Though it laid a big fat egg at the box office, THE DISTINGUISHED GENTLEMAN is still one of Eddie Murphy's smartest and most entertaining films. Eddie plays a career con man who decides there is real money to be made in the political arena and using the name of his state's recently deceased incumbent, runs for Congress and is actually elected on the strength of his predecessor's name. Upon his arrival in Washington, he finds himself courted by many special lobbyists and finds him squaring off against one semi-crooked congressman (the late Lane Smith), whose personal agendas outweigh his duties to the people he represents and it is through his dealings with this guy and learning that politics is more than the big dodge he thought it was going to be, our hero learns to be a better person. This clever comedy takes the expected pot-shots at Washington, DC and politics in general, but also presents a fun good vs evil story surrounded by some elaborate trappings that make for a sophisticated comic romp. Murphy has rarely been better and he has surrounded himself with a superb supporting cast including Kevin McCarthy, Joe Don Baker, Charles S. Dutton, Sheryl Lee Ralph, Noble Willingham, and Grant Shaud. There is also a very funny cameo by James Garner as the congressman who Murphy succeeds. The movie is about 20 minutes too long, but for the most part, it is a very entertaining ride. It's not the kind of film hard-core Eddie-philes expect from him, but for those looking for something a little original and very funny...have your fill here.
56 Reviews
More story than fun -- but still lotsa fun
MovieMusings8 February 2000
There were so many spots that seemed to demand "more Eddie." He only did a couple of impersonation schticks (during the campaign in the van scene, and the nerdy guy visiting the dead congressman's widow), and I wanted more! They were great.
The story is good, too. A con artist decides to become a congressman and play the game, only to find out that the issues involved are not a game. He becomes a person who cares.
Granted, it's a comedy, but it continues to remind us that, as long as humans run organizations, is ANY organization pure virtue and no vice? Religion? Law enforcement? Academia? Government? Corporate society? Sports? Is any system free of corruption?
We all live in glass houses. And there are individuals out there trying at least to keep their windows clean.
The story is good, too. A con artist decides to become a congressman and play the game, only to find out that the issues involved are not a game. He becomes a person who cares.
Granted, it's a comedy, but it continues to remind us that, as long as humans run organizations, is ANY organization pure virtue and no vice? Religion? Law enforcement? Academia? Government? Corporate society? Sports? Is any system free of corruption?
We all live in glass houses. And there are individuals out there trying at least to keep their windows clean.
One of Murphy's few above average movies
Normy189 July 1999
I'll start off by saying I don't particularly like Eddie Murphy. I think he is not always in tune with what is funny, and the only movie that he was in that I truly enjoyed (I thought he was excellent in the Nutty Proffessor but I didn't like the movie really) was Beverly Hills Cop. And this one. Here's why:
Eddie Murphy does not force his humor in this movie, like he tries in almost everything else I've seen him in. For most of the movie, he seems himself. Not only that, you actually see a little drama from Eddie, which while not ranking up there with the likes of Hanks and Hackman, he certainly makes you believe he's got another side to him.
The movie, while stretching credibility, attacks the System very well, both dramatically and humorously. If one watches this movie expecting a mild satire instead of a barrel of laughs or a breathtaking plot, they will probably enjoy it, assuming they didn't hate Beverly Hills Cop.
Eddie Murphy does not force his humor in this movie, like he tries in almost everything else I've seen him in. For most of the movie, he seems himself. Not only that, you actually see a little drama from Eddie, which while not ranking up there with the likes of Hanks and Hackman, he certainly makes you believe he's got another side to him.
The movie, while stretching credibility, attacks the System very well, both dramatically and humorously. If one watches this movie expecting a mild satire instead of a barrel of laughs or a breathtaking plot, they will probably enjoy it, assuming they didn't hate Beverly Hills Cop.
You may think that, I couldn't possibly comment...
DrPrunesquallor17 June 2001
Normally, I dont like Eddie Murphy films. This is a definite exception. He is not as over the top as in a lot of his roles, and carries it off with charm and substance, a little like Will Smith does now.
The plot (concerning a con man who decides theres more money to be made in politics) is for the most part hilarious, but seriously falls down into schmaltz once he starts developing a conscience.
Also, it is not as scathing about the American political system as it could be, giving out the impression that apart from a few bad apples, the majority of politicians do have the publics best interests at heart.
Anyone who enjoyed this should try and check out the English tv series "Yes, Minister". It is written by the director of this film (Jonathan Lynn) and is really much more effective in dealing with the British political system. Another british series along these lines is "House of Cards" and its follow ups, which really pulls no punches at all. And stars Ian Richardson. What more could you possibly want?
The plot (concerning a con man who decides theres more money to be made in politics) is for the most part hilarious, but seriously falls down into schmaltz once he starts developing a conscience.
Also, it is not as scathing about the American political system as it could be, giving out the impression that apart from a few bad apples, the majority of politicians do have the publics best interests at heart.
Anyone who enjoyed this should try and check out the English tv series "Yes, Minister". It is written by the director of this film (Jonathan Lynn) and is really much more effective in dealing with the British political system. Another british series along these lines is "House of Cards" and its follow ups, which really pulls no punches at all. And stars Ian Richardson. What more could you possibly want?
