The Distinguished Gentleman (1992)

Why so much hype?

Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

"A Distinguished Gentleman" is about a con man Thomas Jefferson Johnson (Eddie Murphy) who realizes that the best con that he could pull is not as a small time operator in Florida, but as a Congressman in Washington D.C. making shady backroom deals with corporate lobbyists. All he has to do is vote a certain way on certain pieces of legislation and then get rewarded down the road with "donations" from corporations and other interest groups (including the gun lobby).The three-fifths of "A Distinguished Gentleman" is great. There are many clever scenes in this film that expose Congress and corporations as rotten to the core and I personally think that it is sad that more films, like this one, are not made about the rottenness of Congress and Corporate America; and that the Hollywood establishment is reluctant to admit that, in today's America, we really have government by the corporations and not government by the people. But what also makes the first three-fifths so good is the use of humor as for indicting not only the political system, but also in a subtle way American society. I am referring, for instance, to that scene where an automatic weapons manufacturer explains that his autonomic guns should be sold because they are needed for hunting. Next you see Johnson, Chairman Dodge (Lane Smith in a marvellously wicked performance) and the manufacturer in a hilarious scene firing their automatic guns at ducks (when regular rifles would suffice). Wonderful. Another wonderful scene involves Terry Corrigan (Kevin McCarthy) explaining to Johnson that But then this film goes downhill, albeit slowly. I was entertain until the end, but I felt that the last two-fifths were not at good as the stellar three-fifths. Why? The first reason is the corny love story between Johnson and Celia Kirby (Victoria Rowell) which I thought distracted from the already clever story line. The other thing I object to was the decision of the producers to go for a happy ending, which creates the impression that all is write in the world as far as Congress and corporations are concern. The reality is that Congress is just as rotten now as it was in 1992 (when the film was made). The culprits were never held accountable. Meaningful, transformative changes continue to be held back. Reasoned bi-partisanship to resolve the country's outstanding problems, which include the environment, the deficit, the loss of middle class jobs and others, is non-existent.

This script is so smart. It's like (Mr. Smith Goes to Washington) yet after changing the lead character from unsophisticated honest to sophisticated dishonest. And the aim is foxy; as when a hustler goes to the Congress he would be a very slight one. It got the journey that makes that little conman has a redemption out of beating the bigger conmen. I loved countless details and scenes. The clueless yet enthusiastic speech of "read my lips", "I know nothing about poultry, but I know people. So if you people come to me and say something about poultry…I'm going to listen", plus the scene of "what law you voted for?!" were certainly the best when it comes to define the true and bitter sarcasm of this script. (Eddie Murphy) was nice. I loved him while talking "white", or imitating Martin Luther King. And it was a good choice for his 11th movie. Clearly with (The Distinguished Gentleman) the man wanted to make comedy with something serious in the mix this time. But as a whole it wasn't a distinguished movie itself. It was somewhat like a worthy of Oscar material with a worthy of Razzie direction! The direction didn't give the matters its appropriate shadows. The artistic factors are none. All the scenes were made similarly. For instance there were, in most cases, no different uses for the lighting so all the scenes looked the same. The sets didn't embody the stateliness of the Congress, not even outwardly. The music didn't play any role, it wasn't funny, or serious; simply weak. Sometimes I felt that I was watching a bad TV episode done on a too limited budget too. Sure with another director that might have been one memorable political satire. The casting of the powerful guys wasn't powerful. They looked less menacing than what they are supposed to be. Over and above the script weakened itself by its very ending; actually after clever climax it inclined to be farcical for the sake of being happy. Simply the lead went and exposed a scheme that will push him into jail, while we see him, right after it, free, so honored, and thinking of running for presidency ??!! Well, they wanted it just a comedy after all. However it wasn't that highly attractive. And as a serious movie it didn't achieve much with the very promising material that it has. Mediocre result both ways. Or disappointing if you longed for more. Wanna hear something good; this is way WAY better than Murphy's other movie from the same year, the supposed romantic comedy, (Boomerang)!

When Eddie Murphy hit it big on Saturday Night Live,he became the hottest featured player on there since John Belushi. Along with that came his (then) shocking and hilarious comedy albums. He Like Steve Martin in the '70s,became a stand-up comedian,treated like a rock star.Then came great films like 48 Hours,Trading Places & Beverly Hills Cop #1 & Pt.2 and Coming To America. Mis-steps like Best Defense (which he's barely in) and Golden Child. Mostly though,it was his (clean version here) "smart-aleck"/street smart persona that made him. It's also what broke him,at least for awhile.Harlem Nights was a disaster,Another 48 Hourscould have been made on a Xerox machine. People had begun to tire of him. In 1992 it seemed he had rebounded with "Boomerang" but then came this.The Distinguished gentleman takes Murphy,once again back to the street smart,con artist he'd played before. The smart aleck humor seemed tired for a man (then) 30 years old. It was a somewhat nice touch that his character sees the realities involved in the office he's won based on (someone else's) name recognition. Seeing a little girl whose hair has fallen out due to electrical tower radiation makes him see the light.Most comedies have a pretty funny ending but the writers couldn't even give us that. In the last moment,I was like,"That's it?"Four stars is a generous rating here but I feel that Murphy was at least trying to say good-bye to his 80s super-star and hello to maturity,which he finally found. After Beverly Hills Cop 3,he never looked back again. (END)

This is passable 80's Eddie Murphy winding its way into the 90's. The premise is o.k. mostly works. Of course there has to be the inevitable "I didn't care at first but now I do" moments. You can't have a movie about our superiors in DC without the requisite message that Good must thwart Evil. In this case it is a little waif bald from her radiation treatment as a result of cancer from dastardly power lines. Yeah, that issue still resonates.The first half of the movie is prime Eddie and punctures the fatuousness of Pols in general. Then it takes a left turn and pretty much spews out basic Hollywood rhetoric - Big Business Bad, Big Government Good. It almost spoils the movie entirely. But it pulls up a little and ends humorously enough.Murphy has put out worse, so by comparison, this deserves a 6 out of 10.