Fierce Creatures (1997)

Just perfect...

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

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

There are plenty of tie-ins, and of course, the cast remains relatively intact, but the film itself, despite its few good surprises, is tremendously predictable and contrived. This is not to say there aren't good jokes; there are. And almost all of them come from or are at the expense of Vince, played by the marvelously funny Kevin Kline. A pet peeve of mine (and that truly was not a pun) is poorly done vulgarity; this is not a glowing endorsement of all vulgarity, but if you do it, do it correctly. The moments between Rollo (John Cleese) and Willa (Wanda- I mean Jamie Lee Curtis) are even more forced than in A Fish Called Wanda, which was at least part deliberate. The disbelief felt by Vince was so spectacular and of course intentional, but the unbelievability of it remained unmitigated. The strange thing is it almost seems they have less chemistry here than they do in "Wanda". It really is fully half as fun as A Fish Called Wanda, though, and since that one was an 8/10, technically this would be 4/10, especially due to the contrived and predictable moments, both of plot and reaction thereto. But those fun parts really do shine, as do the good quotes, almost entirely written for Vince, and perfectly portrayed by Kevin Kline.

Given that the central premise is shaky - animal-lovers resisting the commercialization of leisure time, in this case zoos? - this gentle, well-meaning film still ought to be a lot funnier than it is. It's quite cleverly written, chock full of funny actors and fierce creatures, but the whole thing comes across as a trifle half-hearted, especially amongst the supporting cast. The animals certainly play their part, but there ought to be more gags, really. Is the film trying to make a serious point? If so, it rather gets lost in the edit. Cleese reprises his Fawlty-esque persona to good effect and Kevin Kline is brilliant, as ever. But the whole is less than the sum of its parts. Maybe the director wasn't snappy enough? Still, it's all good fun - and on re-viewing seems rather better than the first time you saw it.

Corporate conglomerate, Octopus Inc, run by shrewd tycoon Rod McCain, purchases a UK-based leisure company, and the failing London Marwood Zoo.Octopus hires a new manager, Rollo Lee, who promptly comes up with a way to increase profits, do away with all the animals except for the ferocious ones.This new Policy shocks zookeepers, led by unendingly talkative Adrian "Bugsy" Malone.Eventually, McCain's son Vince, along with business executive Willa Weston, take control of the zoo and revoke the Policy.Vince instead comes up with many schemes to attract customers-unauthorised celebrity endorsements, shoddy, overpriced zoo merchandise, and using robotic animals.Vince is also stealing from the zoo's funds, and when his father finds out, he rears to turn the zoo into a Japanese-owned golf course.But Willa has grown to love the zoo, and, along with her newly-reformed love interest Rollo, plot with the zookeepers to save the zoo from the McCains...The say lightning never strikes twice, and even though this movie has some very funny moments, it isn't a patch on A Fish Called Wanda. And the trouble is that the majority of the cast literally look like they are trying too hard.Kline is annoying in this (in both roles) and Cleese just looks a little bewildered. Palin is good, but again, over hamming it, and Curtis has the look on her as if to say, i'm the most famous one here.So thank heavens for the rest of the cast, they are truly hilarious and bring the film to life. If the film had been a little more scathing in it's humour, rather than cuddly, then it could have been a winner.it appears that it's trying to be too safe for it's own good, as if it wanted to appeal to a wider audience.Instead, it starts, charms a little with it's innuendo, and then goes, like a sweet great aunt.

John Cleese is much more enjoyable as characters who more closely resemble the refined, innocent man finding himself turning to sinful desire and being conflicted about the entire process (such as he played in a fish called wanda) and is not nearly as interesting to watch as the fast talking, sarcastic, hyper, off-the-hinge, raspy voiced, domineering man in charge (such as he played in fierce creatures and rat race). Sadly the latter has become his go to role and it lacks depth of some of his former roles of conflict over innocence and desire.Kevin Kline was much more interesting to watch as the dangerous, manly, cunning, jealous, criminal airhead that he played in a fish called wanda more so than the character he played in this movie which was more less masculine, more effeminate (scarf wearing entrance), metrosexual, suit and tie, submissive, airhead, incompetent son who pervertedly and awkwardly pines for dates with the ladies.