I liked it. I don't remember it. But I remember I liked it.
oneguyrambling1 March 2012
What is the difference between a small time con-man and a politician? Trick question. They're the same! (Unless you want to argue that the politician isn't small time I guess.) Anyway hilarious rib-ticklers aside
When local hustler Jeff Johnson capitalizes on a naming similarity and vaults into the US Senate, he immediately sets about reaching towards all the well manicured hands holding out money and favours.
Seeing a handsome and well spoken black man gives party high-ups ideas, they latch onto Johnson and give him simple instructions "Shut up and smile big".
This works well initially when Johnson amazingly is fast tracked through to positions others in parliament wait years for, but then things change for Johnson As the DVD cover might say Johnson comes into contact with a well meaning and determined young woman named Celia, who catches both his eye and his heart. Celia introduces Johnson to some of the more 'real-life' situations that are all too often ignored by politicians seduced by big business and big budgets.
Will Johnson himself learn to grow a heart when all around him are heartless, or will he simply become another greedy unfeeling politician? This was the early 90s and was obviously a project lying in a studio drawer waiting for a big star to sign on and green light it. If it were Stallone they would have played off the 'big dumb guy with muscles' angle, Bruce Willis would have smirked his way through proceedings and a bunch of peripheral actors would have seen it vanish from shelves and cinemas within weeks.
But they got Ed near the height of his powers, as well as his smile and laugh Murphy gets to unleash his array of voices and characters to provide a few decent chuckles, and it must be said that the supporting cast are all pretty reasonable in a paint by numbers affair.
I liked it. I don't remember it. But I remember I liked it.
Final Rating – 6 / 10. The Distinguished Gentleman is hardly necessary and is as light as a supermodel, but it is a likable flick with a laugh or two and a half-hearted political lampoon that breezes over severe corruption and how empty campaign promises are.
Seeing a handsome and well spoken black man gives party high-ups ideas, they latch onto Johnson and give him simple instructions "Shut up and smile big".
This works well initially when Johnson amazingly is fast tracked through to positions others in parliament wait years for, but then things change for Johnson As the DVD cover might say Johnson comes into contact with a well meaning and determined young woman named Celia, who catches both his eye and his heart. Celia introduces Johnson to some of the more 'real-life' situations that are all too often ignored by politicians seduced by big business and big budgets.
Will Johnson himself learn to grow a heart when all around him are heartless, or will he simply become another greedy unfeeling politician? This was the early 90s and was obviously a project lying in a studio drawer waiting for a big star to sign on and green light it. If it were Stallone they would have played off the 'big dumb guy with muscles' angle, Bruce Willis would have smirked his way through proceedings and a bunch of peripheral actors would have seen it vanish from shelves and cinemas within weeks.
But they got Ed near the height of his powers, as well as his smile and laugh Murphy gets to unleash his array of voices and characters to provide a few decent chuckles, and it must be said that the supporting cast are all pretty reasonable in a paint by numbers affair.
I liked it. I don't remember it. But I remember I liked it.
Final Rating – 6 / 10. The Distinguished Gentleman is hardly necessary and is as light as a supermodel, but it is a likable flick with a laugh or two and a half-hearted political lampoon that breezes over severe corruption and how empty campaign promises are.
Eddie Murphy goes to Washington
The-Sarkologist6 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is cool. It is about a conman who decides that a lot of money can be made in politics and so he decides to become a politician. Fortunately he has a similar name to a congressman that just died and so using his name he rides the coat-tails of the late congressman and gets himself elected. Thus he goes into Congress with the belief that he is conning the nation only to discover that Congress is actually full of conmen. The scene in which he arrives in Washington, and is then praised by his peers for getting elected on somebody elses' name goes to show how this con is not treated with suspicion, but with praise.It is an interesting movie because it attacks politics and politicians.
Thomas Jefferson Johnson (Eddie Murphy) is a conman and believes that he is in control of everything. He is a very intelligent man and is able to squeeze his way into everything. He gets into Congress and then manages to promote himself into the Power and Energy Committee, the one with the most money.
This movie makes politicians out to be people with no real ambitions other than to make money. They have no real goals or passions but lean towards those who throw the most money at them. Capital is the god in politics, not ethics, and those who try to push ethics end up in sticky situations. Eli, a politician preacher, stands for ethics and ends up on the wrong end of a sex scandal. Dick Dodgers, who is the bad guy in the movie, cares only for money and prestige. He says to the public that he will look into powerlines causing cancer and turns on his promise after because the electricity bosses are throwing lots of money at him.
Jefferson learns slowly that ethics in politics does not exist, nor does free will. He is under the wing of Dick Dodgers to the point where people know that he does whatever Dick Dodgers tells him to. He believes that he has a freewill but in reality he does not. He is what is called "Dick Dodgers boy", he has no freewill were politics is concerned. He is to sit down and shutup.
