kitty
02-01-2004, 09:06 AM
'The Perfect Score' an Underachiever
The United States' educational system is one that has become centered around standardized testing. From the SATs, the GREs (which this author will soon be facing), the MCATs, the VCATs, and the LSATs, one test taken on a nerve-wracking Saturday afternoon can be all the difference between Tompkins County Community College, Cornell University, or a competitive future with Church's Chicken. With the recent institution of Bush's 'No Child Left Behind' policy, standardization has even reached its insiduous influence towards the grammar and middle school levels.
'The Perfect Score', penned by Mark Schwahn, Jon Zack and Smallville writer Mark Hyman, takes as its premise six students who, for various reasons are unable (or unwilling) to achieve on the SATs -- and their low scores are preventing them from continuing on to the rest of their lives. Framing the problem is a sense of rebellion against the uniformity of Abercrombie&Fitch white teen America. The movie opens with an argument that when we sit down to our SATs, the test ignores our uniqueness. To it, regardless of GPA or class ranking, we are all the same: average. Thus, a plot is born to steal the SAT answers.
And to some degree, we must wonder what good the SATs does. To assume everyone is equal is to disregard inherent inequalities in America's education systems nationwide. Not all schools are created equal, yet the SATs assume all students are. Desmond (Darius Miles), the aspiring NBA hopeful, and Anna (Erika Christensen) raise this argument, saying that the SATs are both racist
and sexist. The irony is, of course, that the intention of the SATs was to counter discrimination by making college admissions open to anyone who could perform well on a standardized test, creating opportunities for those who would traditionally be denied higher education.
Had the 'Perfect Score' addressed these questions, it would have gotten a solid 'A', and it begins promisingly with a teasing appetizer of social commentary as narrator Roy (Leonardo Nam) talks of trying to find our individuality in a society of standardization. Unfortunately, the movie falls into the usual trap of films of this genre -- catering to a pre-teen audience forces it into a mould of 'She's All That' meets 'Mission Impossible', all clever commentary sanitized for little Timmy's amusement.
(Incidentally, this might be a good time to gripe about the movie-going audience that will attend such a teen flick -- people you will have to presumably deal with if you choose to watch this movie. I sat in front of two ten year old girls who gasped loudly and appreciatively at the trailer for 'Confessions of a Teenaged Drama Queen', who made inane comments about how much they *love* Erika Christensen when her character, Anna, acts out against her parents, and who yelled out obnoxious 'EEEEEeeewwwwwws' at a fantasy make-out scene between characters Roy and Anna.
Meanwhile, across the aisle, their little sister ran back and forth between them and their mother -- I guess little girls just *can't* be seen going to a movie with their moms... even if they could never have gotten into the movie on their own. Lil's sis runs over at one point and asks really loudly 'What's a PIMP??' in response to a particular line of dialogue. Now, I'm not looking at Vanessa and Rachel behind me as the problem, nor is little sister Suzie... no, I'm looking at mommy over there. Why are you gonna take a bunch of kids to a movie if A) you never taught them proper movie etiquette? and B) they're not gonna understand a single joke in the movie? If your kids won't be facing the SATs for another six years, what makes you think they will be able to relate at all to this movie? What the hell is wrong with today's parents?!?
But, I digress.)
Constrained to a 90 minute running time (probably under the assumption that little Timmy's ADD has caused him to be antsy after an hour and a half), contradictions abound. For example, one scene, thrown in for slapschtick comedic effect, involves three of the students crossing a room mounted with a security camera. Hilarity ensues as they creep under it. Not half an hour later, two characters share a romantic scene, shot in the same room, as they prance on the desk that they had earlier used for cover. What - movie budget too small to build another set? Has standardization decreased our intellects to the point where little Timmy would be too dumb to make the connection?
