Best in Show (2000)

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

More than 18 years after its theatrical release, Best in Show remains one of the top 20 classic "Mockumentary films" of our age. The current IMDB user rating of 7.5 clearly contradicts how passionately film fans love and adore this movie. Christopher Guest is a remarkable film maker, not only as a gifted writer (former SNL) and director (Best In Show, This Is Spinal Tap, Waiting For Guffman, Mighty Wind, Mascots, etc.), but also for his spectacular ability to select and retain the kind of acting talent necessary to pull off fast paced films like this. With only a mere 16 pages of actual script, the bulk of the film is hilariously improvised by some of the best comedic talent in the industry. That's saying quite a lot, given the plethora of versatile actors in the theatrical selection pool. Guest is no slouch himself in the acting and improv departments. His entire appearance and accent changes with each film, from "Heavy Metal Rock God" to "Red Neck Camper." Sometimes Guest is almost unrecognizable in his own films. Best In Show was edited down from more than 60 hours of filming. The end result is a worthy and extremely funny look at people who breed and competitively "show" some of the most pampered and well groomed dogs in the world. The magnificent cast runs wild with line after line of beautifully executed improvisation, and it's difficult to say who makes us laugh (or cringe in some wonderfully awkward scenes) the most often. In any case, the camera rolls on. My only complaint with Mr Guest is that he does not produce more of these. Note to Ms. Jaime Lee Curtis (AKA Mrs.Guest) if you are reading this please ask Chris if he's up for another Mockumentary saga, any subject. I'm certain that no matter what he ultimately decides to write and direct will always be well received by fans and newbies alike.

'Best In Show (2000)' is a 'mockumentary' that doesn't really let its style get in the way of its story - never being about the making of itself in the meta way a lot of examples of the genre are, for instance. It uses its subtle but sure style to keep its colourful cast of sometimes quite absurd characters framed with a consistently realistic lens. The film is remarkably funny, with many more gags landing than falling short. Though some mention has been made of its supposed 'cruel spirit', I feel that it's satirical in a rather endearing way, taking its bumbling but lovable cast and making them be the deliverers of the comedy rather than necessarily the focus of it. This makes for an entertaining, if simple, tale that is never unexpected in its narrative but is often unexpected in its humour, a wonderfully straight-laced and realist interpretation of an absurdist's dream. 7/10

Christopher Guest could point his camera at almost any group and find absurdity within their ranks. In 1984 he was the lead for the rock band Spinal Tap, who though they were leagues better than they actually sounded. In his self-directed Waiting for Guffman, he turned to a group of delusional, small-town hicks who compared themselves to the Kennedys and had aspirations for Broadway. And here he focuses on a niche group that seems so perfectly ripe for comedy it is a wonder that no one has noticed them before. Anyone who has owned a dog will know that we all get a little weird around them. We adopt a baby-style talk, and address them as if they could understand our every word. The owners who enter their darlings into dog shows take this behaviour a step further, with some hilarious results. The film, like Spinal Tap and Guffman, is shot in the mockumentary style, with text on the bottom of the screen to introduce us to our peculiar cast, and a faux-haphazard camera that follows behind their every step. Guest is good enough not to simply let the script dictate the laughs - the first scene is a serious therapy session between two couples, talking about the supposed trauma of one of their kids, and only after holding the tension for as long he can does Guest pan over to the bored-looking Weimaraner in the third chair. The swivel is slow and incredulous, mimicking the audience's own disbelief and effectively pulling off the bait and switch. Later when the Flecks joke about Gerry's lack of coordination, they camera just ever so slightly drifts downwards to reveal his two left feet. It's the sort of joke that is dumb and obvious once you've seen it, but through the format Guest forces laughs out of us that have no business being there, by creating a persona behind the camera that is continually exasperated and shaking its head. The intimacy of the talking head is a huge asset here, because all of the characters are inherently stereotypes. In a conventional film it would be funny enough to observe them from a distance, with all their actions and dialogue pre-planned, but it would eventually be a bit tiring. Guest's format seemingly allows them a chance to defend their reputation, and thus he creates more humour by instead making their attempts collapse into themselves. There is Jennifer Coolidge in her usual blonde bimbo role, as the trophy wife of a near catatonic sugar daddy who can barely even pretend to have similar interests as her husband outside of soup, the outdoors, frozen peas and talking. The Swans are upper-class yuppies, so of course they met in a Starbucks, but they reveal it was actually two different stores across the street from each other (they of course live in a neighbourhood where this is the norm) and are not the slightest bit aware of the ridiculousness of this little detail. One half of the gay couple has already packed six kimonos for a two day trip, so when his partner protests, he realises he may need a few more. And there is Guest himself, lovingly showing off his ventriloquy dummy like a kid on show and tell day. Best in Show never descends into mean-spirited territory because beyond the gags, we recognise that these character's eccentricities are ultimately channeled through a love for their dogs, however unresponsive the dogs themselves may actually be. When the Swans enter the airport, they push their trolley of luggage along, but they also drag Beatrice's dog crate, which is larger than all their own belongings combined. Later when Meg is desperately trying to find a replacement stripy, squeaky bee toy for her, every attempt of logic on the shop owner's part flies hopelessly past her. They have their own crazed logic; Meg shouts at her husband that Beatrice is not listening to him, not because she is a dog, but because she is freaking out about her lost toy, all while the camera focuses once again on her bored face. The Flecks are likewise obsessed. They sing duets about Terriers with harmonies so bad they end on completely different keys, and their reaction to their baby being held hostage up on a shed roof is as if the world is ending. Eugene Levy has the natural ability to be flustered before it is even appropriate; he starts a sentence, talking about the weather on the drive-up, and has not thought on how to end it (A little cloudy coming up through West Virginia. But once we get into Pennsylvania...it's still, uh, still overcast."). And of course their card is overdrawn - they are every bit the couple to spend more on their dog than themselves, and we chuckle and love them for it.

I read Christophe Guest's bio and found a couple of statements to be offensive...intentional or not...they were both terse and quite stupid. Voicing his low opinion of Americans and their comedic viewing habits, slaps the faces of the majority of his drone-like fan-base willing to empty their wallets, just to be bored - once again. Apparently many of his fans either agree with his self-aggrandizing opinion or choose to ignore it, I don't really care. Whether you agree with him or not, usually a person goes to a movie to be solely entertained (granted some depend entirely on movies to feed their brains) - to each his or her own. There are a lot of people in Hollyweird I probably would not even like to share the same oxygen, but I will always appreciate talent. That being said, I am so glad I did not spend money on this twaddle, it was not entertaining and definitely not funny. I know, some people thought this was really funny…great…that is your opinion. I found it to be a marginal, at best. Not being a Thurston Howell the Third or Lovey, or like any of those 'intelligent' type viewers, I found this low-brow comedy to be - well - more of an un-comedy. Honestly, "Best in Show", is not even close to 'Spinal Tap'. To think that this is an example of 'silliness framed in intelligence' and being so much better than that 'stupid American Comedy' – give me a break…this thing is way off base. Is this movie really a mess – sure it is. Is it weak in the humor (or would that be humor?) department? If there was any humor to speak of - yes. Is the plot lacking - no - it's just missing altogether. in closing, I feel that this movie may be intended for some elite crowd but misses entirely, and gravitates to a more narcissistic element. Not my choice