The Distinguished Gentleman is a very funny movie, and interweaved with the comedy are scathing attacks at politicians. I enjoyed it the second time, having a greater idea as to where politics, and American History, is concerned. Though I cannot necessarily say that it is an original film (no film is really), but reminds me of an on 1930's movie, Mr Smith Goes to Washington, however there are a number of subtle differences. Namely Mr Smith is naive and innocent, and was elected as a part of a scam, which Mr Johnson is the scam. However, both come to realise what Congress is really all about, and the film finishes with them standing up for their beliefs, and through clever use of the rules, manage to shut the conspiracy down (if only for a short time).
Thomas Jefferson Johnson (Eddie Murphy) is a conman and believes that he is in control of everything. He is a very intelligent man and is able to squeeze his way into everything. He gets into Congress and then manages to promote himself into the Power and Energy Committee, the one with the most money.
This movie makes politicians out to be people with no real ambitions other than to make money. They have no real goals or passions but lean towards those who throw the most money at them. Capital is the god in politics, not ethics, and those who try to push ethics end up in sticky situations. Eli, a politician preacher, stands for ethics and ends up on the wrong end of a sex scandal. Dick Dodgers, who is the bad guy in the movie, cares only for money and prestige. He says to the public that he will look into powerlines causing cancer and turns on his promise after because the electricity bosses are throwing lots of money at him.
Jefferson learns slowly that ethics in politics does not exist, nor does free will. He is under the wing of Dick Dodgers to the point where people know that he does whatever Dick Dodgers tells him to. He believes that he has a freewill but in reality he does not. He is what is called "Dick Dodgers boy", he has no freewill were politics is concerned. He is to sit down and shutup.
The Distinguished Gentleman is a very funny movie, and interweaved with the comedy are scathing attacks at politicians. I enjoyed it the second time, having a greater idea as to where politics, and American History, is concerned. Though I cannot necessarily say that it is an original film (no film is really), but reminds me of an on 1930's movie, Mr Smith Goes to Washington, however there are a number of subtle differences. Namely Mr Smith is naive and innocent, and was elected as a part of a scam, which Mr Johnson is the scam. However, both come to realise what Congress is really all about, and the film finishes with them standing up for their beliefs, and through clever use of the rules, manage to shut the conspiracy down (if only for a short time).
Did i see the same movie as everyone else????
duke3310 August 2001
Hmmm...I must be in the silent minority on this one. I thought this movie was absolutely atrocious. The plot was flimsy, the film moved WAY to fast at the beginning, and the big conspiracy was about power lines causing cancer...It was sad that was the best they could come up with. If you want to see truly great acting by Eddie Murphy, rent Bowfinger, Coming to America, or Trading Places. If you want to see a jumbled mess, watch this movie instead.
Begins Like A Sharp Political Satire As Good As An Ealing Comedy...
Olive-330 January 1999
then falls apart half way through. A charming con artist goes to Congress - this part is hysterical, reminds me of "I'm Alright, Jack". Then has change of heart and decides to do good. Comedies stay funny, when protagonist stays stupid and learns nothing.
More Stereotypes & Liberal B.S. - Does It Ever End? (Nope)
ccthemovieman-110 October 2007
Here is yet another in a long, long line of Hollywood films in which all the black people are smarter than the stupid white folks, and all the politicians are corrupt. Wow, Liberal Hollywood has something original. Yes, to them two wrongs always make a right so let's show what good people we are by reversing the racism. Let's also get one of the hotter black stars of the era to play the "hero," too, and have him show all those corrupt politicians how it should be done, even though that "good guy." played by Eddie Murphy, is a crook, too. That's another familiar Hollywood theme since the '60s: make the hero morally unsound but someone to root for. Throw in some ludicrous "conspiracy theories" like power lines causing cancer, and you have another Looney Left delight.
There are so many bad messages in here, it would make your head swim. It's also too profane, but that's no surprise with Murphy in the lead role and a total unknown - who has remained such in the last 15 years, Victoria Powell - as the female lead.
This is a poor man's "Trading Places," another movie in which a nobody, here a slimeball con man, can turn into a somebody, a man elected to congress. Except in Massachusetts or some other elitist state, I'm sure that could never happen!
One positive thing about this film: Murphy is actually low-key and much less abrasive than his normal characters. That was nice to see-and hear! He's a talented actor and doesn't always need to scream and shout to get laughs. The film gets a few stars for that alone, even though most people prefer the wise-ass Murphy.
There are so many bad messages in here, it would make your head swim. It's also too profane, but that's no surprise with Murphy in the lead role and a total unknown - who has remained such in the last 15 years, Victoria Powell - as the female lead.
This is a poor man's "Trading Places," another movie in which a nobody, here a slimeball con man, can turn into a somebody, a man elected to congress. Except in Massachusetts or some other elitist state, I'm sure that could never happen!
One positive thing about this film: Murphy is actually low-key and much less abrasive than his normal characters. That was nice to see-and hear! He's a talented actor and doesn't always need to scream and shout to get laughs. The film gets a few stars for that alone, even though most people prefer the wise-ass Murphy.
