remember Coming to America… 24 years ago.
What’s this new film about?
Successful but prone to ethically dubious behavior, Jack McCall (Murphy) is thrown for a loop when he discovers a tree whose leaves fall off whenever he speaks. He’s told by a mystical figure that the tree’s branches will be bare after he utters 1,000 words, at which point he will die. The set-up yields numerous opportunities for Murphy to engage in gestures and exaggerated body language.
Huh? He plays a man marked for death, who will expire after speaking roughly as many words as the average college essay? This is supposedly going to result in pratfalls and vaudevillian hijinks?
Maybe they’re just not describing it well. Let’s see the trailer.
Wow, that’s terrible. I’m not one to question ludicrous “mystical figures” in movies, but it doesn’t seem like Murphy’s character’s problem is that he talks excessively but that when he does speak, it’s usually a lie. Shouldn’t a leaf fall whenever he repeats a Mitt Romney talking point? Shouldn’t it be safe for him to guide an old blind man across a busy intersection?
If it’s any consolation, Eddie still looks great. It’s like he stopped aging around the time he stopped being funny. Hey, wait a minute, did he make some sort of deal with Ursula the Sea Witch?


Boycotting Rush…
Andrew Sullivan raised a valid concern about efforts to pull sponsors from Rush Limbaugh’s radio show.
It’s a free country, but I get queasy with boycotts to target disgusting but free speech.
Writer Peter David is not a fan of boycotts, either. He has often stated that the answer to free speech (even disgusting speech) is more free speech. There is no shortage of outlets for the denunciation of Limbaugh’s idiocy (The Daily Show is but one). Shouldn’t we support an open dialogue and exchange of ideas?
Sure, but Limbaugh has never been about that. He’s not interested in the discussion of actual issues. The Sandra Fluke incident is a clear example. His sole goal is to make a lot of money doing what every 6 year old is trained not to do during kindergarten. He’s a shock jock. Some people compare him to Howard Stern but that’s an insult to Stern. Stern is not a bully. He makes fun of himself as much as he does anyone else. His political statements — when he makes them — are often crass but occasionally insightful.
Of course, that’s all personal taste. I don’t like NBC’s 30 Rock. I think it’s facile and empty with no legitimate laughs (as a friend once said about Family Guy, “A reference is not a joke). I could stage a boycott of 30 Rock but I wouldn’t make much headway on those grounds. Advertisers would not be ashamed to continue an association with the show just because I don’t think it’s very good.
What’s happening with Rush is that advertisers are ashamed. They can’t just dismiss the pressure from outraged groups. It’s hard to support a “personal taste” for referring to women as sluts and prostitutes.
It’s not about free speech. It’s about economics. Limbaugh should find it as profitable to spout his garbage as it is to self-publish your own Twilight fan fiction. If he’s talking about private citizens releasing sex tapes, advertisers should find him as potentially toxic as many advertisers find Stern, who has actual prostitutes on his show discussing their sex tapes.
Limbaugh has a right to be an ass for money. He doesn’t have a right to be a respected voice on any subject. During the 1992 presidential campaign, Bill Clinton criticized the rapper Sister Souljah for perceived racist statements. His words were far stronger than the tepid tap dance Republican presidential candidates had for Limbaugh.
Perhaps once this is all over, Republican politicians will feel free to describe Limbaugh’s more repugnant statements with the same scorn and contempt they usually refer for members of the same sex who want to marry.
Posted by Stephen Robinson on March 6, 2012 in Political Theatre, Pop Life, Social Commentary
Tags: Andrew Sullivan, boycott, Rush Limbaugh, Sandra Fluke