REVIEW: The Master of Disguise

So yeah. The Master of Disguise. A 2002 Dana Carvey vehicle that, since its release, has garnered a reputation for being one of the worst films ever made. After having sat through it for the first time in over a decade, I can safely say that it more than earns that distinction. This is truly a godawful piece of garbage in every sense of the word.

The film stars Dana Carvey as Pistachio Disguisey, a charmless Italian waiter who comes from a long line of masters of disguise (hence the title). After his parents are kidnapped, he must team up with Harold Gould and Jennifer Esposito in an attempt to rescue them from Commander Data (Brent Spiner). Basically, it's just an excuse for Dana Carvey to dress up in silly outfits and do a bunch of goofy voices while people fart and fall down. To his credit, Carvey IS quite gifted when it comes to impersonations (honestly, the highlight of the movie is when he appears as Quint from Jaws, doing a flat-out perfect Robert Shaw); however, a knack for mimicry does not a movie make. After hearing this description, you might be wondering, like I once did, who would possibly bother to fund such an empty, pointless film. The answer, to the surprise of absolutely no one, is Adam Sandler. From the second I saw the Happy Madison logo in the beginning, I knew I was in for something especially painful.

I really don't know what else to say about this movie. It's just bad. I mean, I suppose the makeup effects are pretty well done, but that's literally the only positive thing I have to say about it. Everything here is so utterly bland. Even Dana Carvey, lovable old Garth Algar himself, is completely devoid of any of his usual charm. This is an actor who can be downright hilarious, seen here doing nothing but generating sheer and utter contempt; his character is unlikeable, his disguises make no sense (even inside the movie's own absurd logic), and there's not a single joke that made me smile. Appropriately enough, it ends on a hellacious fart; an apt metaphor for the hour and a half of torment I'd had to sit through. Even when the credits roll, the film continues to punish those who dare witness it by playing yet more scenes that were either cut or couldn't be crammed into the already poorly-paced main feature.

It's kind of astounding how incompetent this movie is; within the first five minutes, the pacing already flatlines with no hope for recovery. It opens with a lengthy credits sequence set to an upbeat pop song, before jumping right into a flashback/escape scene. It's a complete tonal 180 that establishes the film's proud precedent of just jumping from scene to scene with little to no transition in between. Half the time, major scenes are explained away through the use of narration; it's as if you can watch the budget decrease as the movie goes on. It opens with characters gliding through the air and wearing all sorts of strange outfits, only to finish with a scene that looks like it was shot at a Hilton resort in Miami. The film manages to actually mimic the audience, as it simply cannot wait to end; everything is wrapped up in a minute-long explanation following the climax. I can't exactly say I'm angry that it was in such a hurry to end itself; it was painful, but it at least moved along quickly. That said, "at least it was quick" is hardly a quote for the Collector's Edition Blu Ray box.

The Master of Disguise is a horrible ordeal of a film. I suppose I can see some value in it from an academic standpoint; this IS a prime example of how NOT to make a comedy. It's also something of a curiosity, considering how no one will remember that this was even a thing in fifty years or so. It's destined to be a fossilized turd, the only people bothering to dig it up being those fascinated enough by ancient trash to give it the time of day. They say art has whatever meaning the observer applies to it; that is the meaning I apply to The Master of Disguise. If you're intrigued by the uniquely terrible, by that which will leave nothing of worth once it is forgotten, then by all means, give this one a watch.

REVIEW: (500) Days of Summer

Director Marc Webb's (500) Days of Summer has become one of my absolute favorite movies of all time. I remember the first time I ever watched it, having been assigned the first fifteen minutes to watch as part of a course on media aesthetics. Ten minutes in, I decided I was seeing this through until the end, because never before had a movie grabbed my attention in such a way. This is a film that, for me, says all the right things at all the right moments. 