There is also no time left for character development. Each of the students are a caricature of a 'high school type', as most notably poked fun at in movies like 'Not Another Teen Movie'. The movie's main protagonists, Kyle (Chris Evans) and Matty (Bryan Greenburg), are the annoying frat fodder, which both actors overact, unconvincingly. They do however manage to capture the upper middle-class white boy angst that has them *surprised* when they don't receive the high scores and college acceptances they "deserve". Christensen proves once and for all that she cannot act
(though she alluded to this fact in 'Swimfan') with her portrayal of prissy perfectionist Anna who discovers her inner rebel through the team's misadventures. The only decent actor is Scarlett Johansson, playing self-admitted poor little rich girl Francesca, with some semblance of skill,
though she seems out of place among her no-talented cast-mates. Rounding out the groups are our token minorities, Desmond and Roy, the latter of which plays pothead with amusement, if sometimes grating obnoxiousness.
This movie has been touted for trying to shatter stereotypes -- after all, maybe almost-valedictorian Anna really does just want to be a normal girl, or Desmond (re: token black guy) really can be good at math. Yet, as you can probably tell, basing a 'non-stereotype' in a stereotype doesn't really help. Desmond is, of course, a basketball player, and Roy, though portrayed as a walking TheTruth.com ad, surprises all when he is able to code Visual Basic with (genetic?) ease. In fact, though it was nice to see Leonardo Nam playing a 'non-stereotypical' Asian, whose few remaining brain cells are being slowly fried by his use of his frequent-smoking bong card, his delivery is by no means spectacular. Colour me old-fashioned, but I found his character too excessively slapschtick and the delivery of some of his lines even grating. As horny as your grandma's chihuahua, his character, rather than stereotype-shattering, is really just embarassing.
Is there anything, than, that redeems this movie? Aside from the promising opening (I really had high hopes for about ten minutes), the film does a few interesting things as far as staging fantasy scenes as the heist to steal the SAT answers is planned, possibly a perk from 'Varsity Blues' director Brian Robbins. At points, the movies is even entertaining and amusing. And, of
course, it gets points for doing no-less than four shoutouts to my alma mater, Cornell University (to which Kyle wants to apply).
But, in the end, I would rather the moviemakers had just taken the re-test on this one.
The United States' educational system is one that has become centered around standardized testing. From the SATs, the GREs (which this author will soon be facing), the MCATs, the VCATs, and the LSATs, one test taken on a nerve-wracking Saturday afternoon can be all the difference between Tompkins County Community College, Cornell University, or a competitive future with Church's Chicken. With the recent institution of Bush's 'No Child Left Behind' policy, standardization has even reached its insiduous influence towards the grammar and middle school levels.
'The Perfect Score', penned by Mark Schwahn, Jon Zack and Smallville writer Mark Hyman, takes as its premise six students who, for various reasons are unable (or unwilling) to achieve on the SATs -- and their low scores are preventing them from continuing on to the rest of their lives. Framing the problem is a sense of rebellion against the uniformity of Abercrombie&Fitch white teen America. The movie opens with an argument that when we sit down to our SATs, the test ignores our uniqueness. To it, regardless of GPA or class ranking, we are all the same: average. Thus, a plot is born to steal the SAT answers.
And to some degree, we must wonder what good the SATs does. To assume everyone is equal is to disregard inherent inequalities in America's education systems nationwide. Not all schools are created equal, yet the SATs assume all students are. Desmond (Darius Miles), the aspiring NBA hopeful, and Anna (Erika Christensen) raise this argument, saying that the SATs are both racist
and sexist. The irony is, of course, that the intention of the SATs was to counter discrimination by making college admissions open to anyone who could perform well on a standardized test, creating opportunities for those who would traditionally be denied higher education.
Had the 'Perfect Score' addressed these questions, it would have gotten a solid 'A', and it begins promisingly with a teasing appetizer of social commentary as narrator Roy (Leonardo Nam) talks of trying to find our individuality in a society of standardization. Unfortunately, the movie falls into the usual trap of films of this genre -- catering to a pre-teen audience forces it into a mould of 'She's All That' meets 'Mission Impossible', all clever commentary sanitized for little Timmy's amusement.