Basic 80's Eddie that takes a small wrong turn, then rights itself mostly
toolkien15 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This is passable 80's Eddie Murphy winding its way into the 90's. The premise is o.k. mostly works. Of course there has to be the inevitable "I didn't care at first but now I do" moments. You can't have a movie about our superiors in DC without the requisite message that Good must thwart Evil. In this case it is a little waif bald from her radiation treatment as a result of cancer from dastardly power lines. Yeah, that issue still resonates.
The first half of the movie is prime Eddie and punctures the fatuousness of Pols in general. Then it takes a left turn and pretty much spews out basic Hollywood rhetoric - Big Business Bad, Big Government Good. It almost spoils the movie entirely. But it pulls up a little and ends humorously enough.
Murphy has put out worse, so by comparison, this deserves a 6 out of 10.
The first half of the movie is prime Eddie and punctures the fatuousness of Pols in general. Then it takes a left turn and pretty much spews out basic Hollywood rhetoric - Big Business Bad, Big Government Good. It almost spoils the movie entirely. But it pulls up a little and ends humorously enough.
Murphy has put out worse, so by comparison, this deserves a 6 out of 10.
The worst film ever?????
russtem_18 December 2005
I was just having a discussion with my work colleague about what may have been the worst film either of us has ever seen. He plumped for The Naked Lunch (?)and I went for this turkey. The most amusing part of my whole viewing experience was when a man in his mid 30's, young family in tow, began to walk out of the cinema and then, once he reached the aisle, turned to face the screen and shouted "B*ll@#ks!!!" at the top of his voice before calmly turning round and walking out. This expressed what most of the audience, myself included, were thinking at that time. Well done, that man....
Can't help but agree with an earlier post -I am SHOCKED to see so many people give positive reviews to this inane drivel and felt I needed to redress the balance somewhat. What is the world coming to, eh???
Can't help but agree with an earlier post -I am SHOCKED to see so many people give positive reviews to this inane drivel and felt I needed to redress the balance somewhat. What is the world coming to, eh???
A very clever and sharp movie
Tiger_Mark13 November 2003
Being a Government teacher, I was curious about this film. As an Eddie Murphy vehicle, I was what somewhat curious to see if it would be an educational movie or just a comedic flick. Well, it was both. The story is funny and the plot is politically sharp. We see how the congressional committees work and how money influences our legislative process. Eddie Murphy has arrived as an actor that is still capable of making quality films.
Ho hum Eddie with great cast
rblayer18 September 2002
Eddie Murphy's almost constant goofy, toothsome grin and face-making is a bit much to bear. Fortunately, he is surrounded by an able troup lead by the show-stealing Lane Smith. Murphy goons his way through this film more of a caracature than a character of a conman elected to congress. Victoria Rowell, his love interest, while pretty, lacks the wiles to have caused Eddie's metamorphisis. A good story line and supporting cast make for an enjoyable movie, in spite of Murphy's muggings and lack luster romantic partner.
Trying to "Distinguish" the Eddie Murphy Persona
happipuppi1316 May 2022
Warning: Spoilers
When Eddie Murphy hit it big on Saturday Night Live in the early 1980s, he became the hottest featured player on there since John Belushi. Along with that came his (then) shocking and hilarious comedy albums. He like Richard Pryor or even Steve Martin in the '70s, became a stand-up comedian, treated like a rock star.
Then came great films like 48 Hours, Trading Places & Beverly Hills Cop #1 & #2 ...plus Coming To America. Only 2 Mis-steps. Like : "Best Defense" (which he's barely in) and "The Golden Child".
Mostly though, it was his (clean version here) "smart-aleck" or "street smart" persona that made him. It's also what broke him, at least for awhile.
Harlem Nights was a disaster, Another 48 Hours could have been made on a Xerox machine. In 1992 it seemed he had rebounded with "Boomerang" and then came this film.
The Distinguished Gentleman takes Murphy, once again back to the street smart, con artist he'd played before. The smart aleck humor seemed tired for a man (then) 30 years old.
Eddie plays Thomas Jefferson Johnson, a guy who decides to get into public office through some con artistry and because he knows that, voters recognize a name like Thomas Jefferson.
He seems to be under the impression that once he gets into office, he'll be able to get new laws passed in a snap and introduce bills that may benefit him and others, as he feels the real politicians just don't care.
His character sees that, being a Public Servant is and getting things accomplished, isn't as easy as he thought and despite his cleverness, he's of course, outnumbered.
The realities involved in the political office he's won. Become apparent to him, as in seeing a little girl whose hair has fallen out due to electrical tower radiation makes him see the light.
He then needs to get the other working politicians on board but , naturally, there are those of the opposing party who wont help and want to control him. He 'had' conned his way into office but does he still want the office itself, if it means opposition like this?
The movie overall is almost like a battle between the 1980's Eddie Murphy and the serious need for a new, more seriosu but still funny Eddie to movie forward.
I won't say what happens but i will say in most comedies, there's a pretty funny ending but the writers couldn't even give us that. In the last moment, I was like,"That's it?"
4 stars is my rating. As the comedy is very hit and miss (or just all out flat). The serious sides seem to play better overall.
I feel that Murphy was at least trying to say good-bye to his 80's super-star and hello to maturity in movie roles, which he finally found...this just wasn't it. (END)
Then came great films like 48 Hours, Trading Places & Beverly Hills Cop #1 & #2 ...plus Coming To America. Only 2 Mis-steps. Like : "Best Defense" (which he's barely in) and "The Golden Child".