Told through a nonlinear narrative, we see Tom Hansen (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) fall head-over-heels for his coworker, Summer Finn (Zooey Deschanel); Tom is convinced he will never truly be happy until he finds "the one" while Summer, on the other hand, dislikes labels and doesn't believe in the concept of love. Naturally, they're headed for disaster; in the very beginning of the movie, we jump right to the moment in their relationship where Summer suggests the two of them stop seeing each other. From that point on, we get to see bit by bit how their relationship grew and changed to the point that it simply stopped existing all together. It's a brilliant way to tell a story such as this, since it manages to present the time-tested story of "boy meets girl" in a really unorthodox, cynical way, while at the same time managing to present an uplifting message. Had this been conveyed in chronological order, we'd get a depressing story about a happy relationship that falls apart, only for a hamfisted ray of false hope to attempt to lift the mood before it ends. When things are scattered around some, we know where everything is going right from the start, so the value lies more in finding out how things get to the point we know they end up at. It's a creative way to tell a basic story, allowing the fleshed-out, well-written characters to do all the heavy lifting.

In the starring roles we have Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel; they both work superbly together. Gordon-Levitt is able to fluctuate seamlessly between wide-eyed optimist and disheveled sad sack, depending on the point in time that the scene is focusing on. He's a wholly relatable guy whom we want to see succeed, even if all of his woe was brought on by his own poor judgement. Deschanel manages to be both down-to-earth and completely unattainable at the same time, a combination that works out perfectly for the character of Summer. I feel as though everyone has had a Summer in their life at some point, which really highlights what makes this movie work so well; it's extremely easy to align our own failed romantic experiences with those of the characters on screen. When you think about it, bad relationships are far more common than someone finding "the one". Because it's so relatable, it's that much easier to become invested on an emotional level.

In supporting roles, we have Clark Gregg as Vance (Tom's boss), Geoffery Arend as McKenzie (Tom's coworker), Matthew Gray Gubler as Paul (Tom's friend), and Chloë Grace Moretz as Rachel (Tom's little sister). While the main focus is clearly on Gordon-Levitt and Deschanel, all of these actors give stellar performances nonetheless. I especially enjoyed Clark Gregg's cheery, soft-spoken CEO of the greeting card company Tom works at; while all of these characters are funny, none of them are comic caricatures of real people. When Tom is hanging out with Paul and McKenzie, it sounds like a couple of twenty-something friends hanging out. When he discusses his relationship troubles with his sister, it sounds like two siblings trying to level with each other. This is thanks in part to the talented actors and also to the incredibly tight script. This movie is a well-oiled machine, in that all the components mesh seamlessly together to churn out a really impressive product.

I particularly enjoyed the message behind the movie as well. It's not entirely cynical, but it doesn't leave us with the same old fairy tale nonsense that so many romantic comedies rely on. It doesn't completely shut down the notion of believing in a one true love, but enforces the importance of having some backbone; Tom is clearly not entirely comfortable with his relationship with Summer, constantly wanting more despite her having told him that she's not interested in anything serious. In his eyes, once they reach a certain point, the wall will come down and they'll live happily ever after. He assumes everything will work out for the best because he projects everything he wants to see onto Summer; he clings to a few minor things they have in common, using that as justification for overlooking the fact that she is looking for something completely different than he is. They both enjoy The Smiths, so of course it's fate that they end up together. The two are flawed people who gravitate towards opposite, unhealthy extremes when it comes to relationships; in the end, they both discover that they were wrong. Summer is, for the most part, oblivious and selfish while Tom is far too eager to bend over backwards when faced with the slightest chance of finding "the one". It stresses how vital it is to look at things with some objective when dealing with matters of the heart; while it may hurt, it's sometimes necessary to admit that a situation isn't working out the way it was intended to. No life is free of pain or heartbreak, but that doesn't mean that it's not worth it to keep on trying.

(500) Days of Summer is a wonderful film and, in my opinion, one of the greatest stories about love ever told (since, as the opening narration points out, this is not a love story). It's shot with a great attention to detail, the nonlinear timeline keeps things interesting, and the performances are top-notch all around the board. It manages to be hilarious, heartfelt, and smart, making for an all-around fantastic time. If you haven't seen it yet, definitely give it a watch; this one is most assuredly an underrated classic that shouldn't be missed.

REVIEW: Ant-Man

It's only just dawned on me how long I've been waiting for Marvel's Ant-Man to come out. Back before The Avengers even assembled, there was buzz (no pun intended) about Edgar Wright's attempts to helm an adaptation of the classic To Steal An Ant Man comic storyline, bringing Scott Lang and Hank Pym into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Finally, after suffering countless rewrites and losing Edgar Wright in favor of the much more obscure Peyton Reed, Ant-Man  finally hits the screen as arguably the most fun Marvel film to date.

