Browse all reviews by letter     A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 0 - 9

USA 2011
Directed by
Jesse Peretz
90 minutes
Rated M

Reviewed by
Bernard Hemingway
3.5 stars

Our Idiot Brother

Synopsis: Ned Rochlin (Paul Rudd) is a preternaturally good-natured neo-hippy who fumbles his way through not only his own life but everyone else’s, and especially of those of his three sisters, Miranda (Elizabeth Banks), Natalie (Zooey Deschanel), and Liz (Emily Mortimer).

Paul Rudd starred in the 2010 remake of the droll 1998 Francis Veber comedy, Le Diner de Cons, which roughly translates as "The Dinner for Idiots" (the remake was called Dinner for Schmucks). For obvious reasons I haven’t seen it but I know that it was Steve Carrell who played the idiot, not Rudd, who played the straight guy. No doubt, however, it was an experience which stood him in good stead for his nicely-judged performance here as Ned, a preternaturally good-natured neo-hippy man-child who fumbles his way through life.

Although its title is unfortunate as it makes the film sound like a standard gag-fest for post-adolescents, Our Idiot Brother is quite a delight, a contemporary comedy that actually has more wit than expletives and jokes about basic bodily functions. Whilst all the cast are fine in their parts, it is the script by director Jesse Peretz with Evgenia Peretz and David Schisgall that really contains the sparkle that makes this film so enjoyable. Ned’s unintentional exposure of everyone’s fragilities is classic comedic material and it is no accident that there is a direct reference to Peter Sellers’ blithe bumbler, Inspector Clouseau although I imagine there are much earlier pre-filmic equivalents. Not that Our Idiot Brother is in the Pink Panther style. It's much smarter fare.

Whilst one may justifiably wonder how anyone could be quite as naïve as Ned, the humour stems from the way the characters around him, whether it is his controlling New Age ex-girlfriend (Kathryn Hahn) or his shallow sister, Miranda are exposed by his graceless innocence. Don’t take the story as realism but see it more as a stage play transposed to a naturalistic environment and you will enjoy it. The dialogue is smart, the characters engaging, the plot moves at a good clip without relying on forced set-ups and it even manages to tie everything up in a happy ending without being trite. The only thing I couldn’t grasp is why everyone kept calling Ned’s dog "Willie Nelson". When Ned’s nephew, River, is called “Riv” why wouldn't the dog be “Will”. With a script that was so charmingly quick-witted it felt like incongruously laboured joke and the final scene doesn't remove that reluctant suspicion.

 

 

back

Want more about this film?

search youtube  search wikipedia  

Want something different?

random vintage best worst