Death to Smoochy

Death to Smoochy is one of the most unappreciated comedies of the last decade. When released, people hailed it to be absolutely god-awful. It topped Roger Ebert's list of the worst movies of 2002. It fell way under the radar, frequently aired on Comedy Central and then finally disappeared. Almost everyone involved in the production of this is ashamed for having released it. But why all the hate? Yes, this is a rather bizarre concept for a dark comedy and it changes the way you look at children's TV ever again. But more that often, its hilarious. Robin Williams delivers possibly his greatest performance as Randolph Smiley. He manages to capture a man whose bitter hatred grows to the point of insanity. Robin plays crazy in every comedy he does, why not actually make him actually crazy. Edward Norton is as charming as ever, especially when he's in that dopey purple rhino suit. Its a fine movie and I think a lot of people should give it a try.

Throughout the years of cinema, a certain dilemma has remained unresolved: how to market a black comedy. Elusive to categorize, it remains equally difficult to articulate exactly what such films are offering, and to which demographic. Certainly such an obstacle arose when marketing Danny DeVito's Death to Smoochy. With a misleading trailer boasting a broad comedy Robin Williams vehicle, the film was greeted as a scornful box office failure that few seemed to know how to approach and proved miles away from what they had expected. Yet this reaction proves all the more disappointing considering the rare treat the film offers - one of a steadily decreasing few which genuinely subvert viewer expectations. While far from perfect, Death to Smoochy remains the sort of fundamentally bizarre yet gloriously daring picture which seldom makes it to theatres, offering a gleefully warped, macabre wit almost guaranteed to please those willing to take it for what it is.

The fact that the word 'death' being present in the title of a mainstream comedy is a rarity should be indicative of exactly how offbeat and downright sinister the film is. Despite a sparkly visual palate of pastel colours, the film could hardly be more dark tonally, with its infusion of frequent brutal violence and sadistic, uncomfortable humour making it about the farthest thing away from the safe, mainstream comedy its trailer attempted to depict. Yet its shady sensibilities cannot possibly quench the film's manic, wickedly sadistic wit, and the enormously quotable screenplay delivers such a varied slew of humour that the viewer cannot help but consistently be caught by surprise. DeVito amplifies such an ambiance with bizarre, off-kilter camera-work and a continuous transitioning from satire to the deadly serious to goofy slapstick and back again, leaving the viewer uncertain when to roar with laughter or to cringe uncomfortably. In fact, the blurring between the two becomes poignantly indiscernible, with DeVito seemingly impishly suggesting that whether cinema makes us laugh or cringe, either way it does not deter our fascination with watching, and that perhaps the boundary becomes simply redundant in the end.

Nonetheless, as fresh as such a fusion of the comedic and the grotesque may be, the lack of obvious prerequisites also results in Death to Smoochy suffering from certain design flaws. The film starts off as a devilish satire of network television, with Norton's sickeningly wholesome entertainer Sheldon Mopes thrust into the fish out of water figure in a sea full of greedy, merchandise obsessed execs. Yet about halfway through DeVito loses his pace, and the film begins to feel more like a chaotic jumble, continually stuffing in new characters and plot twists, and with at least three seeming climaxes uneasily leading into further narrative development. Similarly, the film's treatment of Robin Williams' vengeance obsessed TV host Rainbow Randolph remains equally indecisive. Perhaps due to Williams' star casting, DeVito appears to struggle with exactly what to do with the character, whether to situate him as protagonist or depraved quasi-antagonist. As such, Randolph appears uncomfortably stuck between the two, and the film's ensuing rocky focalization makes it harder for the viewer to maintain their emotional bearings. The addition of a rather conventional romantic subplot also feels somewhat out of place in so uniformly dark and vindictive a picture, making the third act feel all the more unnecessarily chaotic. Nonetheless, despite this mishmash of content, somehow DeVito's loopy pace and zany, twisted sense of humour never quite loses the audience even at its most imbalanced, but instead only becomes more bizarre (often appealingly so) without sacrificing the entertainment front.

