thesar-2
"Obviously, you did something stupid," says John Cleese. To the director, writer, Eddie Murphy, hell…everyone, anyone involved. (At least, I imagined that line from the movie being used more accurately.)Wait a moon minute, was The Adventures of Pluto Nash supposed to be a comedy? Or funny at all? I waited one hour of 90 minutes for one laugh, one chuckle. Not a won. Not once did I even smirk.If it was supposed to be a Sci-Fi adventure, it also had no gravity or originality. Or fun. It was just listless with poorly designed sets that looked like they were stolen from far superior films.Was it supposed to be a romantic drama? Nope. No chemistry here from any of the actors, male/female or otherwise.Finally, I guess it could've been attempting to be a futuristic, action flick. This had as much action in it and looked as futuristic as Schindler's List did.Never once, since 2002, had I ever wanted to see this movie. Had it not be for those awesome guys over at the How Did This Get Made podcast, I would have lived out the rest of my days oblivious to how horrid this picture was.Pretty much, in this failed sitcom pilot of a feature-length, (hasn't been funny in about two decades) Eddie Murray plays the title character on the moon and when his nightclub is threatened by the building of a casino – wait, stop. I know it's been a couple of weeks since I've seen this, but is there not A WHOLE LOTTA ROOM ON THE MOON to build this casino without having to do the age old "if you don't sell, I'll make your life hell so I can become rich on your land" plot?Actually, screw this movie. There is absolutely nothing here worth mentioning or thinking about. Eddie looked bored and uninterested, as did most of the other cast. I do, however recommend you listen to the How Did This Get Made podcast on this. Not only is it enormously hilarious, but they give you a bunch of fun background information that makes this project all the more worthless.* * * Final thoughts: Okay, I've never been an Eddie Murphy fan. Mostly, these days, I watch his movies to laugh AT him instead of because of him. That said, of the about a dozen movies I've seen of his, I did favor: 1996's The Nutty Professor and his turn as Donkey in the Shrek films. Yep, that's about it.
vsantiago5
I watched this movie on TV on demand and thoroughly enjoyed it. Eddie Murphy, as usual, was excellent and the rest of the cast was just as good. I loved the sets, the goofiness, the lines, the story. Since I found myself wanting to re watch the movie I bought the DVD and the movie now stands on my shelf, next to my other favorites. Critics can be wrong. For example, back in the 1950s, "Imitation of Life", now recognized as a cinematographic masterpiece, was unanimously panned by the critics! This is just one example. Personally, I make it a point never to read them before watching a film. Instead, I check out the director, the cast and maybe the story. If I know neither director nor cast I use my own critical judgment based on the story, what my movie - savvy friends say and a general feel based on trailers. I might read the critics after seeing a film to see who I agree with or rather, who agrees with me. By unanimously panning The Adventures of Pluto Nash the critics have committed another Great Critic Blunder. The movie is really very good.
Chrysanthepop
Ron Underwood's 'The Adventures of Pluto Nash' is as silly as they come. I mean silly without being too tasteless as the film does succeed only to a small extent in nonsensical entertainment. It is especially in the second half that things start to drag and march from one cliché to another. The humour works in the first half because of fleeting funny characters such as Illeana Douglas's Dr. Mona Zimmer, John Cleese's James the CyberDriver and Pam Grier as the hot mom provide plenty to laugh about. Eddie Murphy has already proved to be one of the most successful comedy actors and while this certainly isn't even close to his being his best movie or his best role, he does make you chuckle a couple of times in the first half and one can easily notice his lack of interest in the second half. Rosario Dawson is pretty much just required to be the damsel in distress type but the actress isn't given much to do other than play the typical quiet heroine that tags along, waiting for the hero to save her. Needless to say, the writing is dreadful. There are but a few amusing lines which is probably why the main cast doesn't look the least bit interested. As forgettable and ridiculous as this is, I could think of worse movies.