Mostly though, it was his (clean version here) "smart-aleck" or "street smart" persona that made him. It's also what broke him, at least for awhile.
Harlem Nights was a disaster, Another 48 Hours could have been made on a Xerox machine. In 1992 it seemed he had rebounded with "Boomerang" and then came this film.
The Distinguished Gentleman takes Murphy, once again back to the street smart, con artist he'd played before. The smart aleck humor seemed tired for a man (then) 30 years old.
Eddie plays Thomas Jefferson Johnson, a guy who decides to get into public office through some con artistry and because he knows that, voters recognize a name like Thomas Jefferson.
He seems to be under the impression that once he gets into office, he'll be able to get new laws passed in a snap and introduce bills that may benefit him and others, as he feels the real politicians just don't care.
His character sees that, being a Public Servant is and getting things accomplished, isn't as easy as he thought and despite his cleverness, he's of course, outnumbered.
The realities involved in the political office he's won. Become apparent to him, as in seeing a little girl whose hair has fallen out due to electrical tower radiation makes him see the light.
He then needs to get the other working politicians on board but , naturally, there are those of the opposing party who wont help and want to control him. He 'had' conned his way into office but does he still want the office itself, if it means opposition like this?
The movie overall is almost like a battle between the 1980's Eddie Murphy and the serious need for a new, more seriosu but still funny Eddie to movie forward.
I won't say what happens but i will say in most comedies, there's a pretty funny ending but the writers couldn't even give us that. In the last moment, I was like,"That's it?"
4 stars is my rating. As the comedy is very hit and miss (or just all out flat). The serious sides seem to play better overall.
I feel that Murphy was at least trying to say good-bye to his 80's super-star and hello to maturity in movie roles, which he finally found...this just wasn't it. (END)
Wonderful satire!
oldbogus28 December 2002
As a political wonk, I found this movie perfect! I think this is the best Eddie Murphy movie ever! Actually, I am disappointed it took me so long to see it (today, 12/28/02). I was amazed at the negative reviews. What is these people's problem? That the US government doesn't work like this? Or that Eddie's character could actually realize that screwing ordinary citizens is different from swindling corporations and rich people?
Reasonable
safenoe30 December 2021
Warning: Spoilers
48 Hrs, Trading Places, Beverly Hills Cop. These trio of films set the foundation for Eddie Murphy's stratospheric career, and here we have The Distinguished Gentleman. I think TDG appeals to a different milieu or segment of the Eddie Murphy fanbase, and it kind of succeeds as a parable of government corruption and influential money.
TDG was directed by acclaimed the acclaimed Brit Jonathan Lynn, who co-created Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister.
TDG was directed by acclaimed the acclaimed Brit Jonathan Lynn, who co-created Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister.
It Could Have Won an Oscar. And a Razzie Too !
elshikh414 February 2010
Warning: Spoilers
This script is so smart. It's like (Mr. Smith Goes to Washington) but after changing the lead character from unsophisticated honest to sophisticated dishonest. And the aim is foxy; as when a hustler goes to the Congress, he would be a very slight one. It got the journey that makes that little conman has a redemption out of beating the bigger conmen.
I loved countless details and scenes. The clueless yet enthusiastic speech of "read my lips", "I know nothing about poultry, but I know people. So if you people come to me and say something about poultry.. I'm going to listen", plus the scene of "what law you voted for?!" were certainly the best when it comes to define the true and bitter sarcasm of this script.
(Eddie Murphy) was nice, specifically while talking "white", or imitating (Martin Luther King). And it was a good choice for his 11th movie. Clearly with (The Distinguished Gentleman), the man wanted to make comedy with something serious in the mix this time. But as a whole it wasn't a distinguished movie itself. It was somewhat like a worthy of Oscar material with a worthy of Razzie direction!
The direction didn't give the matters its appropriate shadows. The artistic factors are none. All the scenes were made similarly. For instance, there were, in most cases, no different uses for the lighting, so all the scenes looked the same. The sets didn't embody the stateliness of the Congress, not even outwardly. The music didn't play any role, it wasn't funny, or serious; namely weak. Sometimes I felt that I was watching a bad TV episode done on a too limited budget too. Sure, with another director, that might have been a memorable political satire.
The casting of the powerful guys wasn't powerful. They looked less menacing than what they are supposed to be. Over and above, the script weakened itself by its very ending; actually, after clever climax, it inclined to be farcical for the sake of being happy. Simply the lead went and exposed a scheme that would push him into jail, while we saw him, right after it, free, so honored, and thinking of running for presidency??!!
Well, they wanted it just a comedy after all. However, it wasn't that highly attractive. And as a serious movie, it didn't achieve much with its very promising material. Mediocre result both ways. Or disappointing if you longed for more. Wanna hear something good; this is way WAY better than (Murphy)'s other movie from the same year, the supposed romantic comedy, (Boomerang)!
