BROKEN DATE: a review of "Date Night"

This review is written in esteemed tribute to Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert, whose cinematic passions, teachings and lessons inform every single word I write on Savage Cinema.

"DATE NIGHT" Directed by Shawn Levy
* (one star)

The late, great Gene Siskel remarked many, many times that in regards to exploring the criteria for what constitutes a good movie, one question to ask would be the following: Is the movie you are watching more interesting than if you overheard a conversation between the film’s actors in real life, perhaps during a meal at a restaurant? That question has remained locked in my head for much of my life as I have watched one movie after another and I have to say that it was an extremely prevalent question to ask as I sat through Director Shawn Levy’s painfully insipid “Date Night” starring Steve Carrell and Tina Fey. As the wheels of contrivance continued to grind creakily, I knew, proof positive, that if I ever did end up at a restaurant where Steve Carrell and Tina Fey just happened to be sharing a meal at the next table, I would indeed hang onto their every word because I am certain that just even one utterance would be smarter, brighter, funnier and more captivating that anything on display in this movie.

Carrell and Fey star as tax accountant Phil and real estate agent Claire Foster, a “boring” and bored New Jersey married couple with children, who plan a luxurious date night in Manhattan in order to spice up their marriage. They arrive at Claw, a new and highly trendy seafood restaurant, without reservations but with high hopes of finding a table. Just at the point when it seems that their night will go south, Phil arrives at the idea of claiming the table meant for the Tripplehorns, a couple not answering their table seating announcement. Phil and Claire take the table and begin to embark upon their glorious evening when suddenly, they are accosted table-side by two shady looking characters (played by Common and Jimmi Simpson) looking for the Tripplehorns. From this point, the Foster’s glamorous date night becomes comically deadly as this case of mistaken identity balloons into a night long adventure which involves crooked cops, a mobster (Ray Liotta), wild car chases, a misbegotten strip tease escapade, a missing flash drive with incriminating information, a broom carrying campaigning District Attorney (William Fichtner) and a constantly shirtless security expert (Mark Wahlberg) who was once one of Claire’s clients. Will the long dormant passions of Phil and Claire re-emerge and re-ignite their love or are they doomed to a life of suburban mediocrity, if they can only survive the night?

I wearily suppose that this concept could have worked but alas, “Date Night” is just the latest entry of the scarily dumbed-down high-concept movies that have infected our movie theaters in recent years. Despite the obvious chemistry between Steve Carrell and Tina Fey, their personalities and our affection for them are too heavily leaned upon to obviously make up for the derivative, bargain basement screenplay and dangerously lazy impersonal direction by Levy. For a plot like this to work, there needs to be such great attention in the writing of characters like Phil and Claire, as well as their internal dilemma but again, with this film, the writing is not present in the least and there is no comic momentum on display. It was as if the filmmakers and studio decided that just the sight of Carrell and Fey would be enough. That they could show up on set and just be funny, ensuring a comic masterpiece. But, that is definitely not how it works, especially in comedy, a medium that has long eluded the proper respect it deserves. The same level of talent has to exist behind the camera and better yet, at the moment of the film’s conception and throughout the entire process of creating a script to deliver to two people as talented as Carrel and Fey have consistently proven themselves to be. Unfortunately, “Date Night” contains nothing but the most obvious, pseudo-edgy, toothless innuendo that may be dirty enough to maybe make the MOR audience members giggle nervously but its not nearly nasty or challenging enough to be fresh, truly funny or even memorable. The comic pacing was sluggish and scenes seemed to be staged with pauses in dialogue designed as signals for the audience to laugh, so much so that all the film was missing was a 1970s canned laugh track.

And then, there is the plot to really consider. For this, I will turn my attention to Roger Ebert, who coined the term, “The Idiot Plot,” which essentially states that if the characters were not all complete idiots, then there would be no movie. Or the film in question contains a plot during which if one character decided to do or not do just one thing, then they movie would be over. “Date Night” is a movie filled to the brim with its share of idiots and there are several sequences when Phil and Claire decide to run against the MOST LOGICAL thing to do just to keep the wheels of the creaky plot grinding along. Case in point, when they are first accosted by the two shady characters at their dinner table and they are told to get up and leave, why do Phil and Claire follow their instructions at all? Why don’t they just stay at the table? Especially as the identity of the two shady characters are revealed, you know NOTHING bad would have happened to Phil and Claire in the first place. This is “The Idiot Plot” in motion because if Phil and Claire just stayed at the table, the movie as conceived would be completed and then the filmmakers would have had to engage themselves in tougher screenwriting and direction duties and potentially be faced with making a good and memorable movie for people to watch.