(Incidentally, this might be a good time to gripe about the movie-going audience that will attend such a teen flick -- people you will have to presumably deal with if you choose to watch this movie. I sat in front of two ten year old girls who gasped loudly and appreciatively at the trailer for 'Confessions of a Teenaged Drama Queen', who made inane comments about how much they *love* Erika Christensen when her character, Anna, acts out against her parents, and who yelled out obnoxious 'EEEEEeeewwwwwws' at a fantasy make-out scene between characters Roy and Anna.
Meanwhile, across the aisle, their little sister ran back and forth between them and their mother -- I guess little girls just *can't* be seen going to a movie with their moms... even if they could never have gotten into the movie on their own. Lil's sis runs over at one point and asks really loudly 'What's a PIMP??' in response to a particular line of dialogue. Now, I'm not looking at Vanessa and Rachel behind me as the problem, nor is little sister Suzie... no, I'm looking at mommy over there. Why are you gonna take a bunch of kids to a movie if A) you never taught them proper movie etiquette? and B) they're not gonna understand a single joke in the movie? If your kids won't be facing the SATs for another six years, what makes you think they will be able to relate at all to this movie? What the hell is wrong with today's parents?!?
But, I digress.)
Constrained to a 90 minute running time (probably under the assumption that little Timmy's ADD has caused him to be antsy after an hour and a half), contradictions abound. For example, one scene, thrown in for slapschtick comedic effect, involves three of the students crossing a room mounted with a security camera. Hilarity ensues as they creep under it. Not half an hour later, two characters share a romantic scene, shot in the same room, as they prance on the desk that they had earlier used for cover. What - movie budget too small to build another set? Has standardization decreased our intellects to the point where little Timmy would be too dumb to make the connection?
There is also no time left for character development. Each of the students are a caricature of a 'high school type', as most notably poked fun at in movies like 'Not Another Teen Movie'. The movie's main protagonists, Kyle (Chris Evans) and Matty (Bryan Greenburg), are the annoying frat fodder, which both actors overact, unconvincingly. They do however manage to capture the upper middle-class white boy angst that has them *surprised* when they don't receive the high scores and college acceptances they "deserve". Christensen proves once and for all that she cannot act
(though she alluded to this fact in 'Swimfan') with her portrayal of prissy perfectionist Anna who discovers her inner rebel through the team's misadventures. The only decent actor is Scarlett Johansson, playing self-admitted poor little rich girl Francesca, with some semblance of skill,
though she seems out of place among her no-talented cast-mates. Rounding out the groups are our token minorities, Desmond and Roy, the latter of which plays pothead with amusement, if sometimes grating obnoxiousness.
This movie has been touted for trying to shatter stereotypes -- after all, maybe almost-valedictorian Anna really does just want to be a normal girl, or Desmond (re: token black guy) really can be good at math. Yet, as you can probably tell, basing a 'non-stereotype' in a stereotype doesn't really help. Desmond is, of course, a basketball player, and Roy, though portrayed as a walking TheTruth.com ad, surprises all when he is able to code Visual Basic with (genetic?) ease. In fact, though it was nice to see Leonardo Nam playing a 'non-stereotypical' Asian, whose few remaining brain cells are being slowly fried by his use of his frequent-smoking bong card, his delivery is by no means spectacular. Colour me old-fashioned, but I found his character too excessively slapschtick and the delivery of some of his lines even grating. As horny as your grandma's chihuahua, his character, rather than stereotype-shattering, is really just embarassing.
Is there anything, than, that redeems this movie? Aside from the promising opening (I really had high hopes for about ten minutes), the film does a few interesting things as far as staging fantasy scenes as the heist to steal the SAT answers is planned, possibly a perk from 'Varsity Blues' director Brian Robbins. At points, the movies is even entertaining and amusing. And, of
course, it gets points for doing no-less than four shoutouts to my alma mater, Cornell University (to which Kyle wants to apply).
But, in the end, I would rather the moviemakers had just taken the re-test on this one.