by Jon Warner
Groundhog Day was the summative collaboration between Harold Ramis and Bill Murray that spanned 6 films. Ramis wrote and/or directed for several of Bill Murray’s best and most loved early outputs, from the gross-out classics Meatballs, Caddyshack, and Stripes, to slightly more “intelligent” fare like Ghostbusters, but it was with Groundhog Day that a certain key balance was found, eliminating most of the petty and stupid and swapping in the thoughtful, the existential, and the bittersweet. That’s not to say that this film isn’t funny, cause it’s absolutely hilarious. But it’s also something else…..a parable, a morality play, an examination of our humanity.
Unless you’ve lived in solitary confinement for the last twenty years, you already know this film well, and for some of you, you know it by heart. Bill Murray plays Phil Connors, a TV news weatherman based out of Pittsburgh who is slated to cover the festivities of Groundhog Day, Feb. 2, in Punxsutawney, PA. He travels via van with his new producer Rita (Andie McDowell), and his cameraman Larry (Chris Elliott). It does not take long for us to realize what a smug and arrogant man is Phil Connors. From his constant putdowns of Rita and Larry, to his complaining about the trip, to his hitting on Rita, to his sarcastic coverage of the event itself, it is clear that he has alienated himself from others to the point of no-return. Always on the lookout for himself, his day is one big me-fest. After covering the event, the crew tries to return to Pittsburgh, but is halted by a blizzard (which of course Phil failed to predict), forcing Phil, Rita, and Larry to return to Punxsutawney for another night. Phil wakes up the next morning at the B&B where he’s staying and finds that it’s Groundhog Day, Feb. 2 all over again. This occurs the day after…..and the day after…..and again…..and again. Feb. 2, Feb. 2, Feb. 2……..
Phil Connors is stuck in some kind of pseudo time warp and the entire scenario has an interesting set of rules that the film lays out for us. For one thing, people are in certain places at the same time each day, and the entire day repeats itself so that if Phil wants to do the same things and be at the same places, the day will be exactly the same each time. However, Phil also has the ability to do new things with each day and approach each day differently if he so chooses, meaning he can alter the course of each day, but cannot affect the time warp in which he is stuck. He can stay in bed all day if he likes; he can skip the Groundhog coverage if he so chooses; he can park himself in the diner and consume massive quantities of food. He can also carry memories from one day to the next, while everyone else starts over with no memory that the day is being repeated. This is partly what makes this film so funny. It’s the way that we see the differences from one day to the next, almost like seeing multiple takes of the same scene being done over and over again. Phil encounters several people at the beginning of each day…..the fat man at the top of the stairs at the B&B, Mrs. Lancaster the B&B proprietor in the dining area (“Do you ever have déjà vu Mrs. Lancaster?” “I don’t think so but I’ll check with the kitchen”), the homeless man on the street, Ned Ryerson- insurance salesman and former high school classmate on the sidewalk (“Watch out for that first step! It’s a doooooozy”). Each day Phil’s interaction with them is slightly different as Phil’s consciousness of the repetition takes hold. It’s our understanding of what has happened before combined with what is happening “now” that is so funny.
When you get right down to it, Phil is essentially the only one in existence. He has a memory and a consciousness that each day is being relived, but no one else does. This is both why the film is so funny, but also why it can be pitifully sad. In one of the film’s best examinations of Phil’s state, we see a series of days strung together whereby Phil tries to court Rita by learning all of her likes and dislikes, trying to create the perfect day whereby he can go to bed with her. Try as he might, he is never quite able to do it as his attempts to play for self-gain constantly find him out. He’s not fully sympathetic for the whole film, but there comes a point when I begin to root for Phil and really like him and perhaps this has more to do with Murray than anything else. I honestly can’t think of another comedic actor who would have been able to make this role work so well. Murray goes through an amazing myriad of moods throughout the film: from arrogance, to bewilderment, to frustration, to embracing of the carefree, to romantic optimism, to hopeless suicidal despair, to a determination to make a difference in the lives of others and embrace each day as it comes. All of these changes occur through subtle changes in Murray’s tone and demeanor. It’s really a remarkable performance and is probably the genesis of Murray’s later career as a more existential comedic actor. I think there is a clear progression from Groundhog Day to his work in films like Rushmore, Lost in Translation, The Life Aquatic, and Broken Flowers, all of which are films born of a certain balance between the sarcastic, the deadpan, and the melancholy.
