Groundhog Day (1993)

[MmzHrrdb]

Having now seen Groundhog Day myself, I wonder how teenagers - whose opinions of this film are probably not influenced by nostalgia - react to this film. Compared to comedies today, it is slower paced, strives for less belly-laughs, and is mostly just a quieter film. Do teens today have the patience to sit through 5 minutes of set-up with a significantly smaller gag ratio than today's comedies? Groundhog Day would never have been profitable, had it been made in the present. Which is a sad thing, as Groundhog Day reminds one of how charming the "quiet" comedy could be.

TV weatherman Phil Connors is as arrogant as they come. He's rude to those around them, and insists he's a star. Due to unexplained circumstances, however, Connors is set in a time loop, in which he must relive Groundhog Day, over and over again. And he has no idea how to get out of the loop.

Simply summarized, Groundhog Day is as pleasant as a film gets. While belly laughs are rare, there is a satisfactory amount of chuckles and smiles throughout the movie, but even then, one could argue that there are less such instances than in other comedies. For me, Groundhog Day is good entertainment, in spite of slightly less plentiful gags than modern audiences are used to. The story and protagonist are interesting enough that the film still works in spite of all that.

Groundhog Day has its sweet moments, mostly because of the romance between Connors and new producer, Rita Hanson, that works surprisingly well. Even when working with occasionally cheesy dialogue, the two leads have great chemistry, and thus, their relationship remains interesting and believable. It gives the film a much needed extra dimension.

My sole complaint (which is more a matter of preference than anything), is that Groundhog Day elects to avoid some of the darker elements of its premise. Groundhog Day is played mostly for comedy. Though it is implied that Phil Connors is frustrated with living the same day over and over, there is no dramatic scene or outlet to truly express this. Even during a montage in which he tries to commit suicide in various ways, it is done for purely comedic purposes. The ending is also a pinch unsatisfying, thanks to a cop-out that results in a somewhat hasty finale. The lighter tone of the film is largely to blame for this.

Groundhog Day boasts an enjoyable cast. Bill Murray is delightful in the lead, beautifully balancing humor and drama. Andie MacDowell generally gets it right, but falters at time with some of the less intelligent dialogue. Stephen Tobolowsky is a highlight among the talented cast, portraying an overly-friendly insurance agent named Ned Ryerson. The film wisely chooses to limit his presence to just a few scenes, thus eliminating any chance of him becoming overbearing or obnoxious as he well might have with more screen time.

George Fenton's score is playful and fun. Though it does contain some unfortunate '90's synths and at times, ill-suited electric guitar, it's a pleasing and enjoyable effort by Fenton.

One could argue that Groundhog Day is an overly sentimental and innocuous film - a good time-killer, but nothing more. I would argue that it's a bit more than that. It does some interesting things with its premise, and has more depth than one might expect (even if it could have supported significantly more). Even if the ending disappoints a bit, and there aren't many big laughs, Groundhog Day is entertaining enough and funny enough in an endearingly mild way to make for pleasant and likable entertaining. Labeling it as a masterpiece - as many have come to do so - is absolutely stretching things more than a little. But even if its cultural significance didn't make it a must-see by most standards, it's an enjoyable enough film that it deserves a recommendation anyway.

Score: 7/10

[mattorama12]

Good review.

Though it is implied that Phil Connors is frustrated with living the same day over and over, there is no dramatic scene or outlet to truly express this. Even during a montage in which he tries to commit suicide in various ways, it is done for purely comedic purposes.

It's played for comedy, sure, but I don't think that takes away from demonstrating his frustration. How could you show more frustration than purposefully getting hit by a car, driving a car off a cliff, and electrocuting yourself? And he wakes up smashing his alarm clock. It may not be dramatic, since this is mostly light-hearted, but I don't think you're giving enough credit to the way it conveys what it needs to.

Also, you might be interested to read about the production. My understanding is that there were darker elements considered, but rejected for the final project. This includes Phil committing murders and the source of the time loop--a voodoo spell cast on him by a jilted lover. I don't have sources on those, though.

[MmzHrrdb]

It's played for comedy, sure, but I don't think that takes away from demonstrating his frustration. How could you show more frustration than purposefully getting hit by a car, driving a car off a cliff, and electrocuting yourself? And he wakes up smashing his alarm clock. It may not be dramatic, since this is mostly light-hearted, but I don't think you're giving enough credit to the way it conveys what it needs to.

Also, you might be interested to read about the production. My understanding is that there were darker elements considered, but rejected for the final project. This includes Phil committing murders and the source of the time loop--a voodoo spell cast on him by a jilted lover. I don't have sources on those, though.

Eh, I guess I was just wanting more dramatic scenes involving his frustration, instead of purely comedic ones. Ideally, there would have been both, but the film works well enough as is.

And I have read a bit into the production of the film, and it has been intensely fascinating! I really love some of the ideas they initially had, though ultimately, I think the final version of the film had the best ideas.

Thanks for reading!