5 Reasons to Make ‘Mixed Nuts’ A Holiday Tradition

2 Replies

When my husband and I began dating, we bonded over many things -– action movies from the 1980s, “The Crocodile Hunter,” the early music of Coldplay. Then one fateful night, he dug out his family’s well-worn VHS copy of “Mixed Nuts,” an underrated gem of a Christmas comedy that has since become part of our holiday tradition.

In our house, the annual viewing of “Mixed Nuts” often trumps such perennial favorites as “It’s a Wonderful Life,” “Love Actually,” “A Christmas Story” and “Elf,” and we have treated many friends and family members to the eccentric delights of this little seen yuletide treat. (OK, so maybe forced it upon them is a more accurate way of putting it.)

Based on a French play, “Mixed Nuts” premiered in theaters in 1994 and was largely ignored, judging by the measly $6 million it has grossed over its lifetime. That’s a sad statistic, considering how entertaining, unusual and addictive the film is. Here are five reasons to make it part of your own holiday tradition.

1. It’s one of the few films you haven’t seen by late, great writer-director Nora Ephron.

“Mixed Nuts” is no “When Harry Met Sally,” “Sleepless in Seattle,” “You’ve Got Mail” or “Julie and Julia,” but this early work — one of only eight movies Ephron directed — bears strong traces of the romantic comedy queen’s wit, relationship insights and sweet and zany sentimentality. The plot of the film revolves around a nonprofit suicide hotline, fertile ground for dark humor in a script Ephron co-wrote with her sister, Delia.

Makeshift telephone helpline Life Savers is haplessly run by Philip (Steve Martin), a misguided do-gooder who is having the worst Christmas Eve ever. His landlord (Gary Shandling) hands him an eviction notice, a development Philip tries to hide from his stressed-out staff. Then his loan officer girlfriend (Joely Fisher) dumps him for a psychiatrist. That’s just the beginning of the pre-Christmas chaos as prank callers, unauthorized visitors, a roaming serial killer, an elevator malfunction and a lovers’ quarrel conspire to ruin Philip’s holiday.

2. “Mixed Nuts” is the rare film that captures the essence of Christmas in Southern California.

Ah, Christmas in SoCal, where the only snowmen you’re likely to see are made of sand and the incessant sunshine provides an incongruous backdrop to yuletide greenery and songs extolling the joys of sleigh rides. “Mixed Nuts” is set in Venice Beach, that magical boardwalk of bodybuilders, bongs and panhandling bohemians. The opening credits, which pan over the sun-drenched surf and strange sights of Venice to the sounds of “White Christmas,” are thick with an irony only SoCal natives can fully appreciate.

3. The film boasts an amusing, neurotic, highly physical performance by Martin, but it’s Rita Wilson and Madeline Kahn who steal the show.

Martin may be the star of “Mixed Nuts,” but he plays angst-ridden straight man to an ensemble of hilariously over-the-top characters. His Philip has good intentions and no people skills, which can be a problem when your livelihood involves talking despairing strangers off ledges. As great as Martin is, he’s thoroughly upstaged by Wilson as Catherine, a co-worker with a crush on Philip and a perpetually optimistic outlook that is beginning to crumble. Then there is the sublimely funny Kahn as Mrs. Munchnik, a cranky widow always armed with a tart comeback. To watch these two in fine form is to lament that we didn’t get to enjoy more performances by the late Kahn and that Wilson is recognized for her real-life role as Tom Hanks’ wife rather than her acting ability.

4. Like a Christmas stocking, “Mixed Nuts” is stuffed with surprises.

Those surprises come mostly in the form of unexpected cameos by awesome comedians. Among the familiar faces are a young Adam Sandler as a ukulele-strumming writer of T-shirt slogans, Parker Posey and Jon Stewart as a pair of angry rollerbladers, Rob Reiner as a lovelorn veterinarian, Anthony LaPaglia as an ex-con who spends most of the film running around in a Santa Claus suit, Juliet Lewis as an unlikely Virgin Mary figure and the aforementioned Shandling as Philip’s Grinchy landlord. Keep a sharp eye out for “The Sixth Sense” star Haley Joel Osment in a brief, early movie appearance.

5. You’ve never seen Liev Schreiber quite like this.

You may know Schreiber from the hard-boiled Showtime series “Ray Donovan” or his “serious” work in films such as “Lee Daniels’ The Butler,” “Defiance” or “The Manchurian Candidate,” but you haven’t seen him as he appears in “Mixed Nuts.” In his very first feature film outing, Schreiber squeezes his strapping frame into knee-high boots, a sleek black wig and an evening cape to play the transsexual Chris, a lonely soul seeking companionship at Life Savers headquarters, despite Philip’s protestations that it’s against company policy. Schreiber reveals himself to be a deft physical comedian, dueting with Martin in a hilarious ballroom dance routine that rivals the finales of “Dirty Dancing” and “Silver Linings Playbook.” The producers of “Ray Donovan” should really find an excuse to get him in drag once again.

