Mac And Me (1988) **1/2
After recently watching Tammy And The T-Rex (1994) (my review here) and then realizing that the same director was behind Mac And Me (1988) (a film that I was well aware of by reputation), I decided it was time to finally to subject myself to this infamous box office bomb-cum-cult sensation.
This really is a "so bad it's good" type of affair. Outside of the doofy-looking aliens, the production values are actually quite high. I've seen worse acting and it's cool that a boy with an actual physical disablement (Jade Calegory) was cast as the wheelchair-bound lead, Eric. Stewart Raffill's direction is fine but better suited to more intentionally campy material. Nick McLean was DP on movies like The Goonies (1985) and Spaceballs (1987) and it shows—the cinematography is one of the strongest parts of the film, on a technical level. Alan Silvestri's score is also quite good, though he seems to borrow from his own material for films such as Back To The Future (1985) and Predator (1987) (my review here).
So many questions arise around the absence of logic in this film. Why is MAC sucked into a vacuum not once but twice? Why does his alien family survive on sugar over water? Why did Raffill decide to get all serious in the finale and touch upon immigration? Why is there a dance-off in a McDonald's? And who cares—that's the best part of the film! (Well, aside from MAC driving a Power Wheels truck while being chased by a gang of dogs. And also that scene where Eric falls off the cliff in his wheelchair…)
Like the best Italian knock-offs which proliferated the 1970s and 80s, Mac And Me is so shameless in its pillaging of E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial (1982) (my review here) that I can't help but admire it. I can't imagine that Raffill and company weren't aware of just how much they were pilfering that masterful blockbuster when scenes are mimicked almost identically and look like they were shot on the same locations. What's strange is why a rip-off film like this arrived six years after E.T. and not much sooner.
While I can't bring myself to give the film more than **1/2 for a rating, I will say that from an enjoyment perspective, I thought this film was a blast. It's unoriginal, it's cheesy, it's full of intentional product placement, the ending feels wildly out of place and I can't personally see its purpose other to laugh at, but isn't that better than just fading into obscurity?
This really is a "so bad it's good" type of affair. Outside of the doofy-looking aliens, the production values are actually quite high. I've seen worse acting and it's cool that a boy with an actual physical disablement (Jade Calegory) was cast as the wheelchair-bound lead, Eric. Stewart Raffill's direction is fine but better suited to more intentionally campy material. Nick McLean was DP on movies like The Goonies (1985) and Spaceballs (1987) and it shows—the cinematography is one of the strongest parts of the film, on a technical level. Alan Silvestri's score is also quite good, though he seems to borrow from his own material for films such as Back To The Future (1985) and Predator (1987) (my review here).
So many questions arise around the absence of logic in this film. Why is MAC sucked into a vacuum not once but twice? Why does his alien family survive on sugar over water? Why did Raffill decide to get all serious in the finale and touch upon immigration? Why is there a dance-off in a McDonald's? And who cares—that's the best part of the film! (Well, aside from MAC driving a Power Wheels truck while being chased by a gang of dogs. And also that scene where Eric falls off the cliff in his wheelchair…)
Like the best Italian knock-offs which proliferated the 1970s and 80s, Mac And Me is so shameless in its pillaging of E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial (1982) (my review here) that I can't help but admire it. I can't imagine that Raffill and company weren't aware of just how much they were pilfering that masterful blockbuster when scenes are mimicked almost identically and look like they were shot on the same locations. What's strange is why a rip-off film like this arrived six years after E.T. and not much sooner.
While I can't bring myself to give the film more than **1/2 for a rating, I will say that from an enjoyment perspective, I thought this film was a blast. It's unoriginal, it's cheesy, it's full of intentional product placement, the ending feels wildly out of place and I can't personally see its purpose other to laugh at, but isn't that better than just fading into obscurity?
Comments
Post a Comment