What separates Groundhog Day from similar works like Dickens’ A Christmas Carol, or Capra’s It’s a Wonderful Life, is the fact that we have no idea who or what is controlling this exiled existence. It could be God, it could be the Devil, it simply could be fate itself that has dealt Phil this maniacal blow. We just understand that Phil’s comeuppance is due. I think this element of not fully knowing who has caused this or why this is happening is central to the film’s success. There is a deep examination of emptiness and of nothingness, of depression and pointlessness and Godlessness. I think the film can tend to have a lightweight exterior, but I think it’s just beneath this where the real depth of this film lies. It is not until after Phil goes through the state of suicidal obsession, does he begin to come around, to try to find any semblance of purpose out of his predicament, to find a point to his existence. Also, for many interpreting this film along spiritual lines, there is really no talk of God, outside of Phil himself articulating that he IS a god. Spirituality never comes up as a theme. This is a film about humans and their interactions with each other. In a sense, Phil has broken off from humanity and has been set on an island….alone…..to think about himself and his place and his emptiness and loneliness. His goal is to get back to the mainland and his journey back requires him to profoundly change his behavior and his outlook.
It is debatable, but one of the most interesting discussion points of this film is just exactly how long is Phil stuck in Feb. 2? It could be argued that in order to know the life story of everyone in the diner and to memorize every Jeopardy answer for the episode that day, it would take some time. However to be able to go from complete novice on the piano, to being able to play piano at the blues concert he leads at the end of the film, it could be argued that he spends many, many years in the time warp. What gets him out of the time warp is of course that he embraces each day and puts others first. This is after he has resigned himself to making the best of each day as it comes, and this is something that applies to humanity at its core. Call it lame if you want, but I think the film makes you take stock of yourself. Do you take each day as an opportunity to make a difference? Do you even care what happens today? These are the questions the film makes me think about. I’m laughing my way through the film, but the questions gnawing at my brain are there too. Yes it’s goofy and silly at times, but there is so much to chew on, perhaps even more than a film like this deserves to have. When you try to boil it down like that, I think the film becomes perhaps preachy. It’s best not to over-analyze it I think. The film is best experienced and watched multiple times and taken as you see it. I’ve been saying lately that there are great films that happen to be funny, and there are really funny films that happen to be great. This one just happens to be both.
How Groundhog Day made the Top 100:
#6 Bob Clark
#9 Jon Warner
#11 David Schleicher
#13 Jaime Grijalba
#14 Pat Perry
#22 J.D. La France
#28 Jason Marshall
#31 Sachin Gandhi
#32 Dean Treadway
#34 Frank Gallo
#34 Brandie Ashe
#42 Pierre De Plume
#42 Bobby McCartney
#49 James Uhler
#52 John Greco
#53 Bobby Jopsson
Terrific little review. Well thought out and it hits on all the reasons (and then some) why this film is considered a modern comedy classic.
It’s the only film of what I call the “first half” of Murray’s screen career that offers up anything like a true performance. Prior to this film, Murray is all smarmy one-liners and sneers at the camera (the stuff that made him famous on SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE). Here, the script offers him some real character development and while the turn offers him moments to do what he does best, there’s also a history behind the sneers and the one liners.
For Ramis, a director (if you wanna really call him that) that seldom goes out of his way to give you something that isn’t bolted to the floor, the screenplay offers up some opportunities to go a little wild and creative with the visual style and I can tell you that I APPRECIATE this film more than I do his prior work (GHOSTBUSTERS, STRIPES, CADDYSHACK).
I don’t love this film. Matter of fact, I often scratch my head when I hear people clamor over this one like it were the second coming of Jesus Christ Almighty. But, I do see the significance of this film as being a stepping stone toward the serious side of Bill Murray as an actor. It’s this film, I think, along with his work in sketch comedy, on the aforementioned SNL, that got Murray noticed by fledgling director Wes Anderson and it IS the strength of his perfomance in GROUNDHOG DAY that propelled him into that first truly inspired piece of great character realization, RUSHMORE. Since GROUNDHOG DAY, Murrray rarely, if ever, looks back to the bread and water days of his early years with smarmy one-liners and sneers at the camera.