Scott Lang is an ex-burglar who finds himself released from prison, unable to find a job or see his daughter, Cassie (Abby Ryder Fortson, who is almost distractingly adorable). Desperate to make ends meet, Scott decides to pull off one last job, robbing the mansion of Dr. Hank Pym (Michael Douglas). Lang manages to crack Pym's security, only to find nothing but what appears to be a fancy motorcycle suit. Of course, this suit is far from ordinary, allowing the wearer to shrink in size (while retaining proportionate strength and density). Scott eventually finds himself allied with Hank and his estranged daughter, Hope (Evangeline Lilly) as the three plan a heist on Pym's former company to prevent his protege, Darren Cross (Corey Stoll, turning it up to eleven), from misusing Pym's shrinking technology. It's one part whiz-bang comic book adaptation, one part Ocean's Eleven. If I had to compare it to another Marvel film, I'd have to go with James Gunn's Guardians of the Galaxy; both films stay connected to the rest of the MCU just enough to add to the overall narrative of the world Kevin Feige and company have put together, but they also are disconnected enough from everything else that's going on that they're left free to totally be their own, unique thing.

Paul Rudd is quite good in the role of Scott Lang, but I feel as though he's almost too much of an average joe. The idea behind Lang is that he's just a normal guy, not an elite agent like Hawkeye or a billionaire like Tony Stark. He's pretty good at burgling and working with electronics, but other than that he's wholly unremarkable. While Rudd brings a great sense of deadpan humor to the character, he just doesn't leave quite enough of an impression to be considered really amazing. He's good, but he's not about to generate the same level of audience excitement that one would get from Robert Downey Jr or Tom Hiddleston. On the flip-side, we have Michael Douglas as the former Ant-Man, Hank Pym. Douglas completely nails this part, playing Pym like a cynical old man, retired from a life of dabbling in mad science who now desperately wants to save the world. The film does drag at times, but never when Douglas is on the screen. Evangeline Lilly is quite good as Hope Van Dyne, but I feel as though she didn't quite get the character development she needed. Hank is such an interesting presence, but Hope's entire role can basically be summed up in that, ever since the death of her mother, her relationship with her father is somewhat strained. She bounces back and forth between working with him and being furious at him until their arc is wrapped up quickly and cleanly around the end of the second act. Similarly, I never felt all that invested in the relationship between Scott and Cassie; we know that Scott isn't a bad guy (they explain early on that, even though he DID commit a crime, it was decidedly Robin Hood-esque in nature) and Cassie continues to adore him no matter what. He essentially becomes Ant-Man to make himself feel more deserving of his daughter's admiration, which is fine, but it doesn't add anything to their subplot. There is literally no moment in Scott Lang's story at which point his relationship with his daughter is at stake; actually getting to see her and pay child support is what motivates him to invade Pym's home in the first place, but it's not like his ex-wife will grant him unlimited visiting rights now that he can talk to ants.

Filling the role of the villain, we have Corey Stoll as Darren Cross. On one hand, I think this is a terrible villain. He's got next to no depth behind the usual generic greed, ambition, and daddy issues that come with being a protege-turned-traitorous CEO. On the other hand, Stoll is just so much fun to watch in this role. It's not exactly a deep character, but the amount of maniacal cheese crammed into this performance saves it from being yet another pitiful Marvel villain alongside Malekith and Ultron. It's mentioned that Pym Particles (the secret to Hank Pym's size-altering formula) can have an adverse effect on the human mind, when the user is not properly protected. This basically gives Stoll full range to act as goofy and pulpy as he wants, and by God does he go all-out. This is definitely one of those love it or hate it kind of things, but I personally thought it was loads of fun, if not especially deep. In a similar camp is the trio of crooks who help Scott pull off various operations throughout the movie (Michael Peña, David Dastmalchian, and Tip "T.I." Harris); they provide the goofier comedic relief, compared to Rudd and Douglas' more dry, deadpan delivery. I found these characters to be really well-written and likeable, never stepping over that line between funny and annoying. However, like I said, these are the clearly designated comedic relief; if you don't find them funny, they serve little purpose in the grand scheme of things.

