द टॉय

Me and my sister used to watch this when we were children and we loved it. In fact, the last time I saw it I was only 8 years old, but I remember why I enjoyed the movie. I was too young to understand the adult politics but trust me this is a wonderful film for kids to watch. If I was to watch it now it will not be as powerful, and I may not even enjoy it. The point is this was a film made for children, and as this is the case only a child, or an adult who watched it and remembers it as a child are able to accurately review and justify it. Pryor's performance was superb and it shows how diverse he was being able to star in a children's film and manage to be so convincing and never patronises the film by under-performing.

This is simply put, a fun, charming movie about a boy (Scott Schwartz) who decides to make Richard Pryor his toy for a week while he visits his powerful father Jackie Gleason. Simple gags, jokes and life lessons are what this movie is all about. It should be noted that Schwartz, who also played "Flick" in A Christmas Story went on to co-star in non-sexual roles in hardcore XXX films, then did a XXX scene himself, virtually destroying any chance for a comeback as an adult actor.

I've seen this movie more times than I'd ever admit to, and the thing that keeps me watching is Pryor. He shines in just about every scene he's seen, especially when he's paired with the Wonder-Wheel. It's just that the rest of the film isn't on the level.

That's not to say it's a bad film; it's just not a solid one. This remake of a Francis Veber film (the name escapes me) finds Pryor as Jack Brown, an unemployed writer who seeks a job with a newspaper. He arrives at Bates Industries, run by the powerful industrialist U.S. Bates (Jackie Gleason). He works a variety of odd jobs, incl. a janitor in a department store, where he is spotted by U.S. Bates' spoiled son, Eric, during the afforementioned Wonder-Wheel fiasco. Eric wants Jack as a toy, and this leads to a movie that blends the comedic with the sentimental, and works about half of the time.

The movie does take it's time to illustrate the goings-on in the Bates home. Eric spends much time tormenting Jack; during their first night, he shoots firecrackers at him, among other things. The two of them play air-hockey, and when Jack is beating Eric, the boy quits. Jack questions the boy if his father knows that his son is a quitter, to which Eric replies, "He doesn't care what I am, as long as I stay out of his way." That scene illustrates Eric's m.o.; he's frustrated at the neglect and inattentiveness he receives from his father, and expresses it in rebellious behavior.

That's all good and well, and that scenario does have a positive resolution, but the movie is burdened with unnecessary elements that don't belong in a movie like this. The movie has a racist subtext: Jack essentially allows himself to be bought, even though he says he can't. There's also a subplot towards the end dealing with the Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan that serves no purpose other than to wreck a party. And U.S. Bates' wife, Fancy, is a poorly-drawn character; she comes along with an impressive bust and an annoying voice, and does little that is humorous, aside from her pronounciation of "U.S."

Still, the main reason to see the film is Pryor. See it for no other reason than to see a legend doing what he does best.

It's nearly a shot-by-shot remake of the French masterpiece (Le Jouet - 1976). So much for saying I think!

The comparison isn't for the sake of the American movie, since that movie didn't change anything. They kind of translated the French movie to American the way they translated "Le Jouet" into "The Toy" ("The Toy" is what "Le Jouet" means in English!). The only added thing was a storyline about racism which suited (Richard Pryor)'s character, and harmonized with the motif; as if slavery still exists, making the poor as the rich people's toy.

But overall nothing could reach to the original's special pace, or exceptional personality. For example, in (Le Jouet), the rich man's villa was dark, and the silence worked powerfully more than the talking. Here, forget any of that. Instead, they leaned to weak and cheap tricks like repeating the domino's fall, showing off the stepmother's body, and aiming at the adult joking (there was a purposed kick out of hearing the boy says dirty words!).

(Pryor) filled it with his own buffoonery, and some funny lines, however couldn't capture the serious sense of the story, dealing with the movie as a toy itself. He was a golden star at the moment, so maybe they left him do whatever he wants. Or maybe that's the taste of his comedy anyway. (Patrick Williams)'s music was very cute, but not up to (Vladimir Cosma)'s tender memorable score of the original. And nothing can imitate (Le Jouet)'s end, which's one of the most touching and expressing cinematic endings I've ever seen.

Director (Richard Donner), with the 2 scriptwriter, lacked the French director (Francis Veber)'s smart touches while he was transforming his own short story into feature film. Yes, (Donner) made it fairly, but it's still one of his most spiritless movies that lacks the personal touch. He was executing more than creating at this break between the end of the 1970s' (Superman)'s movies, and his movies at the mid-1980s: (Ladyhawke), (The Goonies), and (Lethal Weapon).

Have watched the original or not, this one is good, fresh and solid as an afternoon movie. In fact, its good condition is a proof of the original's beauty. Though, it's obvious that (The Toy) couldn't be as unique as (Le Jouet). I believe this is the habit of Hollywood that loves to "toy" with older movies, or TV shows, making them mostly easier and slighter!

Richard Pryor stars as a down and out writer who ends up as a human toy for multi-billionaire Jackie Gleason's son. The combination results in comedy that only a man like Richard Pryor could take and make even funnier.

Shades of his stand up act stand out when the focus is on Pryor and some of the situations he gets himself into and he uses this time to shine. Jackie Gleason played well, too, as the straight man, but I don't think this was his forte, although, come to think of it, this role isn't that much different from the "straight guy" kind of role he played in the "Smokey and the Bandit" films, but he was a LOT funnier in those films than here.

The only problem I have with this film is that it starts to go for the throat of comedy, but ends up being a piece trying to deal with the issues at the time...almost like changing boats in the middle of the stream. The comedy continues throughout, but it changes its content, which distracted me a little.

7 out of 10 stars.