Again, I am no fan of this film, but I thank Ramis and company for giving it to Murray so the seed could be firmly planted and allowed to grow and blossom into something truly extraordinary. From this film on Murray is now an A-list actor that is wanted and desired for things that his early career would have never allowed (RUSHMORE-still his BEST performance, THE ROYAL TENNEBAUMS and, particularly, LOST IN TRANSLATION).
Yeah Dennis I agree that this film realized Murray’s potential for the first time, giving him something that balanced his talent and utilized it for its potential. Rushmore is quite the film yeah probably is his best performance, even though he doesn’t have as much screen time as in Groundhog Day. He has to cover a bit more range in GD though, so I suppose it’s debatable which is best. I do recall on another post that Bob Clark wrote (which was great) that you didn’t like this film, so that doesn’t surprise me. I don’t consider this film the second coming, but I DO consider it the best comedy of the last 20-30 years.
Let’s not sell “first half” Murray short. While I’ll concede that a maturation as an actor started (or was proven) with Groundhog Day, Stripes and Ghostbusters are turns by a great comic. They may not measure up to classic-Hollywood standards of wit but at least Murray was a primarily verbal comedian and a master of the put-down compared to his slob peers and the infantile men who followed. For a long time I was disappointed that he didn’t follow the Reitman films with work in the same vein, and I was horrified by stuff like What About Bob? His alliance with W. Anderson has gone a long way toward redeeming him, and it might be better to think of Murray’s career as three acts, the first closing with his retreat following the flop of Razor’s Edge, the second a dark age with Groundhog Day as the oasis, the third beginning with Rushmore and continuing to the present. Ramis’s movie just missed my cut but definitely deserves a spot in the countdown.
Samuel…I’m not as big a fan of Stripes, but I do like Caddyshack and Ghostbusters alot. Caddyshack made my list and Ghostbusters just missed it. I was going to go into this point, but avoided it in my review to prevent overlength, but I feel like Murray is probably the greatest screen comedian post 1980. The way he has adapted over the years, outlasted other contemporaries who have flashed and faded etc,…
Nobody is saying Murray wasn’t great in the films of that first “dark half” of his career. GHOSTBUSTERS really served to sell his smarmy, wise-ass personality that was, finally, far smarter than just the smart-ass dope he played in films like STRIPES and MEATBALLS. I have never understood the attraction to Murray, let alone anyone else in the cast, of CADDYSHACK which, turth be told, is nothing more than a lame stringing together of somewhat funny sequences that really don’t come off as a whole. Basically, Murray, to me, has always been far smarter and far more talented than the films he found himself performing in prior to GROUNDHOG DAY. Yes, CADDYSHACK, MEATBALLS, STRIPES and GHOSTBUSTERS are fun comic entertainments, and all of them contain great moments of inspired lunacy, but its not until GROUNDHOG DAY that something more solid, more comically dramatic started to emmerge from good ole Bill. Shit, he wasn’t even the first choice for the role in GHOSTBUSTERS (actually, it was written for the late, great John Belushi) but, a trooper all the way, he made the best of situations and bided his time. Wes Anderson always believed in Murray being far more than slob comedies and after seeing his work in the film reviewed above knew he had his man. Herman Bloom of RUSHMORE was Murray seizing the moment and giving it everything he had. This is why, for me, RUSHMORE stands tallest of all his screen turns. It’s Murray entering the court as the slam dunk master and I can not fathom any other comic actor being better suited for the role.
For one thing, people are in certain places at the same time each day, and the entire day repeats itself so that if Phil wants to do the same things and be at the same places, the day will be exactly the same each time.
This in indeed a fascinating conceit, and it was originally employed in a second season episode of “Twilight Zone” titles “Shadow Play,” when Dennis Weaver, convicted of murder, tries to convince his executioners that the whole situation is only a recurring nightmare of his.” of course the telling similarities to A Christmas Carol and It’s A Wonderful Life have been well established and this morality play (I love your suggestion Jon, that the film makes you ‘take stock of yourself”) dismisses the perception that immortality is much desired in a film that beautifully blends the intellectual and the emotionally, and features the finest work of Bill Murray’s career. I’ll be looking at Bill again in the coming weeks in his new film about FDR, Hyde Park on the Hudson. Congratulations Jon, on a brilliant piece of writing in defense of one of the most popular of all American comedies.
