"Death to Smoochy" is probably the worst film of the year so far. Perhaps the only dilemma this film presents is whether the idea behind the movie or the execution of that idea is worse. The only thing the movie had going for it -- its all-star cast -- only amplifies how bad this movie is by humiliating a number of top-notch actors through the dry and lifeless script.
Directed by Danny DeVito, the whole movie centers on the seamy underbelly of children's television. This world of "Lamb Chops," "Teletubbies" and "Barney" is exposed in this movie to actually be (surprise!) a big capitalist venture whose only goal is to sell toys and candy based on the shows. But there is more. The premier child entertainer of the day, a clown named Rainbow Randolph (a hopeless Robin Williams), is arrested in an FBI sting operation for accepting money to place certain little kids in more prominent spots on his show.
The network president (a not-at-all funny Jon Stewart) of Kidnet, a children's channel, has to scramble to find a replacement for Randolph's time slot and stumbles upon the untainted Sheldon Mopes (Edward Norton), who is as pure as Randolph was corrupt and whose character Smoochy instantly becomes a hit. DeVito plays Sheldon's crook of an agent, Burke Bennet.
The rest of the film focuses on Randoph attempting to get his time slot back from Sheldon. While it is mildly entertaining seeing Williams in a role where he plays the deranged bad guy, his antics get tiresome as quickly as the movie itself. Along the way, Sheldon is protected from Randolph by the Irish Mafia. He obtains a relationship with the group by being the favorite children's character of the former boxer-now-ignoramus son of the Mafia's godmother. It is this plot device which is primarily responsible for Sheldon surviving everyone who tries to get rid of him once they become sick of his counter-culture morals.
As the film progresses, it also chronicles Sheldon's relationship and eventual romance with Kidnet's senior programming executive, Nora Wells (Catharine Keener). While the first half of the movie is spent with Sheldon and Nora fighting over program content and marketing practices, the second half is spent with the two as lovers.
The change in Nora is quite bizarre, and it seemingly stems from seeing Sheldon one day after the show without his shirt on. A few nights later -- or maybe even that night, it is not quite clear -- she comes stumbling into his apartment stone-drunk and has a conversation with him about how they were inspired to enter the children's television industry by the same entertainer. The next time they see each other they make passionate love.
Not only is the change in Nora sudden and unexplained, but the intensely sexual relationship between the two is quite strange. Sheldon, despite all of his good intentions for children, is also tremendously horny. In a character that is presented to the viewer the entire film as almost childlike in his purity, seeing his sexual side is nothing short of disturbing.
But this is just the beginning of the problems with "Death to Smoochy." While written as a satire on the children's TV industry, the question must be begged: for what audience exactly is this film intended? The only people who care about children's television are children and parents, and with the abundance of profanity and sexual content, this was clearly not the filmmaker's target audience. It seems as if by some horrible mistake, "Death to Smoochy" ended up being made without an audience to watch it.
Perhaps even more serious than this is the ambiguous nature of the film's genre. The romance was disturbing, the drama was without suspense and the comedy was simply not very funny. I left the movie feeling only as if I had witnessed a Hollywood film doing what I never thought I would see, merely trying to be funny, but failing almost completely.
The only bright spot of the film is Anastas Michos' ("Man on the Moon") adroit cinematography. Unfortunately, there is little to see in the film worth his careful work.
It must have truly taken enormous vision and imagination to come up with a film this thoroughly awful. The plot falters incessantly, good actors choke on a poorly written script and any attempt at satire is a complete failure. There is only one thing that this film has for certain -- no redeeming value or message.
