"Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly." – G. K. Chesterton

I don’t.  As my theme at the moment seems to be movies that I’m not planning on watching, Hoodwinked Too!: Hood vs. Evil fits the bill perfectly.  I can spot several problems with that title.  The exclamation mark is extraneous and distracting.  Replacing “two” with “too” in a sequel title is old hat.  And if there ever was any humor to be had from naming a villain “Evil”, the Austin Powers franchise certainly wrang that towel dry years ago.  So in summary, I will not be watching the sequel to Hoodwinked.

I did watch the original Hoodwinked, though, and I liked it.  It’s my understanding that most people did not.  It got less than fifty percent on the tomato meter and I doubt that more critics have ever used the words “post-modernist” and “deconstructionist” while reviewing an animated kids’ movie.  In point of fact, Hoodwinked is post-modernist and deconstruction, but in a good way.

The movie begins at the end of the Little Red Rding-Hood story, when Red encounters a wolf badly disguised as her grandmother, a woodsman breaks into the house screaming like a maniac, and then the police–who are bears, frogs, and other animals–arrive and arrest everybody.  (Yes, that’s not quite how I remember the story going either.)  Then the police interrogate them and each character tells their story.  Red talks about how the wolf stalked her through the woods, but then the wolf turns out to be an investigative reporter looking into a rash a goodie-recipe thefts.  And so forth.

But the point is that the movie was really funny.  As evidence for this, I submit the following video:

That, if you want my opinion, is genuine entertainment.  The entire conception of the movie is genuinely smart, unlike numerous other kids’ movies that only think they’re smart.  The interplay among the various perspectives really did require some cleverness on the part of the filmmakers.  There were neat references to everything from Loony Tunes to Indiana Jones.   However, it’s a trick that can only work once.  There are only two possible paths for a sequel.  Either it can try to be even more clever, in which case it would have to be ridiculously complicated, or it could abandon the original premise and do something else, in which case what’s the point?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: