list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around The Distinguished Gentleman on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/The_Distinguished_Gentleman/9283/default.aspx Title: The Distinguished Gentleman
Year: 1992
Director: Jonathan Lynn
Plot: A smooth-talking confidence trickster makes his way into congress (where the cynical would suggest he'd have plenty of company) in this comedy. Thomas Jefferson Johnson (Eddie Murphy) is a con man from Florida who gets the bright idea that a scam artist could make a tidy sum if he was able to get inside the political arena. When a Florida congressman named Jeff Johnson dies and a special election is held to replace him, Thomas puts his name on the ballot as "Jeff Johnson," and enough confused voters check the ballot for him that he wins the race and is on his way to Washington D.C. Johnson soon finds a mentor in Dick Dodge (Lane Smith), chairman of the Power and Industry Committee, who shows Johnson the ropes on raking in PAC money while the late Mr. Johnson's aide, Reinhardt (Grant Shaud), gives him the inside scoop on how things work in Washington. Johnson's plans are going just as he hoped until he meets Celia Kirby (Victoria Rowell), a volunteer lobbyist and political activist whose uncle is a noted religious leader, The Rev. Elijah Hawkins (Charles S. Dutton). Johnson quickly becomes smitten with Celia, but it's obvious that she's not buying his act, and if he wants to win her heart, he'll have to stop fooling people into thinking he's honest and actually be honest. Joe Don Baker and Sheryl Lee Ralph also co-star. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 1
Number of Lists: 3
Number of blog posts: 2
SpoutRating: 2
]]>Sun, 05 Apr 2009 16:26:23 GMTThe Distinguished Gentleman1992Jonathan LynnA smooth-talking confidence trickster makes his way into congress (where the cynical would suggest he'd have plenty of company) in this comedy. Thomas Jefferson Johnson (<a href="/players/P____51440/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Eddie Murphy</a>) is a con man from Florida who gets the bright idea that a scam artist could make a tidy sum if he was able to get inside the political arena. When a Florida congressman named Jeff Johnson dies and a special election is held to replace him, Thomas puts his name on the ballot as "Jeff Johnson," and enough confused voters check the ballot for him that he wins the race and is on his way to Washington D.C. Johnson soon finds a mentor in Dick Dodge (<a href="/players/P____66475/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Lane Smith</a>), chairman of the Power and Industry Committee, who shows Johnson the ropes on raking in PAC money while the late Mr. Johnson's aide, Reinhardt (Grant Shaud), gives him the inside scoop on how things work in Washington. Johnson's plans are going just as he hoped until he meets Celia Kirby (Victoria Rowell), a volunteer lobbyist and political activist whose uncle is a noted religious leader, The Rev. Elijah Hawkins (Charles S. Dutton). Johnson quickly becomes smitten with Celia, but it's obvious that she's not buying his act, and if he wants to win her heart, he'll have to stop fooling people into thinking he's honest and actually be honest. <a href="/players/P_____3412/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Joe Don Baker</a> and <a href="/players/P____58579/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Sheryl Lee Ralph</a> also co-star. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide1Slightly Tagged (1-5)322http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t04887ynz9o.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_Distinguished_Gentleman/9283/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/9/9/34950.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 9/9/2008 4:01:08 PM
Body: Anticipating the worst from Diane English’s new remake of The Women is not just typical low expectations regarding remakes in general. My dread is specifically based on dissatisfaction with remakes and updates of films from the 1930s, arguably the best decade in cinema (it is certainly my favorite). While I may recognize and appreciate some favorable redos, such as DePalma’s Scarface (of which I’ve never really been a fan), Mazursky’s Down and Out in Beverly Hills and the multiple repeats from Hitchcock, I am more often disappointed with attempts to recreate ‘30s classics, even when I approach them with already low standards. Worst, for me, doesn’t necessarily have to do with the quality of the film alone, especially when related to remakes and updates. The titles and versions I’ve selected are hardly the worst in terms of craft or production value — you’ll note there are no Dracula movies on this list — and a few would almost be acceptable if they were more unique or solitary works. 10. Return to Oz (1985) I begin with a film that is not a remake in any form but tone. Yet I still see it as a kind of response to and update of the far more popular classic The Wizard of Oz (1939), which was viewed by some as not faithful enough to the source literature of L. Frank Baum.  