As much as I should praise the writing, I feel as though this may be the most visually interesting Marvel movie to date (aside from Guardians of the Galaxy); while the CGI is noticeable, the cinematography keeps things from looking like just another Summer blockbuster. The shrinking scenes in particular are a feast for the eyes, making for some of the most creative action sequences I've ever seen in a superhero film. It's got a wholly unique look and feel to it, setting it apart from what one might expect out of the MCU these days. At this point, Marvel Studios is basically a money-making machine; by no means do they have to really step outside the box when it comes to visuals or cinematography. If they wanted, they easily could have stuck to a bland, simple formula and still produced something that would go on to be hilariously profitable. Bland and simple, but profitable. However, there is noticeable effort to be found in the way this movie was put together, and I feel as though that's worth a lot.

Ant-Man has managed to succeed in that oh so important field where Age of Ultron failed; it actually lived up to the hype. I honestly didn't know what to expect going in; I was excited, of course, but the number of changes this movie had gone through made me just a tad worried. However, any and all of those fears turned out to be completely unfounded; this is definitely a strong contender for the best film of Marvel's Phase Two, easily landing amongst the cream of the crop of the MCU as a whole. While it's not a flawless feature, it more than makes up for it with great performances, imaginative sequences, and just being loads of fun in general.

REVIEW: World's Greatest Dad

I'd heard about Bobcat Goldthwait's World's Greatest Dad for some time now; I'm a sucker for both pitch black comedy and Robin Williams, so imagine my delight when this happens to be one of the greatest black comedies I've ever seen, featuring one of the greatest Robin Williams performances I've ever seen.

Lance Clayton (Robin Williams) is a high school poetry teacher and failed author, living with his son, Kyle (former Spy Kid, Daryl Sabara). Kyle is generally disliked in school and has few friends, mostly because he's an ill-tempered, lecherous underachiever. Any time not spent watching porn on his computer is most likely spent either heaping scorn upon his beleaguered father or hanging out with his only friend, Andrew (Evan Martin, whom I would really like to see in more after this). After returning home one night from a date with a fellow teacher (Alexie Gilmore), Lance discovers his son's lifeless body; while he was away, Kyle died in a humiliating accident. In an attempt to grant him some modicum of dignity, Lance arranges the scene to look like Kyle hung himself, even going so far as to forge a poignant suicide note. The school is rocked by the news of Kyle's passing; after his suicide note is released to the public, a massive outcry of support rises from the students and faculty, resulting in an almost cultlike following of Kyle's memory. As time goes on, the lie gains more and more influence over Lance's life and he is forced to decide between the seemingly idyllic (but fake) situation he's made for himself and the distinctly less glamorous truth.

To address the elephant in the room early on, yes, this is a movie starring Robin Williams which deals heavily on the subject of suicide. World's Greatest Dad was released in 2009, five years before Mr. Williams himself passed away; as such, I would imagine it's impossible to view this movie with the same mindset that one would have viewed it with when it first premiered. There were more than a few moments in the film that leave an unintended impression, when viewed in present context. As time goes on, society changes and context evolves with it. Art, however, is a product of the time it was made; while art can appear timeless, there will always be some factor (whether it be based in technology, technique, or cast) that will tie it down to a specific era. For example, there are aspects of classic films like King Kong and The General that feel out of place when viewed today. Just as a slapstick comedy that portrays a Confederate soldier as a protagonist may feel a tad off in today's world, so might a movie about suicide starring Robin Williams. As I mentioned, there are a small handful of moments in this film that have taken on a new meaning since his death. However, none of these moments feel intrusive or detrimental to the film as a whole. We simply know a little more now than we did then, which grants us insight into the feelings behind what we're seeing on screen. So for those of you worried that this movie is irreparably damaged, fear not; most likely, it will just make you shed a few tears (which honestly is the reaction the scenes in question seemed to be going for in the first place).

As you may have gathered by now, Robin Williams is absolutely perfect in this. The character of Lance Clayton is the definitive okay guy who does terrible things with the best of intentions. He keeps digging himself deeper and deeper, and the film obviously raises the question of whether he's keeping up the charade for his own benefit or everyone else's. As funny and sardonic as it is, this movie also manages to be a really excellent criticism of the way suicide is treated by society. With the exception of Andrew and Lance's shut-in neighbor, Bonnie (Mitzi McCall), literally every character involved in the whole facade wants to exploit Kyle's memory in some way, shape, or form. Students who bullied him while he was alive suddenly claim that he was their best friend, whom they miss dearly. The school grief counselor is overjoyed that so many students are coming to talk to him; not only is he helping young people sort through their personal issues, but he's also getting his name out there and publishing a book in the process. A major theme of the story is the point of the good that can arise from a tragedy; is it truly "the greater good" if it serves a specific person rather than society as a whole? As the influence of Kyle's memory spreads throughout the school, we see some students who are inspired to better themselves after reading the suicide note and journal that Lance attributed to his late son. Is it worth it for the vultures to reap fame and fortune from a tragic event, so long as a small minority take something genuinely beneficial away from it all? These are the questions that the movie constantly asks, all while being sharply-written and darkly hilarious throughout.

In the supporting cast, we've got Daryl Sabara as Kyle Clayton; he and Williams have amazing chemistry in the worst way. In every scene that they have together he's just such a cringe-inducingly terrible kid, which really provides a stark contrast to the way everyone views him posthumously. Evan Martin is really excellent as Kyle's gawky friend, Andrew. Andrew is the first one to suspect that all might not be what it seems and ends up as something of a foil to Lance as the film goes on. I particularly enjoyed his performance here, considering how Andrew feels like he could easily have ended up as a one-note joke character. Instead, he's given a really strong amount of pathos for how little screentime he has; I feel like everyone knew someone like Andrew in high school. Really, there are no bad performances here. It's a great cast playing great characters reading from a great script and working under great direction. As one would expect, all of these elements make for an all-around great film.

World's Greatest Dad is a movie that manages to toe the line between being a pitch-black comedy and oddly touching while providing some of the most biting and brutally accurate social commentary I've ever seen. It pulls absolutely no punches at all and was clearly constructed with the utmost care and effort for it to turn out as good as it is. If you're interested in seeing one of the most underrated performances of Robin Williams' career, I highly recommend you give this one a watch.

REVIEW: American Psycho

After having just watched American Psycho, it's only now dawned on me how few films I've seen Christian Bale in. Of course, I saw Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy and I'm fairly certain I watched Pocahontas at least once as a child. But other than that, I really don't think I've seen him in much. This is something I'm going to have to remedy posthaste, considering that Christian Bale is positively brilliant here.

The plot involves 80's businessman, Patrick Bateman (Bale, channeling Nic Cage circa Vampire's Kiss); when he's not climbing corporate ladders on Wall Street, Bateman spends his time butchering call girls and homeless people in an attempt to sate his latent, psychotic bloodlust. Truthfully, that's about the extent of the plot. We follow Bateman for the entirety of the film, watching him commit various horrifying deeds while he narrates his thoughts and feelings on the proceedings. There isn't much of an arc or central conflict; the whole thing feels more like a look at a period in time rather than a definite story with a beginning, middle, and end. It's a little unorthodox, but the plot is hardly the main selling point here. In this case, it's all about the performances and the meaning behind the actions of the characters.

Bale is absolutely phenomenal as Patrick Bateman; despite him being such a psychotic, evil human being, he still manages to be oddly charming and endearing. He does horrible, disgusting things, but he's just so charismatic, you can't completely hate him. He doesn't come off as an antagonist so much as a protagonist who is utterly deplorable in every imaginable way. Bale's sense of energy and comedic timing are cranked up to eleven here; within a single scene, he's able to build a wall of tension, then make you laugh out loud without that tension breaking even slightly. It's a masterful blend of horror and pitch-black comedy that works spectacularly well together. For the first two acts, Patrick Bateman comes off as someone who is legitimately psychotic; not "horror movie" psychotic, but rather genuinely dangerous and unpredictable. Despite his eccentricities, they all come off as genuine and he avoids feeling like a silly slasher villain and more like a legitimate serial killer. That is, until around the third act; as the film goes on, I noticed several touches that had Bateman's character descend somewhat into the realm of hilarious cheese. Everywhere else in the movie, the contrast in tone manages to work perfectly here, but there's one scene in particular near the end that comes off as really quite jarring, even though it begins and ends in an appropriately chilling fashion. To put it in perspective, the first two acts can be taken completely seriously; you can define them as straight-up psychological horror. Any traces of comedy only serve to make the situation that much more uncomfortable. The third act, however, should be given a little more leeway when it comes to tone. This is interesting, seeing as how the third act is easily the most in-depth in terms of subtext and meaning.

