Enemies of Laughter is mildly amusing on a consistent basis but is never able to be more than that because it can't decide if its main character is a neurotic dweeb or an arrogant douche. The film randomly switches from portraying him as the only sane man in a crazy world to casting him as a pretentious snob who's the cause of all his own suffering. The movie can't make up its mind it likes him or if the audience should like him. It's like filming an abortive intervention and prevents any dramatic momentum from forming, leaving nothing but a steady stream of reasonably funny lines to carry the load.
Paul (David Paymer) is a failed playwright who's landed a job at a sitcom writer that fills him with contempt for himself and his profession. He's constantly going out of blind dates that never go well and spends the rest of his time stewing in his own preoccupied juices. When Paul asks an acquaintance he hasn't spoken to in a year to wait at his house for the cable guy to show up, the Big Lebowski-like acquaintance named Sam (Judge Reinhold) decides to make a documentary about Paul. So, as Paul has a first date with a crazy woman, production meetings on his sitcom and meets a stubborn theater director who wants to produce a play that Paul wrote but now never wants to see the light of day, those scenes are intercut with Sam's videotaped interviews with Paul's family and friends. A digression about the internal politics of the theater gets thrown in and that's the film.
Now, the dialog and performances here are pretty good if a cut rate version of Woody Allen's humor is what you're looking for. You've got Paul making passive aggressive jokes about everything, including himself, and moments of his loved ones and associates making biting observations about him. Not every line is a winner but there's a steady stream of them that rack up an okay comedy batting average.
The ultimate point of this story, however, turns out to be dramatic and not comedic. It's supposed to be about how Paul has to overcome or outgrow all the egocentric baggage that makes him sort of an ass, but the movie never really commits to Paul fully being an ass. For example, the scenes from Sam's documentary keep going back to Paul's parents (Bea Arthur and Peter Falk). Well, those two talk about Paul like he was a piece of furniture or somebody else's pet bird they were watching while that somebody was on vacation. These are two of the worst parents in the history of cinema and they display a sociopathic disregard for their son. So, every time the movie tries to make Paul out to be this screwed up jerk, it cuts back to his parents and that makes Paul look heroically well adjusted for not turning into a serial killer.
And there are other things like that where efforts to emphasize Paul's flaws are contrasted with scenes that verify his view of the world and other people. I t wouldn't be a big deal except the film definitely veers away from comedy in the second half and the wishy washiness over Paul's nature deflates all attempts at conflict or dramatic tension.
If you want to watch people sit around and say marginally funny things on a regular basis, Enemies of Laughter has that. Its essential indecisiveness prevents it from offering anything more.
Paul (David Paymer) is a failed playwright who's landed a job at a sitcom writer that fills him with contempt for himself and his profession. He's constantly going out of blind dates that never go well and spends the rest of his time stewing in his own preoccupied juices. When Paul asks an acquaintance he hasn't spoken to in a year to wait at his house for the cable guy to show up, the Big Lebowski-like acquaintance named Sam (Judge Reinhold) decides to make a documentary about Paul. So, as Paul has a first date with a crazy woman, production meetings on his sitcom and meets a stubborn theater director who wants to produce a play that Paul wrote but now never wants to see the light of day, those scenes are intercut with Sam's videotaped interviews with Paul's family and friends. A digression about the internal politics of the theater gets thrown in and that's the film.
Now, the dialog and performances here are pretty good if a cut rate version of Woody Allen's humor is what you're looking for. You've got Paul making passive aggressive jokes about everything, including himself, and moments of his loved ones and associates making biting observations about him. Not every line is a winner but there's a steady stream of them that rack up an okay comedy batting average.
The ultimate point of this story, however, turns out to be dramatic and not comedic. It's supposed to be about how Paul has to overcome or outgrow all the egocentric baggage that makes him sort of an ass, but the movie never really commits to Paul fully being an ass. For example, the scenes from Sam's documentary keep going back to Paul's parents (Bea Arthur and Peter Falk). Well, those two talk about Paul like he was a piece of furniture or somebody else's pet bird they were watching while that somebody was on vacation. These are two of the worst parents in the history of cinema and they display a sociopathic disregard for their son. So, every time the movie tries to make Paul out to be this screwed up jerk, it cuts back to his parents and that makes Paul look heroically well adjusted for not turning into a serial killer.
And there are other things like that where efforts to emphasize Paul's flaws are contrasted with scenes that verify his view of the world and other people. I t wouldn't be a big deal except the film definitely veers away from comedy in the second half and the wishy washiness over Paul's nature deflates all attempts at conflict or dramatic tension.
If you want to watch people sit around and say marginally funny things on a regular basis, Enemies of Laughter has that. Its essential indecisiveness prevents it from offering anything more.
