IMDb > The Distinguished Gentleman (1992) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
The Distinguished Gentleman
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
The Distinguished Gentleman More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 5 of 5: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
Index 45 reviews in total 

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

You know this movie is a disappointment when...

Author: BlackJack_B
30 December 2001

Victoria Rowell plays the love interest! Victoria Rowell? Victoria Rowell? Victoria Rowell?!? A soap opera actress? Drucilla from the Young And The Restless?!? No wonder this movie was a big disappointment.

I was hoping that this would of been a return to glory for Eddie Murphy, doing pure comedy after the comedy-drama of Boomerang, but this one is too serious and preachy. The set-up sounds great: Murphy plays Jeff Johnson, a hustler who decides to lie his way to Congress by claiming to be the elected Congressman from some backwoods part of America who elected a dead man to the post. He uses this post to hopefully earn a decent living and sham his way to more. Instead, he discovers that some government officials are even more corrupt than he is and he must use his "power" to make things right for the little guy.

While a movie like this could have been good, Eddie is placed in a vacuum. He can't play the type of guy we all liked in earlier films; instead he's forced to play a kinder, gentler, clichéd type, even from the start. No wisecracks, no flamboyant personality, no life. His no-name associates seem to have more life than he has. He doesn't even do his laugh. We also get to see a classic Hollywood sex scene featuring James Garner (people having sex while fully dressed, seen in so many films). The acting, other than Kevin McCarthy's corrupt Congressman, is flat, and you wonder who decided to allow an untalented soap opera diva in this film.

Bottom line: You can see why it took Murphy a little longer to turn his career around with the acceptance of this role. While Beverly Hills Cop 3 wasn't a box office hit, it was much better than this effort. One of the biggest letdowns ever.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Not very good at all

3/10
Author: NickyCee from Alexandria, VA
14 February 2005

I am SHOCKED to see all the positive comments on this movie! I am a major Murphy fan and I can tell you it is contrived and, at best, silly. See other comments if you want to find out about the plot.

The movie has that fast-paced early 90's feel where the plot develops way too fast with too many minor characters running around. You've seen this movie so many times before - only a series of exactly timed and inconceivable coincidences would make it all work - and (hold onto your seats...) it does! Nothing is developed and reactions to the coincidences are silly. All exaggeration aside, it has as bad dialog and acting as I have ever seen by major actors. Especially bad is Joe Don Baker. It is almost worth renting just to see him deliver his exceedingly poorly written lines - poor guy. Honestly, this movie is not funny and not entertaining on any level.

While not as bad as Best Defense (is any movie?), there is a reason 1992 saw it come and go in just three weeks.

If you like Murphy, get Trading Places (excellent), 48 Hours or Another 48 Hours. If you like Joe Don Baker, get Charlie Varrick (amazing movie).

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

good vs evil

7/10
Author: heppy1212 from United States
26 June 2007

every white person is evil and every black person is good. Thomas Jefferson Johnson: Chairman Dodge, please! Would you tell him that it's Mr. Joshua Benjamin from the NAACP on the line! Actually Mame, you could be a great deal of help, I have a few minor questions.Thomas Jefferson Johnson: Chairman Dodge, please! Would you tell him that it's Mr. Joshua Benjamin from the NAACP on the line! Actually Mame, you could be a great deal of help, I have a few minor questions. I would like to know how many members of the Chairman's committee are African American I would like to know how many members of the Chairman's committee are African AmericanThomas Jefferson Johnson: Chairman Dodge, please! Would you tell him that it's Mr. Joshua Benjamin from the NAACP on the line! Actually Mame, you could be a great deal of help, I have a few minor questions. I would like to know how many members of the Chairman's committee are African American

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

A Black President

Author: jyoung-11
19 October 2001

I guess this film was probably a political statement in its concept that there should be a black president in the White House. It was made after the Gulf War and around the time that Colin Powell became high profile as one of the generals taking command in the 1990 crisis. Apart from the fact that the film tried to explore the idea of having a black president, there wasn't much substance there in terms of storyline. It had James Garner riding a secretary at the beginning of the film (which all red blooded blokes would want to do), and then dies of a heart attack. If Eddie Murphy had taken his place and stepped in to ride the blonde secretary, then maybe the balance would have been redressed in an artistic way. The film also showed an aging Diane Black from Alfred Hitchcock's 'Marnie' whose hair was no longer dark. Apart from this, there was nothing original about the film.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Yea, It's Bad

Author: Hotoil
29 September 2001

I too cannot believe all the positive reviews for this movie. My theory is it's so bad most people didn't even bother commenting on it. It's just so poorly constructed, from the weak & predictable humor to the sloppy editing that plagues every other scene (someone will be standing there holding something, then it will disappear at a different angle, then the camera angle switches again and they'll be missing an arm or something. Seems like even the editor couldn't even stand to concentrate on it).

Yes, Washington is this corrupt. In some ways the cartoonish depiction is well-done, but the mostly it's just a device for lame jokes. Eddie Murphy had lost all his youthful charm by this time this came out, and he's simply pretentious. This whole thing is so cheeeessssyyyy. Feels like an uncensored TV movie.

Not recommended.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 5 of 5: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
Newsgroup reviews External reviews Parents Guide
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history