more by MaryAnn

pumpkin-spice flavored | by maryann johanson

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
Amazon author
tumblr
Pinterest
RSS

Delivery Man review: return to sender

Delivery Man red light Vince Vaughn

What is supposed to be funny and heartwarming is instead creepy and stalkerish. There’s no charm or emotional plausibility in a tale that cannot work without it.
I’m “biast” (pro): nothing

I’m “biast” (con): hated the Canadian original

(what is this about? see my critic’s minifesto)

It’s meant to be hilarious, it would seem. Brooklynite David Wozniak (Vince Vaughn: The Internship) unknowingly fathered 533 children by anonymous artificial insemination decades back, and now 142 of his young-adult biological offspring have filed a class-action lawsuit to learn his identity. Comedy ensues, until David learns the true meaning of fatherhood and the basic expectations that come with being an adult human being, which he’s never had to bother with before, because his boyish doofiness has been tolerated by all around him. All the charm of Starbuck, the Canadian film this is a near scene-by-scene, beat-by-beat remake of, remains intact here… which is to say, none at all. What is supposed to be funny and heartwarming is instead creepy and stalkerish, as David injects himself into the lives of some of the 142 to become a sort of guardian angel, and the kids are so dumb, apparently, that when they discover they’ve all met him in various random suspicious circumstances, no one catches on that he’s the guy they’re all looking for. The new title makes less sense than the original, which referred to David’s fertility-clinic pseudonym — David delivers meat for his family’s butcher business, but he’s not anything like a midwife to these kids, so it doesn’t work as wordplay — but this new version does at least address some of the legal and ethical issues involved, which the first film ignored even as it used the lawsuit as the rationale for its plot. But writer-director Ken Scott, remaking his own film, doesn’t address them in any meaningful or involving way. The kids are barely characters here, and simply having someone tell David that “wherever you go, people love you” isn’t enough to make us believe it, unless we’re meant to accept that forcing sketches of humans together into situations that could only exist in a movie that doesn’t care about emotional plausibility constitutes a well-told story.

US/Canada release date: Nov 22 2013 | UK release date: Jan 10 2014

Flick Filosopher Real Rating: rated J(O): what a jerk (off)
MPAA: rated PG-13 for thematic elements, sexual content, some drug material, brief violence and language
BBFC: rated 12A (contains moderate sex and drug references, and one use of strong language)

viewed in 2D
viewed at a private screening with an audience of critics

official site | IMDb
more reviews: Movie Review Query Engine | Rotten Tomatoes
  • Tonio Kruger

    So now Hollywood and foreign filmmakers are stealing ideas from old ER episodes? Or worse yet, from bad ER episodes?

  • RogerBW

    Ideas are so easy. There is no shortage of the things. Many of them are even good ideas! And yet, instead of making films of those, we get barrel-scraping like this.

    (And your Patriarchal Message of the Day is that all men must get married and become fathers, otherwise they have Failed At Life. It worked so well on the women, we’re trying it here too.)