DeVito also delights in inverting the typical characters his stars would play, resulting in a deliciously unconventional tweaking of expectations. Despite the publicity hyping Williams, Edward Norton is the most firmly situated as the film's 'main character', which works, as Norton is unreasonably hilarious, superbly counteracting his usual intensity as charming yet irritatingly well intentioned children's entertainer Smoochy the Rhino, who goes out of his way to refuse merchandising money in favour of promoting organic, sugar free foods and respecting hostile step-parents on children's television. Norton is careful to keep the character crucially likable, even at his most simperingly moronic, crafting an enduring emotional centre and grounding the calamity of the film around him. Similarly, fans of Robin Williams' less family sanctioned stand-up act will be enthralled by his performance as unhinged Rainbow Randolph. Retaining his usual flair for colourful improvisation, Williams lets loose in a twisted, exceedingly dark fashion barely glimpsed before, and while he unquestionably rockets light years past being over the top, his slew of bitter, incensed, profanity-fraught rants are just about worth watching the film by themselves.

Catherine Keener's credible charisma and warmth also help acclimatize a shaky character transition from nihilistically jaded producer to earnest, hopeful young woman, making the potentially weakest point of the film instead burst to life with a quirky spark. Danny DeVito himself delivers a familiar but still enjoyable lampoon of the greedy agent figure, and an early performance by TV comic Jon Stewart delivers a tantalizing taste of a gestating talent. The film also offers a collection of memorable character bits worthy of the Coen brothers, from Michael Rispoli's blustering, often incomprehensible lovable nitwit of a former boxer, Danny Woodburn's sardonic children's television actor, and an utterly hilarious Vincent Schiavelli as a narcoleptic, heroin addict assassin.

While certainly not for all tastes, Death to Smoochy delivers a unique, daringly morbid and raucously hilarious product which manages to continually dodge expectations while remaining enjoyable. While its unfavourable reaction is perhaps typical of so unconventional a picture, such a rare delight deserves to be enjoyed and appreciated, flaws and all, and those willing to take in a different kind of comedy are unlikely to be disappointed.

-8/10

After children's TV host Randolph "Rainbow Randolph" Smiley (Robin Williams) is publicly disgraced following a bust in an FBI sting operation, Children's TV network Kidnet swiftly cancels the show with a plan to replace it with someone who's lacking in the baggage of negative publicity. Hardened producer Nora Wells (Catherine Keener) and corporate yes man, Marion Frank Stokes (Jon Stewart) scramble to find someone "squeaky clean" eventually settling for Sheldon Mopes(Edward Norton) and his character Smoochy the Rhino, who sings songs at the Coney Island Methodone Clinic and is sincere and ethical almost to a fault. Sheldon soon finds himself fighting for integrity of both his show and his character as network executives, marketing departments, corrupt charities, even the Irish Mafia all develop an interest in Mopes and his Rhino persona. Meanwhile Randolph continually seeks and orchestrates elaborate revenge schemes against mopes becoming more and more unhinged.

A joint British-American co production between Warner Bros. And Film Four, the movie was written by Adam Resnick best known for his work on The Larry Sanders Show as well as his work on Chirs Elliot's TV series Get a Life and the Chris Elliot film Cabin Boy. The movie is a satire of the vapidness and cynicism of the children's entertainment, particularly inspired by Barney the Dinosaur, and takes great pleasure in tearing away the veneer of wholesomeness to reveal the cynical money hungry monster beneath the cuddly foam suit. The film is notable for being a box office disaster making back a mere $8 million of its $50 million budget and in combination with the failure of the following year's Duplex destroyed Danny Devito's directing career in feature films. Roger Ebert even declared the movie the worst of 2002 (it's not). The movie is certainly flawed, but I'd be lying if I said the movie's pitch black gleefully insane takedown of marketing icons masquerading as wholesome children's entertainment didn't raise a few laughs.

The movie from the get go is definitely and unapologetically a Adam Resnick project. From it's seemingly innocent framework that is loaded with uncomfortable and taboo subject matter, it's a similar approach to how Resnick took the Dennis the Menace format with Get a Life and got comedy from it by way replacing an 8 year old kid with a 35 year old man. Unlike Get a Life the movie does try to have a "good" character who we're supposed to root for with Sheldon Mopes. It's pretty clear that Resnick is in unfamiliar territory trying to write characters who are supposed to be principled and ethical and Sheldon at points feels more like a parody of someone principled and ethical rather than someone who's supposed to be principled and ethical. I'm not sure what exactly the issue is if it falls more on Resnick who doesn't usually write characters like this or if it falls more on Edward Norton who's not typically a comic actor (at least as it pertains to this very broad exaggerated style of comedy). There are moments where Norton's delivery in the character do work such as a scene where he's tricked by Rainbow Randolph into performing as Smoochy for an event that isn't what he was told it was, but the scenes of him playing for sincerity straight just come off as odd for reasons I can't put my finger on.