It was a bit of a guilty pleasure for me growing up, but I lost regard for the film after suffering through a professor’s defensive screening of it on the last day of a film history course. Sure, it’s truer to Baum and the illustrations of W.W. Denslow and John R. Neill, but as MGM’s beautiful 1939 interpretation shows, it’s better to be imaginative than loyal when translating works between mediums. 9. The Front Page (1974) Billy Wilder’s version of the Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur play, which was first adapted to film in 1931, is plenty hilarious thanks to stars Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau, as well as to a slew of terrific character actors, including Vincent Gardenia, Charles Durning, Austin Pendleton and Dick O’Neill. Also, the film’s homosexual innuendo is an interesting way of acknowledging Howard Hawks’ 1940 gender altering redo, His Girl Friday. I’d definitely choose Wilder’s film over the subsequent big screen version, the 1988 update Switching Channels, but compared to earlier adaptations and to Wilder’s earlier work, the ’74 Front Page is still quite a dissatisfying effort. My biggest problems are with the film’s artificial look, particularly its use of costumes that look more appropriate for a costume party than a period film, the gaudiness of the dialogue, especially the double entendres, and the miscasting of both Carol Burnett and Susan Sarandon (though my annoyance with the women in the film provide further acceptance of the gay undertones). 8. The Distinguished Gentleman (1992) This loose and uncredited reworking of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) could have been a worthy update had it included more laughs and more of a bite. The concept of placing a small-time con man in the big-time con of politics is ripe for good comedy and satire, plus it makes me think of the respectable crook/crooked respectability angle of Lubitsch’s Trouble in Paradise. Too bad the script was unsatisfactory (not surprising given it came partly from the screenwriter behind Leonard Part 6) and star Eddie Murphy was at the awkward moment of his career when he somehow lost his usual talent for comedy. 7. Flash Gordon (1980) I have to admit that I do actually love this movie. Well, to be fair, I only really love Queen’s score, Brian Blessed’s voice and Max Von Sydow’s makeup. The rest I just like. Anyway, despite my guilty pleasure in watching the thing on television throughout my childhood, it’s neither a good movie nor a successful update. It doesn’t really do the ‘30s Flash Gordon serials justice by being either a big-budget improvement or a tonally and narratively faithful throwback (comparatively, Star Wars succeeded at doing both). 6. The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) Disney’s idea to animate Victor Hugo’s novel was of questionable taste, but the studio’s need to so closely imitate William Dieterle’s 1939 adaptation was of questionable creative judgment. When I watch Disney’s Robin Hood, I’m not reminded of how much better Michael Curtiz’s 1938 version is; similarly, I’m able to appreciate the animated Beauty and the Beast and Alice and Wonderland without thinking of previous adaptations. Especially given the controversial lewdness and the simplification of the story, Disney’s version of Hunchback seems an insult to the source novel, Dieterle’s film and Charles Laughton’s characterization. 5. Meet Joe Black (1998) I’m a hypocrite to criticize anyone’s inability to be concise, but a three-hour remake of a 78-minute film (1934’s Death Takes a Holiday) displays a level of excess that even my meandering can’t compare to. Don’t get me wrong, though; I’m no hater of long films. But if you can make a long story short, it’s preferred that you do so. 4. The Mummy (1999) There’s no problem with reimagining a classic horror film as a blockbuster action movie, but taking something so iconically frightening as Boris Karloff’s Imhotep (in the ‘32 version) and updating the look with laughably cartoonish CGI is unfortunate. I know I’m on the other side of the fence from the moviegoers who made this a hit, but I would have actually enjoyed it more if the villain were depicted as a guy wrapped in bandages. 3. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1994) Of course, CG may have been better than this. In fact, the only thing worse than Robert De Niro as the Creature would have been a hand-drawn animated Frankenberry in the role. 2. King Kong (2005) Technically, the 1976 remake with Jeff Bridges is a worse film, but that version at least took some interesting liberties in updating the 1933 classic. Peter Jackson’s intention seemed to be only to faithfully recreate the original with better special effects. And given the fact that many of the CG sequences are embarrassingly awful, I have to say this film was a more monumental failure in terms of purpose and promise. Jackson gave me yet another reason for questioning the point of filmmakers remaking their favorite films. 