Volunteers (1985)

I am not surprised I hadn't heard of this movie before. It is somewhat entertaining and kind of funny to see Tom Hanks and John Candy acting silly. But I watched this while working on my laptop so it was not captivating enough to give it my full attention. Something similar would be Bachelor Party which I think was slightly funnier than this.If you want to watch a funny, entertaining light hearted movie from the 80's I would recommend The Great Outdoors before I would watch this movie.

'Volunteers' has a few sparkling moments, but they are few & far between. A wittier & funnier Screenplay was the need of the day!'Volunteers' Synopsis: Lawrence is a rich kid with a bad accent and a large debt. After his father refuses to help him out, Lawrence escapes his angry debtors by jumping on a Peace Corp flight to Southeast Asia, where is assigned to build a bridge for the local villagers with American-As-Apple-Pie WSU Grad Tom Tuttle and the beautiful and down-to earth Beth Wexler. What they don't realize is that the bridge is coveted by the U.S. Army, a local Communist force, and a powerful drug lord. Trouble Follows...Despite an interesting premise, 'Volunteers' doesn't amuse much. The jokes here range from good to bland. The first-hour is dull, while the second-hour picks up & offers a truly funny last act. Keith F. Critchlow, David Isaacs & Ken Levine's Screenplay appeals, but only in bits. Nicholas Meyer's Direction is decent. Cinematography is striking. Editing isn't impressive. Performance-Wise: Tom Hanks is terrific, as always. He elevates the film at times, with his impeccable comic-timing. The Late/Great John Candy gets limited scope, but he doesn't fail to engage. Rita Wilson is sweet. Tim Thomerson is alright.On the whole, 'Volunteers' is so-so!

VOLUNTEERS was the second and last time Tom Hanks was teamed with one of the few television based comedians who could match him as a film actor: John Candy. They had been brothers in SPLASH, and VOLUNTEERS makes them fellow members of the Peace Corps. They proved to have good chemistry again here - but no follow-up film showed up for them after this. Pity, but maybe just as well as they each would make their own line of comic masterpieces.VOLUNTEERS is also one of the first times that Hanks plays a somewhat unlikeable (if charming) type. Lawrence Osborne IV is a patrician who has just gone through four years at Yale University. We never know what his major was, but he certainly has enjoyed extra-curriculum activities (such as dating the valedictorian of Smith College), and winning multi-thousand dollar poker matches with vicious opponents. But Lawrence owes a gambling hall owner (Alan Arbus) $14,000.00, and decides to bet it all double or nothing on the outcome of a basketball championship the next day (his graduation date from Yale). He is listening to the game on a radio (while missing the speech by guest speaker President John F. Kennedy) at the ceremony - and hears his bet going down the tubes. That night he asks his father (George Plimpton) for the $28,000. But the senior Osborne actually is very realistic - he feels that being beaten and injured for such a stupid bet is just what Lawrence needs, and he refuses to pay the bet. Chased by Arbus's bouncer/collector (Ji-Tu Cumbuku, as a no-nonsense collector who will go as far as possible to get Lawrence, whom he hates), Lawrence hies to New York's Idlewild Airport, and manages to get onto a plane as a member of the Peace Corps group going to Thailand.Lawrence meets Beth Wexler (Rita Wilson - now Mrs. Hanks in real life), a New York medical student, and Tom Tuttle from Tacoma, Washington (Candy) who is an intensive student of management psychiatry. Candy is also an engineer. When they are taken to a village for their service by helicopter operator John Reynolds (Tim Thompson) they find they are assigned to build a bridge connecting this village with the other shore. Soon it turns out that others are interested in that bridge: the local war lord and opium dealer (Chumg Mee - Ernest Harada) and the local Communists insurgents. While Lawrence tries to get back home (and finds his wise father has made it impossible for him to do so), he finds that he has annoyed Beth (who is more impressed by Reynolds), and he is dealing with the over-active and inept Tuttle. But soon Tuttle vanishes into the jungle (and into the hands of the Communists) while Lawrence finds he needs to rely on a smart local villager (Gedde Wantanabe) which is good because both men are threatened by the war lord to get that bridge built or else. What follows is a delight, as Lawrence does build the bridge, and then realizes (much as Col. Nicholson does at the end of THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI) that it was a dreadful mistake, and the poor villagers are in danger from two evil groups as a result.Hanks never loses his charm and insouciance, even as he grows into a responsible local leader. Candy is a wonder as an would-be world saver, an over-achiever who insults people as he tries to show he has a heart. Wilson is good explaining how she wants to help the villagers, speaking in Thai - but telling how she wants to kill them! Wantanabe is constantly finding his warnings and realistic view of the situation is ignored and he gets injured as a result (or even sexually threatened by a trio of sumo-wrestler guards of the War Lord). And Thompson has only one really close friend - his knife. He makes George Macready's relationship with his sword stick in GILDA look matter-of-fact in comparison. Finally there is a definite love affair with David Lean in this film. Besides the similarities with THE RIVER KWAI (including Candy whistling "Col. Bogie's March" and saying, "What have I done!") there is the concluding shot of Hanks (having brought prosperity to the village) being cheered by the people with cries of "Lawrence, Lawrence!". Wonderful comedy here.

John Candy really shines in this classic. Don't believe the nay-sayers. This is a very funny movie. Besides, Tom Hanks met his wife while filming this picture (she co-stars). If you like Tom Hanks and John Candy, you are sure to enjoy this movie. Rent it or buy it. I watch it often.It is "R" rated, but mostly for language I think, as there is just one very brief scene of partial nudity. It is not nearly as bad as many present-day movies rated "R", and I would not hesitate to have my grandchildren (11 and 13) watch it.Bill