Evan-sent?
It's said to be the most expensive Hollywood comedy ever made. Tag-lined "a comedy of biblical proportions", is the story of a modern-day Noah.
As the name suggests, it's the sequel to . Steve Carell stars as Evan Baxter, a former TV newsman recently elected to Congress whose life is upturned when he receives a visit from God (played by Morgan Freeman).
The biblical saga of sin and punishment becomes, here, a farce (allegedly with a message) addressing our contemporary ecological crisis. God tells Baxter to build an ark in advance of a scheduled flood. Presumably a fair amount of the movie's $175m budget went into building the ark (pictured); and at least some of the budget was spent on tree-planting to offset the production's carbon emissions (whether tree-planting is an effective carbon offset is another matter altogether). The director, Tom Shadyac, is still replying to that some of the 117 species of animals used in the film had previously been abused.
We've asked our film critics Mike Cato and Liz Kennedy to reflect on whether the audience is in for some cinematic abuse from Evan Almighty. You can hear their review on Sunday shortly before 10am. If you've already seen the film, feel free to write your own review here. Does Evan Almighty sink or swim?
Comments
Okay, I saw the movie a couple of months ago on its US release date (and since when could I pass up the opportunity to review a movie?).
The first thing we notice is the rating: Bruce Almighty was a PG-13 in the US for language, sexual content and crude humour, Evan Almighty got a PG rating for mild rude humour and "some peril". This makes Evan Almighty a film that easily works for the whole family, an intentional move on the part of director Shadyac (a filmmaker I respect greatly and believe to be a largely unsung talent in Hollywood).
The second thing we notice is the budget, as William mentioned. Where Bruce was hilarious, Evan is epic. The film is a sort of a sequel (for which Shadyac pursued Jim Carrey for a long time) but has a completely different feel to the first.
In general, I enjoyed it. It's one of the few PG-rated movies I've seen this year, and it accomplishes its goals, of which the first is to entertain and make you (and your kids) laugh, and of which follows is to tell an epic tale which brings something fresh to a biblical story. And in that regard, the lessons are the same.
I would have had no problem with my child of any age watching Bruce, but they wouldn't have enjoyed it as much as they would watching Evan. The opposite, I think, is true for us adults: you'll like Evan and appreciate the story, light humour and special effects, but you won't enjoy it quite as much as will your kids.