The movie's best asset is definitely in its unapologetically cruel take on its subject matter, showing the majority of children's TV hosts as being drug addicts, pedophiles, perverts, alcoholics, or subject to some other vice that rules their lives and the studio and network are happy to ignore so long as it doesn't spill over into the public eye. It's a stomach churning take that also manages to be darkly humorous thanks in no small part to a committed assortment of actors such as Danny Devito, Harvey Firestein, Danny Woodburn, Jon Stewart and Catherine Keener who all play their roles very well and create an intriguingly repellent world of foam covered hypocrisy. But easily the best performance belongs to Robin Williams, who plays a disgraced Captain Kangaroo style children's TV host who becomes more insane in his attempted takedowns of Sheldon and his Rhino persona Smoochy with his schemes and meltdowns being comedic highlights of the film.

The movie unfortunately loses its edge a bit in a third act that starts off well enough involving a smoochy centric ice show that starts off quite well with a retelling of many of the events of the movie as done by figure skaters that's very entertaining, but it loses its teeth in the final 10 minutes by offering redemption for Rainbow Randolph and not even having the guts to show the ultimate fate of our main antagonists. If I had to guess I'd say this was most likely a studio note to soften the edges of what I can only guess may have been a darker script.

Death to Smoochy is a flawed film, but it's also very entertaining with a decent skewering of Children's entertainment and a twisted sense of humor. While certain elements work better than others I think the film is a very well done dark comedy that doesn't pull its punches (mostly).

This film's been released on DVD for a while and at my local blockbusters, i noticed it quietly sitting in a corner next to Day after tomorrow and dirty dancing 2. But as i work in blockbusters, i get free rentals every week so thought i might as well rent it out. Man, was i in for a shocker!! Talk about totally hilarious.

Some of the gags in this film were quality - Robin Williams is at his comical best. I'm not saying it's Williams' best ever film (cough good will hunting cough) but certainly he's never been this funny. His gag about the abnormally shaped cookie was so funny. In fact, i've never laughed this much since Dumb and Dumber.

Edward Norton was actually very believable as the clean cut good guy. I didn't expect it from him after watching Fight club and American history X but he carried out his role really well.

Catherine Keener also looked really beautiful, she played her power-hungry turned nice chick character to a tee.

Even though the story is about a kids show, there's a lot of dark comedy in it e.g. the involvement of the Irish gangsters (by the way also very funny) showing what a good job Danny devito has done directing this film. Credit to him. All the characters in the film served a purpose and above all, did it well!! All seemed believable and Robin Williams was the star.

If you watch this film, persevere for the first 20 minutes because after which the jokes and plot come in hard and thick.

Top stuff, rent if you want a comedy with original storyline and a little bit of good humoured smut thrown in for good measure.

I would be wrong if I said that Danny DeVito's films were made with full intent to capture the realisms of life, and it is because of his ability to portray an eccentric world (or relationship) that he is able to made the most original and entertaining characters known to film.

For example, although he didn't create the character Matilda, he was able to portray the girl with telekinetic ability in a very effective manner in the film of the same name. And also the characters in 'War of the Roses' were thoroughly over-the-top, but it was because of this that the films directed by the short man were so entertaining.

'Death to Smoochy' was no exception. It is because of the over-the-top characters that it is so funny. Edward Norton's character in particular is hilarious just because of the OTT reactions the 'atrocities' of the world draw out of him, and the overly-nice attitude he oozes.

There are other things that create humour. The lines are hilariously witty and even the facial expressions created by some of the characters give the film replay value. So IS there anything wrong with it?

I, personally, don't believe the dated storyline creates an obstruction, but I do feel that there is a problem with the dramatic character arcs. The biggest example of this is Robin Williams' character who goes, in one scene, from being ridiculously hateful, to wanting nothing more than to save his ex-arch-rival. This is where the over-the-top obstructs believability, although it doesn't do enough to make me dislike the film even partially.

The film, although flawed only by the very dramatic character arcs, is thoroughly enjoyable, and DeVito sprinkles just enough dramatic camera angles to support the extremity of the storyline. It is a rare gem, battered at the box office, but very safe in my collection of favourite DVDs.

Enjoy.

-Stoate.