In supporting roles, we have Chloë Sevigny, Cara Seymour, and Willem Dafoe. Sevigny plays Jean, Bateman's secretary. I enjoyed this performance in particular, considering the very interesting relationship the two have with each other. Bateman is chauvanistic and patronizing, but never really straight-up mean to her. Considering this is a man who "likes to dissect girls", one could consider a few backhanded remarks to be getting off easy. Conversely, Jean takes it all in stride; she calls Patrick by his first name and feels much less like his subordinate than his behavior would imply. Cara Seymour portrays a prostitute who ends up involved with Bateman; we never learn her real name, as he simply decides to refer to her as "Christie". She plays the part well and comes off as appropriately tragic and sympathetic, but I can't help but wish we saw more of her. Bateman himself is an interesting character, but it's also interesting to see some things from the point of view of his victims. All that said, I can't really complain; the mystery surrounding this character helps sell the idea that she could be anybody. Patrick literally finds her on the side of the road, so what happens to her could literally happen to anyone, making Bateman's actions all the more effective. In the role of Detective Donald Kimball, we have Willem Defoe. Defoe is a favorite actor of mine, but I feel he's under-utilized here. All he really does is question Christian Bale in a few scenes, but nothing really comes of it. He does a good job, but there's not enough of him to make it especially noteworthy.

American Psycho is an excellent film; it's brilliantly shot, smartly written, and simply oozes personality. The majority of the movie's high points come care of Christian Bale, giving the best performance I've seen out of him yet, but it's clear he wouldn't shine as brightly as he does if the writing and direction weren't as strong as they are. If you're looking for a wholly unique psychological thriller, put down a few tarps, pop in some Huey Lewis, and give American Psycho a watch.

REVIEW: Cannibal! The Musical

It would be something of an understatement to say that I'm a huge fan of the duo of Trey Parker and Matt Stone. South Park, Team America, Book of Mormon; I love basically everything they've done. Anyone who's seen their work (especially Book of Mormon) knows that they're incredibly skilled at crafting musicals, resulting in work that is as catchy as it is hilarious. When I learned that the two had made a musical in the vein of Oklahoma! about pioneer cannibals that debuted years before South Park was even on the air, I knew I had to check it out.

The film tells the true story of Alferd Packer (Trey Parker, credited as Juan Schwartz); in 1873, he led a group of miners on a journey to Breckenridge, Colorado in search of fresh deposits of gold. As the title implies, things go poorly for the group and they're forced to resort to desperate measures to stave off starvation. We hear this story from Packer's point of view; when the movie begins, it's 1883 and Alferd is on trial for murder and cannibalism. He recounts the tale of his journey to Polly Pry (Toddy Walters), a reporter hoping to cover the story behind his ill-fated expedition.

The sense of humor is precisely what you'd expect from a movie with this sort of tone coming from Parker, Stone, and friends. It's all very silly, juxtaposing the grim horror the the situation with an absurdly cheery mood. It's an adaptation of the true story of a group of people who got lost in the Rocky Mountains and resorted to eating each other in order to survive, all conveyed by way of upbeat musical numbers. That said, it's important to keep this movie's origins in mind when watching it. Originally made as a 3-minute trailer for a film class, Parker and Stone went on to collect just over $100,000 in order to expand the project into a full-length movie, all while studying at the University of Colorado. The budget really shows, so anyone expecting anything on the same scale as Team America or Book of Mormon should adjust their expectations accordingly. I personally find the shoestring budget really endearing; it's evident that budgetary restraints forced them to think outside the box in some respects, leading to some really great moments (like when the protagonists stumble upon a tribe of Indians who continually call attention to their many teepees).

Cannibal! The Musical is a really fun time, as well as a truly interesting look at the early works of the team behind one of the biggest shows on Broadway. It feels almost like a spiritual prequel to Book of Mormon; all of the Parker/Stone trappings are there (from extraterrestrial visitors hiding in the background to references to the teachings of the Church of Latter-Day Saints) and the gruesome, unfortunate reality of the situation is presented by upbeat goofballs who sing and dance to jaunty show tunes. If you're into these guys' work as much as I am and want to see what they were doing before they made it big, I highly recommend you give it a watch.