Forget Batfleck: The Real Outrage is That Hollywood Still Hasn’t Given Us a True Superheroine

Leave a reply

The latest potential casting development in the controversial saga of Zack Snyder’s “Batman vs. Superman” film materialized yesterday with rumors that Joaquin Phoenix was in talks to tackle the role of the Man of Steel’s ultimate nemesis, Lex Luthor.

If the rumors are confirmed, they’re likely to be met with the passionate debate and perhaps even outrage sparked by the news that Ben Affleck will don the Caped Crusader’s cowl in DC’s epic superhero face-off. That event, which almost blew up the Internet, was followed by more fan consternation when it was announced that Gal Gadot, a Miss Universe contestant featured in the “Fast and Furious” franchise, will appear in the movie as Wonder Woman.

Some have hailed DC Comics’ decision to quietly sandwich Wonder Woman into the “Man of Steel” sequel as a smart move. After several notorious botched attempts to bring the Amazonian princess to the big and small screens, this is a sneaky way to introduce the classic comic book character to moviegoers without the risk of investing in an expensive film that would rest solely on her muscular shoulders. It also appears to be part of a strategy to quickly introduce multiple characters from the DC universe to facilitate an inevitable Justice League movie.

DC is all too aware that it lags behind Marvel in its attempts to build its stable of superheroes into a formidable collective box office force, a la “The Avengers.” If moviegoers respond positively to Gadot in “Batman vs. Superman,” the studio can breathe a sigh of relief and plow ahead with a Wonder Woman spin-off. It they don’t, DC can shrug it off and move on. This may be shrewd strategizing from a business perspective, but to me it feels like a defeat.

The fuss over Snyder’s perplexing “Batman vs. Superman” casting selections is merely a distraction from the real outrage brought to light by the sequel: the fact that DC repeatedly failed to produce a Wonder Woman movie and has, for the moment, abandoned all efforts to do so. The marginalization of Wonder Woman is also a potent reminder that Hollywood has failed to bring us even one successful comic book movie headlined by a female superhero.

Over the past few decades, Hollywood has made a few weak attempts to bring superheroes who are women to the big screen. There was 1984’s “Supergirl,” the 2005 Jennifer Garner vehicle “Elektra” and, of course, 2004’s much ridiculed “Catwoman,” featuring Halle Berry as the feline supervillain. The dismal reception of these films could be considered evidence that comic book movies starring women don’t sell, but that would be disregarding the fact that these projects were ill conceived, poorly written and sloppily executed. You can’t blame audiences for rejecting them.

In today’s cinematic landscape, superhero movies have become so lucrative that Marvel and DC are constantly mining their archives for new properties. It’s not just about pop cultural juggernauts like Batman and Spider-Man and Superman anymore. Less familiar crusaders, like Iron Man and Thor, have emerged from the pages of comics to astounding success. And the studios are planning to mine even more obscure properties in the near future, including Ant Man and Guardians of the Galaxy.

There’s no excusing that women in comic book movies are still largely relegated to the role of sidekick. There are strongly scripted female roles to be found in the most successful franchises: Anne Hathaway’s smart, slinky Catwoman, Gwyneth Paltrow’s no-nonsense Pepper Potts, the powerful female mutants of “X-Men,” Scarlett Johansson’s conflicted Black Widow in “The Avengers.” But despite Johansson’s tough portrayal of the redheaded Russian spy, the focus on the character too often comes down to how great the actress looks in her tight, black bodysuit. And consider the recent “Thor: The Dark World,” in which astrophysicist Jane Foster is relegated for much of the movie to a simpering damsel in distress.

The sad fact is there has never been a better time for a film studio to step up and take a risk on a female-driven superhero movie, a time when women are proving themselves to be hot commodities at the box office as never before.

“The Hunger Games: Catching Fire,” starring Jennifer Lawrence as the bow-and-arrow-wielding Katniss Everdeen, recently grossed a staggering $700 million worldwide, while Sandra Bullock led the outer space thriller “Gravity” to an unexpected $640 million in global ticket sales. The upcoming “Divergent,” based on a dystopian book trilogy that revolves around a butt-kicking heroine named Tris, is expected by some analysts to outperform even “The Hunger Games.” Many of Disney’s recent animated hits are princess flicks -– think “Brave” and “Frozen” — with considerable girl power that nonetheless appeal to boys and girls alike. Even the comedy genre is currently dominated by women, from “Bridesmaids,” to “Pitch Perfect,” to “The Heat.”

My friend, Kristy Rivas, an avid comic book reader who enjoys such titles as Batgirl, Wonder Woman and Birds of Prey, dreams of the day when girl power at the box office finally translates into a movie featuring a heroine as mighty as the Caped Crusader or the Man of Steel.

“I absolutely love Tris and Katniss,” she said during a recent text exchange on the subject. “They are reluctant heroes though. It would be nice to have a true ‘hero’ role model for girls. Batman and Superman chose the life of a hero as did Batgirl and Wonder Woman.”