I want for you, for a moment, to turn back your cinematic clock 25 years to Director Martin Scorsese’s intense comedy “After Hours” (1985), which starred Griffin Dunne as a quiet office dweller who embarks upon a surprise date with the unhinged Rosanna Arquette and ends up trapped in a surreal, almost Hellish SoHo for one long night. For all of the uncomfortable situations Dunne finds himself in, all of the characters at all times are true to whom they are, the film is rooted firmly in reality and you never once feel the plot ticking away.

Or if you are going to lean towards a more raucous setting, how about Director Chris Columbus’ “Adventures In Babysitting” (1986)? That film’s more fantastical elements were contained within that film's title yet the characters never disintegrated into cartoons. The air-tight script, Columbus’s flowing direction and the engaging performances from the entire cast kept the film speeding along with comic energy, excitement and inventiveness and for added charm, it often laughed at its own ridiculous situations to boot.

Yet, “Date Night” is a wild, screwball film stuck in neutral and for much of its stagnant running time, it felt to be idling in park. Beyond that, it seems that absolutely no one behind the scenes seemed to trust the comic gold they had in their hands from the very beginning. Sometimes, the best solutions and answers are the simplest ones and in the case of “Date Night,” it is all there in the title. Why didn’t Levy and his filmmaking crew trust in it characters and their situation enough to just make a film about a date night between these two people? That would have the most obvious thing to do and it could potentially have the most comedic unpredictability. Nevertheless, we exist in a time when studios think there just has to be some high concept to drive the film. That a modern audience just won’t be able to handle strong direction, writing and performances that sustain themselves on their own terms. Instead of making a film that is burdened with “The Idiot Plot,” why not make a smart movie about smart people and treat the audience as if they were smart people as well?

There is one horridly embarrassing sequence in particular that really stresses what I am speaking of. It is a fairly quieter section set upon a subway train, and in this scene, the character of Claire Foster is used as an audience surrogate. She expresses to Phil that she is unable to keep up with complicated plots which then gives him the opportunity to recount to her (i.e. us the audience) the entire film thus far, as if we hadn’t been watching it to this point at all. Do Levy and his crew feel that the audience is so stupid that they could not have kept up with the story or even understood what has been happening for all of this time? Trust me, dear readers, there is not one moment of “Date Night” complicated enough to necessitate re-explanation and the suggestion that this film is more than what it actually is is insulting to all of us.

Furthermore, what makes “Date Night” so disappointing, even moreso than the poor utilization of its stars’ talents is the fact there is a really good movie at its core. I have to say that this movie began very well, as during the first fifteen minutes or so, it effectively set up who Phil and Claire Foster are, where their lives have been and where they are headed, their love for each other and their fears of it evaporating. And then the two shady characters wind up at their restaurant table and whatever good will the film had begun to earn, Levy and his filmmaking crew tossed it away completely. It reminded me of Director Peyton Reed’s Vince Vaughn/Jennifer Aniston vehicle “The Break-Up” (2006) another tremendously wasted opportunity that began so strongly with truthful, very funny and equally uncomfortable humor and sacrificed it all for contrived situations that betrayed the characters and strong core.

Please take another moment and recall Director Judd Apatow's "Knocked Up" (2007). Would that wonderful, hysterical, vulgar, romantic, empathetic and highly memorable and re-watchable film been better served with car chases and explosions? Of course not!! "Date Night" is a film that just did not need the mistaken identities and "Mexican standoffs." All it had to do was trust in these characters and their dilemma and search for the comedic elements within.

That kind of a movie, if done to the very best of its abilities, would have easily been a film that could have surpassed an overheard conversation between famous people in real life.

However, we are left with this one.