1. Mr. Deeds (2002) Other than the minor way in which this comedy updates the conservative message of Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (1936), there is really no reason for Capra’s film to have been remade, especially with such broad, immature comedy from Adam Sandler. While the original Mr. Deeds completely speaks to and of its time, this includes no topicality, no compelling historical or contemporary relevancy and no lasting cultural significance. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:01:08 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com9/9/2008 4:01:08 PM Anticipating the worst from Diane English’s new remake of The Women is not just typical low expectations regarding remakes in general. My dread is specifically based on dissatisfaction with remakes and updates of films from the 1930s, arguably the best decade in cinema (it is certainly my favorite). While I may recognize and appreciate some favorable redos, such as DePalma’s Scarface (of which I’ve never really been a fan), Mazursky’s Down and Out in Beverly Hills and the multiple repeats from Hitchcock, I am more often disappointed with attempts to recreate ‘30s classics, even when I approach them with already low standards. Worst, for me, doesn’t necessarily have to do with the quality of the film alone, especially when related to remakes and updates. The titles and versions I’ve selected are hardly the worst in terms of craft or production value — you’ll note there are no Dracula movies on this list — and a few would almost be acceptable if they were more unique or solitary works. 10. Return to Oz (1985) I begin with a film that is not a remake in any form but tone. Yet I still see it as a kind of response to and update of the far more popular classic The Wizard of Oz (1939), which was viewed by some as not faithful enough to the source literature of L. Frank Baum.  It was a bit of a guilty pleasure for me growing up, but I lost regard for the film after suffering through a professor’s defensive screening of it on the last day of a film history course. Sure, it’s truer to Baum and the illustrations of W.W. Denslow and John R. Neill, but as MGM’s beautiful 1939 interpretation shows, it’s better to be imaginative than loyal when translating works between mediums. 9. The Front Page (1974) Billy Wilder’s version of the Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur play, which was first adapted to film in 1931, is plenty hilarious thanks to stars Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau, as well as to a slew of terrific character actors, including Vincent Gardenia, Charles Durning, Austin Pendleton and Dick O’Neill. Also, the film’s homosexual innuendo is an interesting way of acknowledging Howard Hawks’ 1940 gender altering redo, His Girl Friday. I’d definitely choose Wilder’s film over the subsequent big screen version, the 1988 update Switching Channels, but compared to earlier adaptations and to Wilder’s earlier work, the ’74 Front Page is still quite a dissatisfying effort. My biggest problems are with the film’s artificial look, particularly its use of costumes that look more appropriate for a costume party than a period film, the gaudiness of the dialogue, especially the double entendres, and the miscasting of both Carol Burnett and Susan Sarandon (though my annoyance with the women in the film provide further acceptance of the gay undertones). 8. The Distinguished Gentleman (1992) This loose and uncredited reworking of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) could have been a worthy update had it included more laughs and more of a bite. The concept of placing a small-time con man in the big-time con of politics is ripe for good comedy and satire, plus it makes me think of the respectable crook/crooked respectability angle of Lubitsch’s Trouble in Paradise. Too bad the script was unsatisfactory (not surprising given it came partly from the screenwriter behind Leonard Part 6) and star Eddie Murphy was at the awkward moment of his career when he somehow lost his usual talent for comedy. 7. Flash Gordon (1980) I have to admit that I do actually love this movie. Well, to be fair, I only really love Queen’s score, Brian Blessed’s voice and Max Von Sydow’s makeup. The rest I just like. Anyway, despite my guilty pleasure in watching the thing on television throughout my childhood, it’s neither a good movie nor a successful update. It doesn’t really do the ‘30s Flash Gordon serials justice by being either a big-budget improvement or a tonally and narratively faithful throwback (comparatively, Star Wars succeeded at doing both). 6. The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) Disney’s idea to animate Victor Hugo’s novel was of questionable taste, but the studio’s need to so closely imitate William Dieterle’s 1939 adaptation was of questionable creative judgment. When I watch Disney’s Robin Hood, I’m not reminded of how much better Michael Curtiz’s 1938 version is; similarly, I’m able to appreciate the animated Beauty and the Beast and Alice and Wonderland without thinking of previous adaptations. Especially given the controversial lewdness and the simplification of the story, Disney’s version of Hunchback seems an insult to the source novel, Dieterle’s film and Charles Laughton’s characterization. 