Dear Keenen, Marlon, Damon, Shawn and \nany others I may have \nforgotten,
I am writing on behalf of the recent trailer for your latest Wayans Bros. comedy opus "Little Man," a film that, according to IMDB.com, chronicles the tale of "A wannabe dad (Shawn Wayans) who mistakes a vertically challenged criminal on the lam (Marlon Wayans) as his newly adopted son" (is vertically challenged, the PC way of saying midget? I didn't get that memo.). Now I'm no expert on what makes successful comedy. However, I can't help but think that maybe things have gotten out of hand in what justifies good comedy.\nI say this only because the trailer and the overall premise for your upcoming CGI heavy romp of a comedy may be some of the worst, let me finish, trash seen on film since 1999s "Baby Geniuses" and 1986s smooth-talking, suave duck dramedy "Howard the Duck."\nThere was a time when the Wayans brothers were a household name in the world of comedy. You stunned us with the '90s urban sketch comedy series "In Living Color," took on David Zuckeresque film satires with the great blaxploitation homage "I'm Gonna Git You Sucka" and the ripe with parody pseudo gangsta comedy "Don't Be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in the Hood," which also has one of the best titles ever. You even managed to catch our attention and garner some laughs with the first two, and as far as I'm concerned, only good, "Scary Movie" films (kudos for resurrecting the career of Chris 'Cabin Boy' Elliott).\nLately though I must say your films have become rather trite. 2004's "White Chicks" seemed to have been nothing more than a multi-million dollar produced inside joke about your take on ghettofied, trixie white chicks, either that or you were just anxious to dress up in heavy makeup and do your best Paris Hilton/Nicole Ritchie impression. Whether or not either of these theories are correct, the film still was a disaster, even if it did add some more Benjamins to the Wayans monarchy.\nBut enough about the past, let's get back to "Little Man." As far as I'm concerned you guys are either out of ideas, were blazed as hell when conceiving the idea or are merely trying to see if you can pull a film out of your asses and still make a cold 30 million profit. The joke is on you if the latter was the true fuel for the development of this film, because I guarantee people are fed up with throwing down 10 dollars for mindless staid crap. \nAs far as I'm concerned there are many things wrong with the "Little Man" trailer and most likely the soon to be released film itself, however, two main reasons really stand out in my mind.\n1) Going too far with CGI: Computer Generated Imagery technology has done wonders with modern filmmaking, however, it must be utilized with care and sophistication (see Peter Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" or James Cameron's entire catalogue). By using the sophisticated technology to simply see what brother Marlon would look like with a body of a two-year old toddler, you have abused your power and have officially treaded the waters of the bad CGI world of films like "Anaconda/s," "Son of the Mask," "Van Helsing," and, oh, dare I say, "SuperBabies: Baby Geniuses 2."\n2) I'm Pretty Sure Babies Don't shave: From what I gather from the trailer the main premise and hook of the film is that after a diamond heist goes wrong the Little Man (Marlon) tries to be adopted by two extremely naïve and hopeful parents (this is where Shawn appears) in order to retrieve the misplaced goods. In the trailer Tracy Morgan (sigh) leaves the Little Man in a basket on their doorstep and the parents take him in. While the plot alone is worthy of concern, I must point out that babies, no matter the size of their bodies, can't have five o'clock shadow stubble, don't have fully polished adult teeth, can't have pierced ears with 5 carat diamond studs and generally are not inked up with thug tattoos on their arms (arms that, mind you, are also quite ripped), but hey that's just me. Prove me wrong if you think these assumptions are unfair. \nSo brothers Wayans perhaps I am wrong on my premature assumptions about this film (I hope for your sake I am). I am just a concerned moviegoer who is tired of being jerked around by shitty comedies that are made for money and money alone. If the trailer speaks for itself and this movie is trash, shame on you. Don't go the way of Paulie Shore and so many other comedians whose careers sunk as fast as Steve Guttenberg's post "Zeus and Roxanne" (that's the one where a dog and a dolphin become friends and save the day). I'm just saying, be careful with your Hollywood power because the way it looks now, despite "Little Man's" tagline, little might not in fact be the new big this summer.
Best,\nC. Warner Sills
