While it isn’t my intention to be the lone dissenting voice, the fact remains, I was not a fan of The Muppets. Take note that I didn’t say I hated or even disliked it; I simply wasn’t charmed by it and therefore have no desire to sing its praises. Many have said that this is the Muppet movie they’ve been waiting over 20 years for, and I’m happy for them. (That sounds condescending, but it truly isn’t.) I’d be bouncing off the walls if I’d been gifted a movie that brought me back to the golden age of Henson. For me, this wasn’t that.
Many consider Muppet content pre The Muppet Christmas Carol as “good,” inferring that output after the 1992 entry is “bad.” I’m inclined to agree and, like many, I view Disney’s involvement as the cause. Not only was Henson gone, but the franchise was now owned by a powerhouse with an established brand. Things were bound to change in the absence of Jim’s voice. (And I mean “voice” in every possible way it can be used.) What I am saying is this: no matter how you look at it, The Muppets is still after 1992; it’s still Henson-less.
I give the film and Jason Segel a lot of credit. Successfully introducing a “Muppet,” Walter, with a sympathetic back story and a likeable persona is nuts. It’s like pulling a dump truck uphill with your teeth. Or not… but still. Sure, the little guy is us. He’s an oddball who grew up idolizing Kermit and obsessing over his cohorts. How could we not love him? The setup is also solid in a save-the-rec-center sort of way. Get the Muppets back together to put on a Muppet Showesque telethon to save their old studio? Sold. But the devil is in the details and those details are why I couldn’t give myself away to this film.
There are many hair-splity things I could ramble on about, but in the interest of brevity I’ll focus on the main issue. Muppets are not supporting characters. In all those “good” Muppet movies (Caper, Manhattan, Movie) the Muppets are the stars. They meet human villains (Doc Hopper, Nicky Holiday) and friends (Jenny), but the story is about them. On IMDb the voice actors are billed first until you get to films like Muppet Treasure Island and The Muppets’ Wizard of Oz where the established actors (and Ashanti) are now the decidedly human stars. (Muppets from Space, albeit it underwhelming, is an exception.) I’m not implying I have any issue with Segel in a human lead role. I found him delightful and wouldn’t have minded more brotherly interaction. Walter is, after all, a Muppet and any personal saga surrounding him was welcomed and quite frankly adorable. But the love story killed me. I’m pro Amy Adams. I am not pro human love story in my Muppet movie. Ever. It took up valuable time; time that could have gone to Rowlf, or Lew Zealand, or Sweetums, and where was Robin? It wasn’t the Muppet movie I’ve been waiting decades for because its heart was missing. It’s soft, furry, Muppety heart. Take out the love story, cram some more Muppets in (Bean, please), and extend the Muppet Show telethon to include more “acts.” That’s my unsolicited advice.
Not to beat a dead horse, but the cameos were lacking a bit. In the past folks had popped on in a small role that generally had some comedic payoff. Think Steve Martin as a disgruntled waiter or John Cleese as a puzzled yet helpful homeowner. Here we are treated to 30 seconds of Sarah Silverman and less than a minute of Donald Glover. No bit, no gag, no punchline. (Dave Grohl and Jim Parsons were inspired though.) I suppose what I’m saying is that the people were in the wrong place. The Frog Prince had one person (until the end, spoiler alert, when there was a prince) in it!
So what made The Muppets lackluster for me? The Disney involvement? Or maybe the tone and content of modern, mainstream children’s films. (Although, that’s another discussion all together.) Perhaps it’s simply that, for me, there can never be a “good” one without Jim. Thankfully, much like with remakes, they don’t set fire to the old films when a new one comes along.