I loved countless details and scenes. The clueless yet enthusiastic speech of "read my lips", "I know nothing about poultry, but I know people. So if you people come to me and say something about poultry.. I'm going to listen", plus the scene of "what law you voted for?!" were certainly the best when it comes to define the true and bitter sarcasm of this script.
(Eddie Murphy) was nice, specifically while talking "white", or imitating (Martin Luther King). And it was a good choice for his 11th movie. Clearly with (The Distinguished Gentleman), the man wanted to make comedy with something serious in the mix this time. But as a whole it wasn't a distinguished movie itself. It was somewhat like a worthy of Oscar material with a worthy of Razzie direction!
The direction didn't give the matters its appropriate shadows. The artistic factors are none. All the scenes were made similarly. For instance, there were, in most cases, no different uses for the lighting, so all the scenes looked the same. The sets didn't embody the stateliness of the Congress, not even outwardly. The music didn't play any role, it wasn't funny, or serious; namely weak. Sometimes I felt that I was watching a bad TV episode done on a too limited budget too. Sure, with another director, that might have been a memorable political satire.
The casting of the powerful guys wasn't powerful. They looked less menacing than what they are supposed to be. Over and above, the script weakened itself by its very ending; actually, after clever climax, it inclined to be farcical for the sake of being happy. Simply the lead went and exposed a scheme that would push him into jail, while we saw him, right after it, free, so honored, and thinking of running for presidency??!!
Well, they wanted it just a comedy after all. However, it wasn't that highly attractive. And as a serious movie, it didn't achieve much with its very promising material. Mediocre result both ways. Or disappointing if you longed for more. Wanna hear something good; this is way WAY better than (Murphy)'s other movie from the same year, the supposed romantic comedy, (Boomerang)!
Good start, average middle, cheesy ending
xbernard14 August 2007
Eddie Murphy is a man capable of high energy humor, and is efficient with his broad smile, mimics and impersonations. And this movie gives him some great moments especially in the beginning.
Eddie Murphy starts as a Florida con 'artist' accompanied by some accomplices blackmailing people who use his private fake phone-sex service. While racketing a congressman, he finds out that running for Congress will earn him more money than he does now. His asset to get elected is his name which he shares with a just-deceased congressman called Jeff Johnson. His way to the top of course hardly meets any difficulty but, after all, this is a comedy so we don't mind as long as it's entertaining.
But then things go wrong, Johnson meets a Pro Bono lobbyist, falls in love with her pretty fast but their relationship doesn't add anything to the movie and is not developed and chemistry between both actors is obviously missing.
First, Johnson enjoys his journey at the Congress but he soon realizes he can't keep a straight face and simultaneously take part to the different frauds and corruption present.
This is where the movie takes a turn for the serious and forgets it started out as a comedy. It's now trying to make a point. Johnson accepts to help a town where children are submitted to the negative effects of power high lines causing a great deal of them to suffer from cancer. Johnson develops a plan to force Congress to do something and expose publicly the aforementioned frauds and corruption. All this is done in an unexplainable cheesy way.
Shame, as the movie contained some good ideas for a comedy but director Jonathan Lynn seems to have been distracted and forgot that his original intention was to make a good comedy with Eddie Murphy having a good time at Congress.
Eddie Murphy starts as a Florida con 'artist' accompanied by some accomplices blackmailing people who use his private fake phone-sex service. While racketing a congressman, he finds out that running for Congress will earn him more money than he does now. His asset to get elected is his name which he shares with a just-deceased congressman called Jeff Johnson. His way to the top of course hardly meets any difficulty but, after all, this is a comedy so we don't mind as long as it's entertaining.
But then things go wrong, Johnson meets a Pro Bono lobbyist, falls in love with her pretty fast but their relationship doesn't add anything to the movie and is not developed and chemistry between both actors is obviously missing.
First, Johnson enjoys his journey at the Congress but he soon realizes he can't keep a straight face and simultaneously take part to the different frauds and corruption present.
This is where the movie takes a turn for the serious and forgets it started out as a comedy. It's now trying to make a point. Johnson accepts to help a town where children are submitted to the negative effects of power high lines causing a great deal of them to suffer from cancer. Johnson develops a plan to force Congress to do something and expose publicly the aforementioned frauds and corruption. All this is done in an unexplainable cheesy way.
Shame, as the movie contained some good ideas for a comedy but director Jonathan Lynn seems to have been distracted and forgot that his original intention was to make a good comedy with Eddie Murphy having a good time at Congress.
good vs evil
heppy121226 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
Not very good at all
NickGepetto14 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).
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).
Obama bio-pic 20 years ahead of its time
ArtVandelayImporterExporter19 September 2021
We were too poor to have cable TV back when Eddie Murphy saved Saturday Night Live. I can only judge his career based on the mostly terrible and unfunny movies he's been in for decades.
Then along comes pirate TV and even the movies nobody saw in theatres eventually get aired at some point or another. One of those Murphy obscurities is The Distinguished Gentleman.
Murphy plays freshman congressman Barack Obama, errrrr, Tom Johnson as he shows up on D. C. and dives head first into the swamp. Lane Smith plays Mitch McConnell, errrrr, Dyck Dodge, Chairman of a big congressional committee where lobbyists line up to bribe, errrrr, influence the congresscritters.