It’s high time Hollywood let such a hero emerge.

Hiddlebatch: 2013 Entertainer of the Year

Leave a reply

The end of 2013 is just around the corner, a time in which journalists make their cases for the celebrity who should be crowned Entertainer of the Year. In the next few weeks, there will be much debate over which actor, musician or media personality dazzled us the most over the past 11 months. Who was the biggest headline maker, the most prolific in their career, the most amusing red carpet schmoozer? Who spawned the most tweets, memes and Facebook posts?

Obvious candidates for this year’s entertainer include Miley Cyrus, who scandalized America with her twerking and wrecking ball nudity; the guys from Norway who wrote the song about the fox; irresistibly candid “Hunger Games” star Jennifer Lawrence; the cast of “Breaking Bad,” going out in a blaze of glory in the acclaimed series finale; or Sandra Bullock, who reminded us that blockbuster movies don’t have to be dumb with her remarkable performance in “Gravity.”

I would like to propose a less obvious, but far more compelling choice for Entertainer of the Year: the sublime pair of actors known as Hiddlebatch.

Hiddlebatch is the nickname fondly bestowed by fans upon the dapper British twosome composed of Tom Hiddleston and Benedict Cumberbatch, who starred in a couple of the highest grossing movies of 2013. Cumberbatch played the purringly menacing Khan in “Star Trek: Into Darkness,” which drummed up more than $460 million at the worldwide box office, while Hiddleston reprised his role as preening, bad-to-the-bone brother of everyone’s favorite hammer-wielding god in “Thor: The Dark World.” Marvel’s comic book sequel has so far raked in $620 million in theaters around the globe.

It’s not an exaggeration to credit a good deal of the success of these films to Hiddleston and Cumberbatch. Beefy Australian Chris Hemsworth is fun to ogle in his Thor armor, but Hiddleston acts circles around him as silky smooth wisecracker Loki. “Star Trek: Into Darkness” boasts an excellent cast, but when moviegoers emerged from J.J. Abrams’ sequel, it was Cumberbatch — and his commanding, velvety voiced monologues — they were talking about, not Chris Pine’s Captain Kirk impression. The two actors practically stole the movies out from under their better known co-stars.

Cumberbatch was particularly ubiquitous in 2013 on screens big and small. After amassing a loyal following as star of the BBC series “Sherlock,” he proceeded to carve out a diverse Hollywood resume that included critically praised drama “12 Years a Slave,” controversial Julian Assange biopic “The Fifth Estate” and the star-studded “August: Osage County,” not to mention lending his dulcet vocal cords to the CGI dragon of “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug.”

Cumberbatch and Hiddleston may seem unlikely candidates for Entertainer of the Year because of they way they crept up on American audiences. Classically trained in England before cutting their teeth on British television, neither actor arrived in the states with a bang. Through steady and impressive work, they cleverly insinuated themselves into the Hollywood landscape, but it is not their big-screen performances that make them ideal heir apparents to the throne of Entertainer of the Year. Rather, it is the amusing off-camera antics of Hiddlebatch that provided endless entertainment throughout the course of 2013.

Both actors have attracted a considerable horde of female fans — known, respectively, as “Hiddlestoners” and “Cumberbitches” — with their gentlemanly demeanors, which evoke a pleasingly unpretentious, old-fashioned Hollywood glamour. But the allure of Hiddlebatch goes deeper than that. These guys are unabashed showmen: wildly talented, amusing, eager to please, shamelessly hammy but never obnoxious. Whether making a talk show appearance or a cameo on “Sesame Street,” starring in a comedy sketch or performing a reading, Cumberbatch and Hiddleston have become social media mainstays because of their willingness to do anything to make us smile.

In July, Hiddleston was the talk of San Diego Comic-Con when he took the stage during a Marvel panel in full Loki costume, playfully commanding the 6,000-plus geeks assembled in Hall H to kneel in his presence. That was just the beginning of a slew of engaging appearances that quickly went viral. There he was on “Sesame Street,” teaching Cookie Monster the meaning of the phrase “delayed gratification.” He also could be found tap dancing, doing a dead-on impersonation of Owen Wilson, singing “The Bare Necessities” at Disney’s D23 convention and reading Shakespearean sonnets aloud.

Not to be outdone, the polite but playful Cumberbatch literally embraced fans who had flown thousands of miles to see him on “The Graham Norton Show,” did a respectable Chewbacca impression on another visit with the British host and became the subject of a popular otter meme. To cap it all off, he read the lyrics to R. Kelly’s “Genius” on “Jimmy Kimmel Live” in a hilarious bit that concluded with the dignified “Sherlock” star declaring, “I’ma hit that thing again.”

While American entertainers tend to woo audiences with an approach that feels like a full-on assault, whether it involves good looks, talent, sexuality or cheap gimmicks, the subtle but seductive force known as Hiddlebatch sweetly and politely charmed us into submission.

I’ve never been so entertained.

What about you?