5. Meet Joe Black (1998) I’m a hypocrite to criticize anyone’s inability to be concise, but a three-hour remake of a 78-minute film (1934’s Death Takes a Holiday) displays a level of excess that even my meandering can’t compare to. Don’t get me wrong, though; I’m no hater of long films. But if you can make a long story short, it’s preferred that you do so. 4. The Mummy (1999) There’s no problem with reimagining a classic horror film as a blockbuster action movie, but taking something so iconically frightening as Boris Karloff’s Imhotep (in the ‘32 version) and updating the look with laughably cartoonish CGI is unfortunate. I know I’m on the other side of the fence from the moviegoers who made this a hit, but I would have actually enjoyed it more if the villain were depicted as a guy wrapped in bandages. 3. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1994) Of course, CG may have been better than this. In fact, the only thing worse than Robert De Niro as the Creature would have been a hand-drawn animated Frankenberry in the role. 2. King Kong (2005) Technically, the 1976 remake with Jeff Bridges is a worse film, but that version at least took some interesting liberties in updating the 1933 classic. Peter Jackson’s intention seemed to be only to faithfully recreate the original with better special effects. And given the fact that many of the CG sequences are embarrassingly awful, I have to say this film was a more monumental failure in terms of purpose and promise. Jackson gave me yet another reason for questioning the point of filmmakers remaking their favorite films. 1. Mr. Deeds (2002) Other than the minor way in which this comedy updates the conservative message of Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (1936), there is really no reason for Capra’s film to have been remade, especially with such broad, immature comedy from Adam Sandler. While the original Mr. Deeds completely speaks to and of its time, this includes no topicality, no compelling historical or contemporary relevancy and no lasting cultural significance. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/7/16/32629.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 7/16/2008 2:00:50 PM
Body: The latest Eddie Murphy comedy, Meet Dave, debuted at a dismal 7th place this past weekend with only $5.3 million (on Monday it had already dropped down to #8), marking the worst wide-release opening for the actor since The Adventures of Pluto Nash. Can you spot the connection between these two movies? If you noted that they’re both sci-fi comedies, you’re smarter than the average movie exec, apparently. After comedy subgenre failures like Pluto Nash and Vampire in Brooklyn, you’d think producers would have known better than to cast the broad comedy star in something like Meet Dave. Actually, its distributor, Fox, may have started growing wise to the issue when it threw away the original title, Starship Dave. A few writers have now addressed some of the reasons why Meet Dave failed, and it should be clear how to avoid such a bomb in the future. At the L.A. Times, Patrick Goldstein argues the sci-fi comedy case, though figured out the subgenre can sometimes go blockbuster, as the Men in Black movies show us. He also notes all the horrible crap that Fox has been putting out lately, displaying how shocking it is that this particular film did so much more poorly than garbage like Alvin and the Chipmunks and even What Happens in Vegas. Still, there seems to be some debate over whether or not Meet Dave suffered from actually being a sci-fi comedy or from Fox’s failure to own up to the fact and market it as such. Meanwhile, at Defamer, Stu Van Airsdale offers the simple idea that kids today just don’t give a rats ass about Eddie Murphy. And neither does anyone else. But enough people cared to allow Norbit to come really close to grossing a million bucks, and the people tend to enjoy him, as Anne Thompson claims, when he’s in disguise (of course, he also makes big bucks when his face is visible and he’s surrounded by talking animals or rambunctious kids). Considering his recent Oscar nomination (for Dreamgirls), he probably just needs to go serious for a bit. Or merely stay away from the spacemen roles. It’s definitely not too late for Murphy, despite Vulture blog’s call for his retirement. Personally, I stayed away from Meet Dave because it seemed a lot like a cross between What Planet Are You From? and Innerspace, neither of which I particularly enjoyed (well, I have a soft spot for the latter as a huge Joe Dante fan). That, and I guess I’m in the Stu-designated camp since I haven’t bothered with any of Murphy’s films since I Spy (and honestly I stopped caring after The Distinguished Gentleman — I didn’t even see Beverly Hills Cop III). As for the people who have cared in the past, neither the little kids nor the older fans likely saw any appeal in Meet Dave. Maybe Murphy needs to decide to go directly for the family films or directly for the raunchy stuff (it still works well enough for Martin Lawrence and others). Trying for the middle clearly isn’t working. What was your reason for avoiding the flop? The star? The subgenre? The fact that a ton of other bigger blockbusters are out right now? