ShareThis Page
Movies/TV

Review: Kevin Hart's star turn in 'The Upside' has a down side

| Thursday, Jan. 10, 2019, 9:54 a.m.

Kevin Hart’s transition from brattily charming comic persona to serious dramatic cinematic presence isn’t going quite as planned.

His extracurricular controversies notwithstanding, the comedian’s first turn in a more serious role in “The Upside” — a remake of the award-winning French hit “The Intouchables,” across from Bryan Cranston and Nicole Kidman — should have been a slam dunk. And yet, “The Upside” is missing some crucial elements, and it’s a struggle to find the bright side to this rather hackneyed film.

What’s missing is Hart’s manic energy, which he can’t quite translate into an effective or poignant toned-down performance.

Part of what makes his comedic performances work is that his characters’ cheerful arrogance is constantly rebutted by those around him within a heightened reality, offering a silly push and pull. With this muted performance in a naturalistic world as the down-on-his-luck Dell, that arrogance just makes him seem like a jerk.

Strange turn of events

On the hunt for signatures to prove to his parole officer he’s looking for a job, Dell stumbles into a job interview in the palatial penthouse of Phillip LaCasse (Cranston), an uber-wealthy investor who is quadriplegic and requires the assistance of a “life auxiliary.” It’s begrudging respect at first wisecrack for the two curmudgeons, and in a strange turn of events, Phillip offers Dell the job.

Somehow, it works, because, while neither man wants to be in the situation, they both need to be. Dell is essentially homeless, behind on child support and desperately does not want to return to dealing drugs.

You will probably guess what happens next: The two men learn to love each other and embrace life through their unlikely intimate relationship.

And that’s much of the problem with “The Upside” — so little of it is surprising or fresh. Instead it’s predictable, plodding and laden with well-trodden tropes. Here’s an uplifting montage, and an array of embarrassing female supporting character stereotypes (frigid exec, dead wife, nameless sex worker). At the center, a spirited person of color teaches uptight white people to loosen up already.

The jokes are stale, trafficking in tired, gender-based material that hovers around the edges of misogyny and gay panic.

Cynical sensibility

We can’t judge “The Upside” based on the recent controversies surrounding Hart and his old offensive jokes, but we can judge it on the script, adapted by Jon Hartmere, which is clunky and dated. Neil Burger’s serviceable direction doesn’t quite liven things up.

The best scenes of the film simply show the relationship between Dell and Phillip, who share a cynical sensibility, despite their differences. Phillip appreciates that Dell doesn’t pity him, that Dell demands everyone treat him as a real person, flaws, desires and all.

You see flickers of what the heart of the film is in one of its most warm and authentic scenes, where Dell takes his charge out to get stoned and order munchies. Their chemistry is easy, unlike the forced bits and riffs that bedevil the rest of the film.

“The Upside” has a heart. It’s just that the film leaves it lukewarm, focusing more on extracting laughs than jerking tears. It suffers from a bit of an identity crisis, while weak writing and shaky character transitions don’t help matters.

While this could have been an interesting turn in Hart’s career, it may be back to the drawing board to discover his new iteration.

Katie Walsh is a Tribune News Service writer.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me