Thanks Sam. You’re right this does have a Twilight Zone feel to it, and although I can’t quite recall that episode exactly, I know you have a great grasp of Serling’s show and it makes sense. I like what you say about how this film calls into question whether immortality is something to be desired. That’s an interesting angle and one I don’t think I really examined. Good call. Yeah I hope Murray’s performance as FDR works well and I’ll surely check that out.
There is an aching sense of deja vu in the film, and the fact that Murray’s character is the only one who really exists gives the film it’s existential heft. Very engaging review, Jon Warner.
Hey thanks Peter nice observations. I do love that line in the film about Deju Vu and the B&B lady has that great quip about checking with the kitchen.
Jon –
A wonderful review – you give the deeper, spiritual overtones over the material their due, but not to the point of overshadowing the comedy (much as does the film itself.) Interesting and obvious reference to A CHRISTMAS CAROL, too, especially in light of the fact that Murray also played a modern version of Ebeneezer Scrooge in SCROOGED, a film that isn’t of the same caliber as GROUNDHOG DAY, but has its own modest pleasures (Mary Lou Retton as Tiny Tim!!) I never get tired of this movie, and reading your review just makes me want to watch it again.
Thanks Pat! I could have gone more into those connections with Scrooge. Actually Bob Clark’s great great essay a few months back went into that I recall and I didn’t want to repeat too much. You might have a look if you’re interesting. It was a great read. This film is so funny though. There’s a couple parts that just kill me. That scene when he’s a glutton in the diner and drinks straight from the coffee pot….and the one where he’s sitting in his pajamas, watching Jeapardy and drinking straight from the bottle of Jack Daniels…he knows all the answers and all the senior citizens in the living room at the B&B are so impressed.
Jon,
Ramis is no great director but this is his best film. Your first paragraph really sums it up. The film does represent Murray’s first step in maturing as an actor. It’s a film I can watch repeatedly and in fact recently bought the blu-ray. Great job!
Thanks John, yeah Ramis struck gold on this one occasion and it could probably be argued that Murray’s own screen persona is what makes it so great.
Excellent review. ‘Groundhog Day’ has a beautiful spiritual overtone to it: we watch Murray’s character, Phil Collins, unfold as he learns to handle the immortality of Soul. The film chronicles the stages of man as he evolves from ignorant bliss to living with pure love in the moment!
This is not only one of the best comedies of all time, it’s also one of the most rewatchable movies in existence, as is noted in the review, I’ve seen it 5 times this year and I can’t get enough of the inventive, cleverness and overall great acting that you can find in every tiny detail, death, survival and act of kindness (or not) to be found within this film.
It is not only one of my favorite comedies, but it’s also on my list of the best movies of the 90’s, a list that you can check out at my blog and that you can chime in with your own list, Dennis already did so and it’s responded, so go ahead and let’s make a great thread.
Hi Jaime, Wow you watch this film a lot! I would say it would make my list of the 25 best films of the 90’s if I had to take a guess. I think it has held up remarkably well since 93.
Jon, great piece… I’m another one who loves this film and agree it is worth rewatching many times, which has its own irony. So many great details to pick up on. I love all the riffs on the repetitions of the day, like breakfast at the hotel and the meetings with the annoying old friend. Must agree with you that it is interesting to wonder just how long the day in the life really is – as you say, it could be years for him to learn to play the piano with such expertise. I do like Scrooged as well and agree with comments that Murray builds on his character in that film here, but this is by far the greater comedy.
Can anybody listen to ‘I Got You Babe’ without immediately thinking of this film? It was interesting when Don woke up to its strains in bed with Megan at the end of season four of ‘Mad Men’ – I’ve now at last got my hands on a box set of season five and will be interested to see if this choice of music holds any suggestion about repetitions in Mr Draper’s life. (Don’t tell me, anyone!)
Haha Judy! Interesting! I don’t watch that show, but that is an interesting parallel. I do agree that there is no way I could hear that song and not think of this movie it is very true. Glad to hear you like the film.
Great review! This movie is one of my faves, and the line I never tire of is when Bill Murrary catches the boy falling from the tree for the upteenth time: “You have NEVER thanked me!”