GroundHog Day
By David Alford
It’s Deja-vu all over again as TV weatherman Phil Connors (Bill Murray) is trapped in a time loop where the same day repeats itself over and over again. Legendary comedy writer/producer Harold Ramis of Animal House, Caddyshack, and Ghostbusters fame is the writer, director and producer of this project. He and Murray had collaborated on many of his biggest successes in Hollywood. However on this project the two didn’t see eye to eye. The original script wasn’t the rom-com laced with comedic cynicism it eventually became, but was much darker in tone focusing more on the philosophical elements of the conundrum. That was the movie Murray was interested in making, whereas Ramis wanted to focus more on the comedy to make it more broadly palatable. There was a great deal of in-fighting on set between the two movie moguls. This project marked the end of their collaborations and their friendship up till Ramis’ passing in 2014.
There is no denying the financial and critical success of the movie in the 1990’s, but how does “Groundhog Day” fare against the test of time? It hasn’t aged well. In the wake of the “Me Too” movement, this film feels every bit of it twenty plus years. And not in a “vintage classic” sort of way.
Murray broke new ground with this performance giving a more somber leading man performance which would later open the door for him to pursue more serious roles. Those expecting the comedic high-energy of his “CaddyShack or Ghostbusters” performances will find the laughs lacking in this one. There are a few good chuckles, but the jokes here are largely stale. Andie MacDowell, a well known star of the 90’s, plays Murray’s love interest with charm if not a bit giggly and two dimensional. This wasn’t uncommon in the 90’s for women to be written as simply the object of a man’s desire without much more depth of character than that. So, I assume McDowell was working with what she was given. Comedian, Chris Elliott, rounds out the cast as a punchline tossing side-kick, a role he has consistently handled well through-out his career.
The supporting roles are painfully acted and rarely believable beyond cartoonish caricatures for Murray to lob his sardonic insults toward. If they were seen as real people, viewers might find Connors’ harsh retorts too harsh and turn against him, but if these minor characters are seen as walking punchlines, then no one worries about them be skewered, because they kind of “deserve it”.
The story’s plot mechanism are loosely defined because it’s a rom-com so who cares why Connors is in a time loop, he just is until love sets him free. It’s a metaphor, so go with it. Viewers spend half the movie asking themselves why Connors isn’t taking obvious steps to try and escape the time trap; however, none of it matters because our leading man never even asks the question “why is this happening?” He readily accepts it without question and plays along with the plot devices for the simple reason that the writers need him to do so in order to make the story work.
Even if we take logic out of the equation and go with the romantic side of the story, there is only the mildest chemistry between Murray and MacDowell. Her character is so vapid and poorly defined and the urgent stakes of Murray’s character are so low, that the entire situation feels passive and only mildly interesting. If they get together, great! If not, oh well.
Which begs the question, was this film successful because Bill Murray and Harold Ramis were coming off a string of huge hits? If this movie had someone else as its star would it have been forgotten long ago. My guess is that it would. With this movie, Ramis added “Groundhog Day” to our lexicon to mean “a dull or monotonous day”. Watching this movie now might not do much to save anyone’s “Groundhog Day”.
