This is the second picture I’ve seen this year where a comedy, which should be funny by all its own standards, sadly isn’t. “Without a Paddle” has uncountable funny quips and dialogue, which are pitifully delivered and ultimately gives the opposite effect.
I was actually enjoying the picture for about the first five minutes. We watch four young friends, as they run around each other’s back yards pretending to be Ghostbusters, or Indiana Jones and the like. I could identify quickly.
I remained involved with the picture’s storyline, as news of the most sucessful friend of the four, Billy, had died in an accident. I felt for those characters who received the disheartening news. So, I feel the picture was set up well.
However, once the main plot of the movie was revealed, the film took a serious nosedive. From then on, characters were handed the largest collection of unfunny lines to delvier in maybe all of film history.
Let me clarify. These three leading actors, being Dax Shepard (Tom), Matthew Lilliard (Jerry) and Seth Green (Dan), gave the most unfunny DELIVERIES from the largest collection of medicore funny lines.
Shepard was the worst of them all. His abilities are severely limited, and it’s obvious he was hired because of his popularity on the MTV show “Punk’d.” He probably didn’t even have to audition. If he or she did, than the casting director(s) was alseep that day, or dead.
Again, as I did viewing “Envy” this year, I watched “Without a Paddle” thinking to myself, “All right, that was a funny line, but for some reason, it came out stupid.”
The three leading actors maintained a comedic IQ of 10, combined. However, I have seen Lillard and Green perform very funny material in separate features. Therefore, I truly blame the trio’s performance, chemistry and the picture’s unfunny dialogue, as well as director Steven Brill.
Brill has directed two of the worst movies, starring Adam Sandler, in the last four years, including “Little Nicky” and “Mr. Deeds.” Even “Little Nicky” had a better sense of comedic timing than “Without a Paddle.”
The personal stories of each character were also pathetic. When we finally get past the cliched petty arguments between the three remaining friends, we learn more about each character’s station in life and goals. Jerry loves surfing. Tom runs a Harley motorcycle store, which turns out to be a lie, while Dan is a doctor with his own practice.
Later in the film, we learn their lives actually aren’t that great. Jerry hates his day job. Tom lied as always and Dan is phobic of everything, which we already knew just by watching.
The FIVE writers attached to this junk pile reached for anything to make the characters human in the last 40 minutes of the film. Suddenly, there’s some bulls**t about Tom striving to not be like his father, or blessed with his bad luck. Wow. How many times have we heard THAT as inner motivation? “You are not your father,” says Jerry. Are we supposed to feel sorry for this character simply because he claims to be unlucky, even though all we see him do is make stupid decisions and be a smartass? I need an aspirin.
In the end, even though we’ve set up a couple of dreams for these three friends, the writers decided to throw them away. Lillard’s character, who dreamed of surfing, decides his life at present is “good enough” and returns to it with a big smile. Okay.
Shepard’s character takes all the money the friends were given and…becomes a scout leader? We never even see what he does with the money. I would think he’d have taken all the loot and opened his own Harley Davidson® store, like the one he lied about. I thought THAT was his dream. It sounded like it anyway.
Green’s character…well, since he was already a medical doctor with a practice, didn’t have much to achieve in the end, except get laid. So, that’s what the writers have him do. He gets laid by one of these nature loving hot chicks, residing deep in the woods; the same woods which almost killed the three friends. For this movie, that character’s ending is fine.
My problem is, I as a viewer have to accept Dan went back down the river and into the woods, braving all the bears and possibly more murderous rednecks, ALL BY HIMSELF just to get some action? By this point, I was barely even watching.
The characters’ inner pieces were so scattered, it was difficult for me to even care about a single one of them. The director passed over several moments which could’ve made the picture more touching, but-let’s just admit it-he has no talent for this genre.
So, I guess my final recommendation is, if you liked “Little Nicky” and “Mr. Deeds,” from director Brill, than “Without a Paddle” should be for you. As for me, I could’ve gotten a bigger laugh by digesting tainted meat.
Leave a comment