New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

If only. Like most '80s teen comedies, Better off Dead isn’t the place to go if you want to learn about whether it’s the content of your character or the presence of a kick-ass muscle car in your driveway that makes you a good person. No, this is the kind of movie where you turn off your brain and just let it happen. The problem is that while there are more than a few laughs in Better off Dead, the movie feels like a loosely connected series of bizarre sketches than a coherent story. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - even a stupid story needs to make sense, or you risk your audience feeling cheated. We just never feel a sense of connection between the characters, or any investment in their (very) loosely connected stories.

The main story here - Lane and his attempts to win back his girlfriend - takes up probably less than 30 minutes of screen time. Meanwhile, characters and subplots are introduced that go a long way toward padding the script, but otherwise amount to nothing more than a distraction. The paperboy is funny - anyone over the age of 35 will automatically laugh when they hear you say “I want my two dollars” - but what does he have to do with anything? Lane’s neighbors, and a subplot involving a dancing hamburger are also funny, and do serve to bridge Lane’s character development, but the execution feels clunky and contrived.

Charles is there because we HAVE to have a Wacky Best Friend, but he doesn’t really DO anything, other than deliver a handful of memorable lines. Plus, Curtis Armstrong is a character actor whose persona is so closely identified with Revenge of the Nerds that he kind of takes you out of the movie whenever he’s on screen. What I’m getting at is that Better off Dead is kind of funny, but it’s funny in the same pointless way as watching a video mashup of random people getting punched in the face. And Lane blithely wades through it all with the same look of bemused detachment that got Peter Venkman through Ghostbusters.

Neither film would have worked out the same way without its leading man. The difference is that without Bill Murray, Ghostbusters would have still been a good story, and a different kind of funny. Without John Cusack, Better off Dead would fall apart completely and be exposed for the incoherent pile of half baked punchlines that it is. It’s good for a nostalgic shot in the arm, but you’ll find yourself strangely silent and sad during moments that once had you in stitches. Like any bottle of wine, Better off Dead had a shelf life, and was best enjoyed quickly once opened.

But now that time has passed, and all that’s left is just a stale, depressing glass of vinegar.

Continued:       1       2