Pluto Nash

Kids( 11, 9, 7 ) and I enjoyed this this afternoon and must agree with others that tghe critics have this all wrong. The special effects are top class and the CGI workers deserve kudos. Sure the plot was holywood boiler plate but it really surpassed Total Recall and Mr. Murphy was still able to project his exceptional talent and gift for dramatic comedy. Why didn't Warner Bros. plug this better? Why the release delay? Obviously putting it on DVD/VHS there was somebody with brains, sense, and guts to know it had quality. Bad rap and poor business judgement are it's only shortcomings. (7/10)

My husband and I never heard the bad reviews before watching Pluto Nash...and it has become one of our favorites! Certainly not Eddie Murphy's best film, but no less enjoyable in my book!

"The Adventures of Pluto Nash" was made and shelved for two years....a clear sign that the studio knew they had a box office bomb on their hands. The picture ended up costing $100,000,000 to make and earned back only a little over $11,000,000 worldwide! Because of this, it's the biggest financial disaster in film history. However, after seeing it I realized that is not that bad...even if it is on IMDB's infamous Bottom 100 List...and has a horrid overall score of 3,8!!

All this being said, I don't think it's really that bad a film. I think the problem, more than anything else, was that according to some sources, the star, Eddie Murphy, really burned a lot of bridges while making this film...insisting on re-writes and overruling the director repeatedly. And, it seems that the studio got sick of him and the controversy...and word of this leaked out and killed the movie. And, so, as often happens with movies like "Gigli", people just start getting on the bandwagon...and heap tons of hate on the picture. However, after seeing it, I thought the movie was actually not bad. Would I pay to go see it? No. Would I pay to rent it? No. But if it was available to see for free on TV, then it's worth seeing.

So apart from its horrible reputation, there is one big problme with the film....it's not a comedy. Now perhaps it was intended as one....but there isn't a laugh in the story and it's more an unusual action/adventure film....and I can enjoy it on that level. It also doesn't help that it's very obvious that the film was written and re-written and edited and re-edited...with entire story lines dropped and inexplicably so!

The story is set in the future ...a future when the moon is colonized and is a nice place to live...unless you are Pluto. This is because some mobsters want to take his successful nightclub...and they offer him a fraction of what it's worth. He rejects their offer...and they almost immediately blow the place up and try to kill him. Most of the film consists of Pluto and his companions (Rosario Dawson and Randy Quaid...who plays a robot) on the run until the final boss battle.

So what did I like about it? Well, the film looks nice for 2002 with decent special effects, costumes and CGI. Compared to today's CGI it's kinda shabby...but that is to be expected after 17 years...technology simply improves and improves over time. Also, the story isn't terrible and the acting is generally decent.

So, on whole, the story just isn't funny, parts are obviously missing due to hack editing and re-writes but it looks good and isn't annoying or hellish....like a Bottom 100 film should be. Watchable.

By the way, a couple final comments. First, I saw a review which said that they 'laughed from start to finish'. I can only assume this person laughs at ANYTHING....funerals, dramas, Coke commercials, etc....as the film simply isn't funny and doesn't look at all like a comedy. Second, it's become in fashion to hate Eddie Murphy in recent years. While he has had some serious box office stinkers, he's STILL amazingly talented. See "Dreamgirls" or "Bowfinger" and you'll know what I mean. But I also think he'd benefit from realizing that he alone cannot make a great film...it takes teamwork and a good script.

I happen to think that this movie is entertaining. Sure the jokes are juvenile, but if Austin Powers can do $millions of business with recycled jokes and bathroom humor, I can't see why Eddie Murphy, who's in great form here, can't score with this one (millions, after all, went and see the awful Nutty Professor II). I heard a lot of bad reviews, but I was pleasantly surprised that I totally enjoyed the movie.

It's basically a gangster comedy wrapped in a Sci-fi treatment. There are some genuinely eye-catching set pieces and amusing exchanges. The visuals are great. And Rosario Dawson and Eddie Murphy have genuine chemistry -- much more convincing than that between her and Will Smith in MIB2. Randy Quaid steals the show as the robot bodyguard though. After the disappointing MIB2 and Gold Member, Nash is quite a refreshing change of pace.

There's maybe one laugh (if you're lucky) in this universally-panned disaster, but that doesn't mean THE ADVENTURES OF PLUTO NASH is a complete loss. Eddie Murphy is the title character, a reformed felon operating the most successful club in the "Little America" part of the Moon. But after he turns down an offer to sell to a shyster for $10 million, the laser bullets begin flying in his direction. Now he and gal pal Rosario Dawson, along with robot bodyguard Randy Quaid, are on the run.

Murphy is generally appealing, but his comic touch just doesn't jive with the sci-fi environment. The plot is at times incoherent and suffers from trying to roll comedy, action and excitement all into one. It's kind of amazing this clunker ever made it beyond the idea phase, particularly with talents such as Murphy and director Ron Underwood (CITY SLICKERS) involved.

What does PLUTO NASH have going for it? Though it's supposed to be a comedy, it actually works to some degree as a sci-fi adventure. The massive $100 million budget and futuristic setting make for some interesting visuals. And the picture moves along at a fair pace, with a tidy running time of 95 minutes.

For all its flaws, I would not use the term "boring" to describe PLUTO NASH. Hollywood has done much better, but it's also done far worse.