Sperduti a Manhattan

I loved the original, Jack Lemmon at his best. Great story, typical Neil Simon script. I'm not a Sandy Dennis fan, but she was very good in this role, surprisingly.

Two of my favorite comedic actors are Goldie Hawn and Steve Martin. I grew up on them. But, they just don't cut the mustard in this remake. I can't place my finger on it, but it just isn't funny. It's not just the writing, it's the actors and their direction.

I was so excited when this movie was released. Who doesn't love John Cleese? Well, I don't in this role. I did enjoy seeing a great stand-up comic, Steve Mittleman, in a cameo role in the early portion of the film. Mittleman was one of the funniest comics I remember from my childhood days.

This movie is a waste of time.

Goldie Hawn is a wonderful comedy actress; Steve Martin is a wonderful comedy actor; Neil Simon is a wonderful comedy writer; and New York City is a wonderful place to use as a setting for a movie. Yet, this movie is a clunker; it's as flat as a pancake, and an overcooked one at that. Although certain scenes do provoke a laugh, in general this movie simply is not funny. The story is a pure Hollywood comedy potboiler, that is, a formula movie and a poor retread of the 1970 original, which itself wasn't the funniest movie either, but that's for another review. The idea of everything going wrong during a trip is nothing new, but if properly treated it can produce laughs. But in this movie the things that go wrong are so absurd and contrived that the laughs are lost. What happens to the Clarks would not and could not happen to anyone else, hence the movie becomes irrelevant to the audience and loses its meaning as a satire or parody. John Cleese provides some humor as the hotel manager but his presence is limited and in no way comes close to rescuing this movie from its essential banality.

Neil Simon's script for the original 1970 hit, "The Out-of-Towners," was, essentially, a one-joke skit stretched out to a feature-length film. Starring Jack Lemmon and Sandy Dennis as two suburbanites from Ohio who experience a nightmare of frustrating complications when they hit the Big Apple, the film managed to generate some laughs as well as a great deal of grating repetitiousness.

The 1999 remake, with Steve Martin and Goldie Hawn in the central roles, manages to be a far worse film. The original at least seemed grounded in some sense of reality as the couple fell victim to a believable, if overstated, series of tourist mishaps; this version spins off into slapstick delirium, going so far as to have its main characters actually swinging on hotel signs six stories above street level and John Cleese as a snippy concierge prancing around in lady's clothing to Donna Sommer's "Bad Girls." Also, in the original, Jack Lemmon seemed determined to really take on all the people who arrayed themselves against him and the film conveyed a real sense of this implacable, almost malevolent force known as NEW YORK coming down with all its might on this innocent couple from the Midwest. In the remake, Steve Martin seems strangely passive and unharried and the victory-over-the-city theme comes along only at the very end. Without that added dimension of epic frustration, the new film robs the original of whatever audience identification it might once have had and simply devolves into an undisciplined display of unfunny slapstick.

Martin, Hawn and Cleese are game players, but this "Out-of-Towners" should indeed have been driven out of town!

The Out of Towners could have easily been called The Empty Nesters, or perhaps The Empty Plotters.

Goldie Hawn and Steve Martin play Alice and Henry, a husband and wife of 27 years who's last child, (he's in his twenties) is tearfully sent off to Europe early in the film. He's not crying, they are, or are likely to. Anyway the parents flinch and then head off from their hick home town in Ohio to New York.

Henry has a job interview to attend and we all know what middle aged, middle order executives looking for a job might run in to, at least in an intelligent script written properly for the nineties.

The Out Of Towners was based on a screenplay penned by Neil Simon in the early 70's. The story has been re written for this version but it seems that the comedy slant was firmly in the sights of the producers. The plot was therefore left high and dry. It needed a much heavier rewrite.

Henry and Alice have both been in advertising, but Alice has given the game away while she's been mothering the children. Henry is tired and a bit dowdy. It would be expected that a truly modern script would have found Alice moving back into her old career and Henry taking on home duties.

Henry says as much in the film! Their daughter has also been accruing horrendous credit card debts on cash stricken Dad's card. This is glossed over in happy land Hollywood. And what's to become of Alice? She's lost for a career.

So this emasculated script is left to flounder and to rely on a good deal of slapstick. Neil Simon's clever dialogue is largely gone, and the plot is without depth.

We're left with a good deal of arm flapping, particularly from Goldie Hawn. As I write this, The First Wives Club (much, much funnier than The Out Of Towners) is on TV in the same room and there's Goldie again, arms a flapping, bum a poutin'.

If there's a chair either Henry or Alice will fall over it, and as is the way these days, if there's a buffoon sidekick, he'll be gay.

But still, except for it's contrived, energetic humour, which some patrons will enjoy immensely, The Out Of Towners does work reasonably well. There are one or two warm smiles, and perhaps a laugh or two, but really a bit more heart and common sense and a dose of plot credibility would have been an advantage.

I have always enjoyed Steve Martin and Goldie Hawn; however, I'm not to sure they work to well as a comedy duo. In one of Martin's previous roles he had played a dramatic role in "The Spanish Prisoner", which seemed to fit him better than play a comedic part. The jokes in this movie seemed to be old and unoriginal. I can't deny that this film was all bad; I did enjoyed bits and pieces of it; however, it seemed like it had been done before under the guise of a different movie title. It just did not have originality for me to keep my attention. It is a light hearted film that is worth seeeing at home for rent. I am just happy I didn't spend money to see at the theatres.