Tina Fey, Nat Wolff and Paul Rudd in Admission |
** out of ****
There’s a scene early in Admission when its main character
pushes the importance of smart kids going on to earn honorable degrees. For
with a prestigious education, they have the power to positively impact the way
this crazy world is run. Could they start with how feel-good comedies are made?
Director Paul Weitz (About a Boy) and screenwriter Karen
Croner (One True Thing) are two people I would assume to be very educated and
probably hold important credentials, but they have made a rather bland comedy
that only stays afloat due to a likeable cast.
Admission is about a meticulous no-nonsense Princeton
admissions officer played in perfect deadpan form by Tina Fey. Her world is
suddenly changed when she discovers an applicant (Nat Wolff) may be the
accidental child she gave up for adoption in her twenties.
The seventeen-year-old attends a progressive school, which
resembles a commune-style farm. The school is run by an ideal man - and this
film’s love interest - played by Paul Rudd, in a performance that has the same
mild tongue-in-cheek nature as the experimental school his character runs.
Rudd’s character champions the kid’s brilliance and his
dream to go to Princeton. Fey’s character, unable to tell the boy she is his
mother, sets aside her stingy objectivity and tries to get him in, despite his
uneven academic background.
The film has a kind of stupid misplaced focus on the subject
of its title. The main character wants her estranged son to be happy and he
wants to go to Princeton. She starts to pull strings in the admission process.
What she eventually does is wrongly portrayed as sympathetic, as this
unconventional learner may not be Princeton material at all. It is conveyed
that he is a good and smart kid deserving of great things, but an Ivy League
School might be a terrible place for someone who lacks structure. The movie
really tries to make a big deal about him getting in and I couldn’t get behind
that for one minute.
Lily Tomlin plays Fey’s mother and that is truly inspired
casting. She is a reclusive feminist scholar and is emotionally insensitive to
her daughter’s troubles with the belief that everything can be made better by
liberation from any attachments -Hardly the thing a woman who thinks she’s
found her son needs to hear. This is a good element of the film. Unfortunately
it’s a subplot and fails to fuse, as well as it wants, with the rest of the
movie.
I went to see Admission without imposing very high
standards. I just wanted an innocent and simple crowd-pleaser that existed on
it’s own terms of comic reality and didn’t owe us any kind of accurate portrayal
of how the admissions office of a degree-earning institution really functions. I
was prepared for all of that as long as I was entertained by witty banter and
original farcical inventions.
Instead, I got a semi-funny movie broken up by weak attempts
at sincere drama, never funny enough or emotionally investing. It left me
hyper-aware that the only thing driving the emotion, were the bittersweet
contemporary music selections plugged into every emotional passage the film
took. If you know what I’m talking about, you know this kind of editorial
method is used and abused in every comedy/drama movie you see these days, and
aren’t you tired of it too?
I was kind of surprised that this movie came from Focus
Features, normally known for more art-house fare. Universal, for which Focus is
a division, would normally put out a movie of this kind under their label. Did
the subject of Ivy League schools sound too intense to market as a mainstream
movie? It sure felt like one to me. Maybe this was slated to be a Focus release
from the beginning except it was planned to be interesting.
Tina Fey, who often writes the great material for herself as a performer,
was only involved with this project as an actor. As a movie star now, she
deserves better and should have possessed the wisdom to stamp a “deny” when she
was handed this script.
No comments:
Post a Comment