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:00:50 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com7/16/2008 2:00:50 PMThe latest Eddie Murphy comedy, Meet Dave, debuted at a dismal 7th place this past weekend with only $5.3 million (on Monday it had already dropped down to #8), marking the worst wide-release opening for the actor since The Adventures of Pluto Nash. Can you spot the connection between these two movies? If you noted that they’re both sci-fi comedies, you’re smarter than the average movie exec, apparently. After comedy subgenre failures like Pluto Nash and Vampire in Brooklyn, you’d think producers would have known better than to cast the broad comedy star in something like Meet Dave. Actually, its distributor, Fox, may have started growing wise to the issue when it threw away the original title, Starship Dave. A few writers have now addressed some of the reasons why Meet Dave failed, and it should be clear how to avoid such a bomb in the future. At the L.A. Times, Patrick Goldstein argues the sci-fi comedy case, though figured out the subgenre can sometimes go blockbuster, as the Men in Black movies show us. He also notes all the horrible crap that Fox has been putting out lately, displaying how shocking it is that this particular film did so much more poorly than garbage like Alvin and the Chipmunks and even What Happens in Vegas. Still, there seems to be some debate over whether or not Meet Dave suffered from actually being a sci-fi comedy or from Fox’s failure to own up to the fact and market it as such. Meanwhile, at Defamer, Stu Van Airsdale offers the simple idea that kids today just don’t give a rats ass about Eddie Murphy. And neither does anyone else. But enough people cared to allow Norbit to come really close to grossing a million bucks, and the people tend to enjoy him, as Anne Thompson claims, when he’s in disguise (of course, he also makes big bucks when his face is visible and he’s surrounded by talking animals or rambunctious kids). Considering his recent Oscar nomination (for Dreamgirls), he probably just needs to go serious for a bit. Or merely stay away from the spacemen roles. It’s definitely not too late for Murphy, despite Vulture blog’s call for his retirement. Personally, I stayed away from Meet Dave because it seemed a lot like a cross between What Planet Are You From? and Innerspace, neither of which I particularly enjoyed (well, I have a soft spot for the latter as a huge Joe Dante fan). That, and I guess I’m in the Stu-designated camp since I haven’t bothered with any of Murphy’s films since I Spy (and honestly I stopped caring after The Distinguished Gentleman — I didn’t even see Beverly Hills Cop III). As for the people who have cared in the past, neither the little kids nor the older fans likely saw any appeal in Meet Dave. Maybe Murphy needs to decide to go directly for the family films or directly for the raunchy stuff (it still works well enough for Martin Lawrence and others). Trying for the middle clearly isn’t working. What was your reason for avoiding the flop? The star? The subgenre? The fact that a ton of other bigger blockbusters are out right now? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/revenge/MemberTagFilms.aspxrevenge
Number of films tagged: 5189

Number of people who tagged: 145

Number of times used: 489

]]>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:13:41 GMT5189145489Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/corruption/MemberTagFilms.aspxcorruption
Number of films tagged: 1236

Number of people who tagged: 47

Number of times used: 108

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT123647108Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/politician/MemberTagFilms.aspxpolitician
Number of films tagged: 1569

Number of people who tagged: 14

Number of times used: 25

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT15691425Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/conscam/MemberTagFilms.aspxconscam
Number of films tagged: 2333

Number of people who tagged: 12

Number of times used: 19

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT23331219Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/congress/MemberTagFilms.aspxcongress
Number of films tagged: 69

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 17

]]>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 22:07:31 GMT69517Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/againstthesystem/MemberTagFilms.aspxagainstthesystem
Number of films tagged: 363

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 4

]]>Wed, 17 May 2006 21:52:53 GMT36344Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/baltimore-movie/MemberTagFilms.aspxbaltimore-movie
Number of films tagged: 55

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 55

]]>Mon, 04 Dec 2006 15:00:25 GMT55155Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/politicalcorruption/MemberTagFilms.aspxpoliticalcorruption
Number of films tagged: 124

Number of people who tagged: 0

Number of times used: 0

]]>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 14:02:22 GMT12400Tag