I found it to be fairly sharply written, and acted mostly without artifice. I laughed out loud a few times. Of course it's an American movie so the lead character, no matter how shady in Act 1, needs to be redeemed at some point.
I was grateful Murphy didn't break out that stupid laugh of his. And I think I fell in love with Victorial Rowell.
All considered, time well spent.
Then along comes pirate TV and even the movies nobody saw in theatres eventually get aired at some point or another. One of those Murphy obscurities is The Distinguished Gentleman.
Murphy plays freshman congressman Barack Obama, errrrr, Tom Johnson as he shows up on D. C. and dives head first into the swamp. Lane Smith plays Mitch McConnell, errrrr, Dyck Dodge, Chairman of a big congressional committee where lobbyists line up to bribe, errrrr, influence the congresscritters.
I found it to be fairly sharply written, and acted mostly without artifice. I laughed out loud a few times. Of course it's an American movie so the lead character, no matter how shady in Act 1, needs to be redeemed at some point.
I was grateful Murphy didn't break out that stupid laugh of his. And I think I fell in love with Victorial Rowell.
All considered, time well spent.
Highly Entertaining
ReelCheese7 May 2006
This overlooked Eddie Murphy from 1992 gem is much better than most critics would have you believe. Murphy plays a charming con man who swindles his way into Congress through voter inattention -- they think he's the incumbent, who is actually deceased. What starts as a game to merely soak the job for all it's worth turns into an unlikely effort to make a real difference. Several scenes are laugh-out-loud, particularly early on. Though a shade overlong, the story is engaging enough to keep the viewer's attention, and it serves up some nice potshots at how bloated and self-serving government has become. One of Murphy's best 'non-family' entries.
A Distinguished Gentleman
jonathanruano17 January 2011
"A Distinguished Gentleman" is about a con man Thomas Jefferson Johnson (Eddie Murphy) who realizes that the best con that he could pull is not as a small time operator in Florida, but as a Congressman in Washington D.C. making shady backroom deals with corporate lobbyists. All he has to do is vote a certain way on certain pieces of legislation and then get rewarded down the road with "donations" from corporations and other interest groups (including the gun lobby).
The three-fifths of "A Distinguished Gentleman" is great. There are many clever scenes in this film that expose Congress and corporations as rotten to the core and I personally think that it is sad that more films, like this one, are not made about the rottenness of Congress and Corporate America; and that the Hollywood establishment is reluctant to admit that, in today's America, we really have government by the corporations and not government by the people. But what also makes the first three-fifths so good is the use of humor as for indicting not only the political system, but also in a subtle way American society. I am referring, for instance, to that scene where an automatic weapons manufacturer explains that his autonomic guns should be sold because they are needed for hunting. Next you see Johnson, Chairman Dodge (Lane Smith in a marvellously wicked performance) and the manufacturer in a hilarious scene firing their automatic guns at ducks (when regular rifles would suffice). Wonderful. Another wonderful scene involves Terry Corrigan (Kevin McCarthy) explaining to Johnson that But then this film goes downhill, albeit slowly. I was entertain until the end, but I felt that the last two-fifths were not at good as the stellar three-fifths. Why? The first reason is the corny love story between Johnson and Celia Kirby (Victoria Rowell) which I thought distracted from the already clever story line. The other thing I object to was the decision of the producers to go for a happy ending, which creates the impression that all is write in the world as far as Congress and corporations are concern. The reality is that Congress is just as rotten now as it was in 1992 (when the film was made). The culprits were never held accountable. Meaningful, transformative changes continue to be held back. Reasoned bi-partisanship to resolve the country's outstanding problems, which include the environment, the deficit, the loss of middle class jobs and others, is non-existent.
The three-fifths of "A Distinguished Gentleman" is great. There are many clever scenes in this film that expose Congress and corporations as rotten to the core and I personally think that it is sad that more films, like this one, are not made about the rottenness of Congress and Corporate America; and that the Hollywood establishment is reluctant to admit that, in today's America, we really have government by the corporations and not government by the people. But what also makes the first three-fifths so good is the use of humor as for indicting not only the political system, but also in a subtle way American society. I am referring, for instance, to that scene where an automatic weapons manufacturer explains that his autonomic guns should be sold because they are needed for hunting. Next you see Johnson, Chairman Dodge (Lane Smith in a marvellously wicked performance) and the manufacturer in a hilarious scene firing their automatic guns at ducks (when regular rifles would suffice). Wonderful. Another wonderful scene involves Terry Corrigan (Kevin McCarthy) explaining to Johnson that But then this film goes downhill, albeit slowly. I was entertain until the end, but I felt that the last two-fifths were not at good as the stellar three-fifths. Why? The first reason is the corny love story between Johnson and Celia Kirby (Victoria Rowell) which I thought distracted from the already clever story line. The other thing I object to was the decision of the producers to go for a happy ending, which creates the impression that all is write in the world as far as Congress and corporations are concern. The reality is that Congress is just as rotten now as it was in 1992 (when the film was made). The culprits were never held accountable. Meaningful, transformative changes continue to be held back. Reasoned bi-partisanship to resolve the country's outstanding problems, which include the environment, the deficit, the loss of middle class jobs and others, is non-existent.
