Flirting with Disaster (1996)

User Rating:

6.7/10   

Director:

David O. Russell

Writer (WGA):

David O. Russell (written by)

Release Date:

22 March 1996 (USA)

Genre:

Comedy

Tagline:

Have you flirted yet?

Plot:

A young man, his wife, and his incompetent case worker travel across country to find his birth parents.

Plot Keywords:

Adoption | Mistaken Identity | New Mexico | Satire | Drug Humor

Awards:

1 win & 7 nominations

Cast

Ben Stiller	...	Mel Coplin
Patricia Arquette	...	Nancy Coplin
Téa Leoni	...	Tina Kalb
Alan Alda	...	Richard Schlichting
Mary Tyler Moore	...	Pearl Coplin
George Segal	...	Ed Coplin
Lily Tomlin	...	Mary Schlichting
Josh Brolin	...	Tony Kent
Richard Jenkins	...	Paul Harmon
Celia Weston	...	Valerie Swaney
Glenn Fitzgerald	...	Lonnie Schlichting
Beth Ostrosky	...	Jane
Cynthia Lamontagne	...	Sandra
David Patrick Kelly	...	Fritz Boudreau
John Ford Noonan	...	Mitch

MPAA:

Rated R for language, sexuality and a comic drug scene.

Runtime:

92 min

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Color:

Color

Aspect Ratio:

1.85 : 1

Sound Mix:

Dolby

Certification:

Canada:14A (Ontario) | Iceland:L | USA:R (certificate #34425) | Finland:S | Netherlands:12 | Singapore:NC-16 | South Korea:18 | Australia:M | Germany:12 | Spain:13 | UK:15

Filming Locations:

Battle Creek, Michigan, USA

Company:

Miramax Films

Goofs:

Continuity: After Mel has crashed the truck and is at the police station, Paul and his partner leave the questioning room. When they re-enter the questioning room, Paul opens the door with his left hand. In the next shot, he is entering with a clipboard in his left hand.

Quotes:

Mr. Coplin: Why is everyone getting worked up all of the sudden? I thought we were gunna talk about getting new carpeting. Taking out this crap and putting in the wall-to-wall.

Movie Connections:

References "Roots" (1977)

Why or why not is `Flirting with Disaster' a typical Hollywood movie?

`Flirting with Disaster' is definitely a typical Hollywood movie in many aspects but not in all of them. It fits the form of classical cinema or classical paradigm in that the director, David O. Russell, does not get distracted from telling the story with filmmaking techniques. It is a clear and precise comedy that never leaves the characters in action, and is done so in a way that works unlike many other films of this genre released today. The film is structured narratively, with a clearly defined conflict from the very beginning. Ben Stiller shines in his performance as a neurotic new father who is trying desperately to find his biological parents in order to name his newborn son. At one point in the film the viewer begins to become anxious and wonder if the same problem for the protagonist, Stiller, is going to continue on in the same form as it has in the past half of the movie, but luckily Russell then changes the flow of the film and brings it to a much more comedic finish than the first half.

The photography is shot in full and long shots throughout most of the movie. Russell must have used deep-focus shots when filming because the surrounding background is clear around the characters, using a wide-angle or short lens. The characters are never off of the screen except for a few instances when we see a plane flying or a car driving and then we have voice-overs. The dialogue is always continuous- there is never a break in the script which works well because the screenplay is well written and clever on its insights on the little inconveniences of everyday life. Although all of these events are too unbelievable too happen all at once, they are all real life comedic situations that could happen to anyone. When compiled together with this plot line, we have this film before us.

Although this is a typical movie in the sense that it does not break any barriers or do anything creatively in its techniques in telling the story, the plot and screenplay do enough justice in making the film entertaining for the audience and one of those films you can just sit down, relax, and have fun viewing because it makes sense and fits together. This aspect is not like many Hollywood films released today, with their gaping holes that leave the viewer feeling unfulfilled. Altogether this was a good film, even though it did fit many of the typical Hollywood stereotypes.