Movie Review - 'Death at a Funeral'

Death At A Funeral Starring Chris Rock, Martin Lawrence, and James Marsden Directed by Neil LaBute Rated R

Let's suppose you were going to make a farce, excuse me -- remake a farce. There are certainly directors who can do this sort of thing well, but instead, you hire Neil LaBute, best known for a couple caustic social dramas about a decade ago (In the Company of Men, Your Friends and Neighbors), but a director who has remake experience. Unfortunately, that remake is The Wicker Man. The good news, if there is any, is that LaBute has experience in the theatre, so he should have a knack for keeping the farce on its very specific case. He should have. But he doesn't. It's hard to blame LaBute for Death at a Funeral, but his presence here is a microcosm of what's gone wrong with this nearly identical remake of a blisteringly funny 2007 British film. The original was extraordinarily specific on the page and on the screen. It was well-cast and never, not once, slowed down. The English just do farcical comedy better than the rest of the world. In the remake, LaBute has the original writer, Dean Craig, and sets about to essentially recreate the first film with a different cast. Well, mostly different. What's the point of doing what seems like a shot-by-shot remake so soon after the original, which is better, anyway? It really doesn't matter outside of the small audience that saw Frank Oz' Funeral, and maybe that is the point: What better film to remake as closely as possible than a movie nobody saw the first time? On its own merits, the new Death at a Funeral tries, and then tries to hard. Because a British comedy will necessarily have different laughs at different times than an American remake, some things here are too broad for what surrounds them, and that's saying something. Is it funny? Sure, quite funny at times. But more than that, it's just messy. The family gets together to lay to rest its patriarch. The responsible son (Chris Rock) is putting everything together, but notices the man in the casket isn't really his father, and there'd be no mistaking the two men. That's just the beginning of a breakneck afternoon, filled with crackpot relatives, hallucinogenics, and - oh yes - a blackmailing gay dwarf (Peter Dinklage, reprising his role). The cast isn't bad at all, and by and large, they do right by the material. Too bad it turns out that's a one-way street. Rock's less responsible brother is portrayed by Martin Lawrence, and it's as close to what made Lawrence famous as we've seen in a while. Tracy Morgan and Danny Glover make an odd pair, and James Marsden makes a real go of it as the boyfriend of Rock's cousin (Zoe Saldana). He mistakenly takes that hallucinogenic drug, the first of two big wild cards, all hell breaks loose, and clothes are strewn about. The problem with mixing all of these elements together is that if one of them drops the ball, the game's over. A farce works or it doesn't. There are a few trouble spots in the American update, but it's probably a bit of bathroom humor that's the biggest culprit. Yeah, it's an R-rated movie, but it just didn't fit the kind of comedy everyone was trying to push. If you've not seen the first film, you can certainly have a good time with Death at a Funeral for a while, and considering so little of substance has been changed, this version does have moments where it feels pretty fresh. But it just misses the mark a little too often and noticeably.

Comments

[Nelson]

I loved the original movie, and even though Roger Ebert claims this one is better I have absolutely no interest in seeing a carbon copy of Frank Oz's film

[Tsukemono]

I saw the original English version and thought it was hilarious. Found out they were doing an American remake and just new that it wouldn't be as good. I'd say see the original one over this.

[paneriab]

Good to see this movie having new path other than fallowing the first movie and it bring more people into the movie too. how ever the rush in the movie with more comedians are a waste and two been quite enough.

source
http://blog.80millionmoviesfree.com

[MattT]

I did a double-take when I saw a preview for this remake. I had seen the British version and loved it in all its quirkiness. When I saw the preview I thought - no, scratch that - I knew it was going to be a flat imitation of the original. They even kept the same damn midget! I just couldn't believe that they would remake a movie so quickly, but then again, that's Hollywood for you. Quite often they steal from 'outsiders' and remake it, without any acknowledgement to the original work. Quite sad really.

[Luke]

I saw the original and loved every minute of it. True British comedy genius. Then some idiot comes along thinking itll sell more if we put a famous american cast in it. Why cant you people leave anything good alone!!! This film was fine as it was! To make things worse they havent even tried to adapt the script or storyline to make it fit america more theyve just kept it exactly the same with exactly the same camera direction with just different people saying the lines in exactly the same way as before. Seriously this is why I hate the film industry at times, and I bloody work in it. I will admit I have worked on things I didnt want to but even still this remake should never have been approached at least not for another forty years or so.

[Shaheen McCallum]

I'm a south african and always much prefer brittish humour over american but I have to admit this remake is much more funnier than the original

[movie downloads]

this movie is not only not morbid, it is hilarious, not just in a black-comedy way, but in a straightforward matter that uses a funeral as the basis for generating some very funny scenes. I really enjoyed the movie. Thanks for sharing the blog.