Jeff Johnson: the name you can trust
Newsense10 January 2009
Warning: Spoilers
The Distinguished Gentleman is one of those movies that was a little too smart for its audience. Because of this, it came and went in theaters. I think its one of Eddie Murphy's better movies.
The story: Eddie Murphy plays Thomas Jefferson Johnson, a small-time crook that runs for Congress and wins. He ran with intentions of getting rich and left with intentions of helping the little people that get ran over by those corporate fat cats in the oval office. This being after he meets up a cancer-stricken girl that is a victim of the power lines over her school.
Eddie Murphy is great as the slick con man and he looks like he wants to be in this movie not like these later flicks where he phones in his performance. Lane Smith is perfect as the corrupted chairman Dick Dodge and so is Joe Don Baker as Olaf Anderson. Victoria Rowell(who plays Celia Kirby) and Charles S. Dutton(who plays Elijah Hawkins) turn in some good performances too. I like how this movie targets the don't-give-a-damn mentality of all of these politicians in the White House. It was good in its satire even when the humor misses(rarely). The Distinguished Gentleman is underrated but is definitely recommended to the crowd that can see past their nose.
The story: Eddie Murphy plays Thomas Jefferson Johnson, a small-time crook that runs for Congress and wins. He ran with intentions of getting rich and left with intentions of helping the little people that get ran over by those corporate fat cats in the oval office. This being after he meets up a cancer-stricken girl that is a victim of the power lines over her school.
Eddie Murphy is great as the slick con man and he looks like he wants to be in this movie not like these later flicks where he phones in his performance. Lane Smith is perfect as the corrupted chairman Dick Dodge and so is Joe Don Baker as Olaf Anderson. Victoria Rowell(who plays Celia Kirby) and Charles S. Dutton(who plays Elijah Hawkins) turn in some good performances too. I like how this movie targets the don't-give-a-damn mentality of all of these politicians in the White House. It was good in its satire even when the humor misses(rarely). The Distinguished Gentleman is underrated but is definitely recommended to the crowd that can see past their nose.
A pretty obvious satire but enjoyable nonetheless and featuring a mostly on form Murphy
bob the moo4 August 2006
Thomas Jefferson Johnson is a small time con artist who realises the money in politics when he overhears Congressman Jeff Johnson during one of his scams. When the Congressman dies between his secretary's legs in his office while "poling the electorate" Thomas sees his opportunity. Dropping his first name in the hope that name recognition will see him through, Thomas and his crew go to work and it is not long before they slide their way to Washington. Once in town he gets on the gravy train straight away joining his colleagues in Congress, he is soon up to his neck in contributions and fund raisers but is this really what it is all about?
Although it starts out with plenty of big, easy targets the first half of the film is lively and quite funny. The broad satire is never that cutting or intelligent but it does the job for an Eddie Murphy comedy. Unfortunately, around the halfway mark the obvious plot suddenly has Thomas develop a heart and the film grinds to a halt. Happily it gets its senses back in the final section and is a return to the lively first part this is not to say that it is brilliant because it isn't, but it is amusing and pretty enjoyable apart from the narrative arch having a massive hole in the middle of it.
The cast are mixed dependant on their material. Murphy himself is on good form. His con artist character suits his on screen personae and he works the dialogue really well he is all at sea when he has to convince the audience of the change in his character but he moves through that as quickly as he can. The supporting cast are all in his shadow on this but at least there are plenty of famous faces. Smith, Dutton, McBride, Baker, Ralph and McCarthy all add an ensemble feel to the film even if it is very much Murphy's vehicle. Lynn's direction is OK but he can't do much of real intelligence with the basic tools presented to him by the writers.
Overall this is not the sharpest of satires but the big simple targets are still enjoyably hit. The middle section is poor but Murphy ensures that the majority of it will be good enough to please his fans even if it could have been so much better.
Although it starts out with plenty of big, easy targets the first half of the film is lively and quite funny. The broad satire is never that cutting or intelligent but it does the job for an Eddie Murphy comedy. Unfortunately, around the halfway mark the obvious plot suddenly has Thomas develop a heart and the film grinds to a halt. Happily it gets its senses back in the final section and is a return to the lively first part this is not to say that it is brilliant because it isn't, but it is amusing and pretty enjoyable apart from the narrative arch having a massive hole in the middle of it.
The cast are mixed dependant on their material. Murphy himself is on good form. His con artist character suits his on screen personae and he works the dialogue really well he is all at sea when he has to convince the audience of the change in his character but he moves through that as quickly as he can. The supporting cast are all in his shadow on this but at least there are plenty of famous faces. Smith, Dutton, McBride, Baker, Ralph and McCarthy all add an ensemble feel to the film even if it is very much Murphy's vehicle. Lynn's direction is OK but he can't do much of real intelligence with the basic tools presented to him by the writers.
Overall this is not the sharpest of satires but the big simple targets are still enjoyably hit. The middle section is poor but Murphy ensures that the majority of it will be good enough to please his fans even if it could have been so much better.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
