MovieChat Forums > Mumford (1999) Discussion > Where this movie falls short ...

Where this movie falls short ...

posted 18 years ago by Citymars
12 replies | jump to latest

I couldn't agree more that Mumford is underrated. It's so good I've seen it three or four times. But I've been trying to figure out where it fails, and I think it's the sex/porn stuff.

Mumford is a charming, funny, quirky, small town romantic comedy with a great cast, with so much sexual content that it that --nearly-- sabotages the whole thing.

One big scene takes place in Skip's (Jason Lee's) secret lab, and many shots feature prominently displayed nude (fake) women. Which is fine, but it's not going to play on network television.

Dr. Follet's whole sex/fantasy problem is a little creepy, and the fact that Dr. Mumford helps him (and brings tears to his eyes) by giving him a box of old porn is a bit ridiculous. Pairing the unappealing Pruitt Taylor Vince with the beautiful Mary McDonnell doesn't help. For those who disagree or find this harsh, I admit I have a strong dislike for the overweight Mr. Vince -- if his "trademark" eye movement is a medical condition, so be it, but if it's an acting choice, it wore out its welcome long ago.

Then there's Doc's flashback story, with more brief but strong female nudity.

Ultimately so much nudity seems less to do with the story and more with the director's own obsessions. In fact, thinking back, it seems like two different movies. One remembers the warm performances, led by Loren Dean, but the other stuff is there, too.

[–] ohcheeky 17 years ago

I totally agree with what you're saying. Although, I disagree on a few points. The strong sexual content I think is important to the movie because of the nature of psychology. Freud says that all human's basic motivations are sex and agression. The Dr. Mumford flashback used the brief nudity to show how dark and seedy his past was. And as far as Jason Lee's lab of robot babes, it relates back to Freud and basic human motivations or urges. Also, the box of porn for the pharmacist it would seem is to show that although it may be some sort of therapy, it may more likely show Dr. Mumforn is not a pyschologist and just making up the therapies as he goes along. We humans all need to eat, sleep, have sex, etc. This movie is truly underrated. Besides that it was filmed in my hometown of Healdsburg, CA and parts of Santa Rosa and I think Guerneville, all northern California towns.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Can_a_bitch_get_a_donut 17 years ago

I think Americans (myself included) have been overly sensitized to sex and nudity that seeing a lot in an otherwise light-hearted romantic dramedy does seem out of place. The dark spots in the movie, such as the main character's past with drug addiction and infidelity made the whole picture a little uneven. Not a bad movie overall.

But yeah at some point you expect there to be a point or a message or a theme to come from all the dark sexual fantasies and memories, but it just didn't tie in with the rest as well as it could have. For a film about a fake psychologist, it wasn't a very psychological film.

------
We come into the world naked, screaming and covered in blood. Why should the fun end there?

[–] tysonh 17 years ago

Well, he's a fake psychologist . . . not a real one.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tysonh 17 years ago

Why didn't you believe the love affair between Jason Lee and Alfre Woodard? She IS a good looking woman. I think so, and I'm younger than Jason Lee.

[–] orangelifer 17 years ago

i saw it on free tv,so i didn't see any nudity!
but anyway,yeah,i liked the film.sort of.i enjoyed it,but the ending seemed lackluster.and i'm not sure if like the main character,mumford...he's rather charming,but also seems a bit manipulative.and he is an ex-drug addict,and many of us know just how charismatic and manipulative addicts can be.
i don't know.i liked the concept.it was pleasant.but it's not really a great film.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ghostofmrpalmer 16 years ago

I always thought some of the "darker" sexual points felt tacked on, and Mumford's back story seemed a little unbelieveable, and not in a good way. I felt there wasn't enough development in that direction, that we were being led down one path and then confronted with this completely alien revelation, like the director knew where he wanted to go, just not how to get there, so he just made it an abrupt shock ending, no development. Overall, I though it was a good movie, watched it several times when it was running on pay cable, but I always felt like I left the movie missing something.
P.S. the movie makes a great double feature with "Election". These two would play together on HBO and they fit together perfectly.

[–] michiruwater 12 years ago

"Pairing the unappealing Pruitt Taylor Vince with the beautiful Mary McDonnell doesn't help. For those who disagree or find this harsh, I admit I have a strong dislike for the overweight Mr. Vince -- if his "trademark" eye movement is a medical condition, so be it, but if it's an acting choice, it wore out its welcome long ago."

Yeah, that threw me. I couldn't find anything appealing about him, physically OR in his personality, and while his attraction to her was totally understandable there was never anything in the film that explained to me why she gave him even a second glance. It was a very odd, random pairing, like they had these two characters, and had decided everyone needed a love story, so they just threw them together to tie up loose ends. But, I mean, really, in what world does someone as awkward and physically unappealing as Vince end up with someone like McDonnell?... not without some serious character development, at least, which did not happen.

I had a similar problem with Jason Lee and Alfre Woodard. Of course, there both people are reasonably attractive, but his personality left a hell of a lot to be desired. I just couldn't see a classy, mature person like Woodard's character genuinely falling in love with someone so totally immature, even if he had all that money. I totally understood why he would like her so much, though.

This was, generally, a very pleasant movie, but these two pairings in particular seemed too convenient. I'll never understand why, in Hollywood, it seems like men can always get the (gorgeous) girl regardless of their own appeal. All those TV shows with unattractive, unhealthy men with a bombshell wife who puts up with his antics... it's a formula that seems to work, weirdly, but the other way around?...

[–] mentyl 11 years ago

Pruitt Taylor Vince has a medical condition called Nystagmus, involuntary eye movement.