Did "The Nutty Professor," directed by 1996 by Tom
Shadyac, really need a sequel? If the insatiable demand by
the target audience of movies like "Dumber and Dumber" can
be whetted by "Nutty 2" and even "Nutty 3" and the box office
computers can gobble up all the change that will inevitably
arrive, then, sure. The market research suits were probably
on target in pushing for a sequel. But since we've already
seen in '96 how the special effects guys and cosmetics
people did a remarkable job of transforming Eddie Murphy
into seven people who can flawlessly interact in the same
frame, there's nothing in this second venture that needed to
be fashioned. As director Peter Segal pushes for jokes that
register only on lowest-common-denominator meters, he
misses his opportunity to express some loftier ideas: the
notion that people should accept themselves for what they
are. After all, doesn't the 400-pound Sherman Klump win the
love of the lovely and bright Denice Gains (Janet Jackson)
because he is kind, intelligent and humble?
Segal opens the story on a dark dream indulged by the
professor, beginning with vows he is taking in a marriage
ceremony with the lovely Denice and ending with the
scattering of the entire church party when the loud and
arrogant Buddy Love springs from his pants. Recall from
"Nutty 1" that the massively overweight Sherman had
swallowed a serum for re-aligning his genetic structure, which
transforms him into a well-toned alter ego, Buddy Love.
While the new man is a sight for the sore eyes of any young
and beautiful maiden, his personality is conversely obnoxious.
This time around, using biology professor Denice Gains's
strategy for changing his genetic structure, Sherman is finally
able to remove Buddy from within his body, but having done
so, Buddy turns on his creator and embarks on a plan to
steal Sherman's formula for restoring youth to aging bodies
and gain the $150 million offered by a large pharmaceutical
company for its rights.
To pull in the large numbers of movie fans who have
shown themselves insatiably addicted to toilet jokes, the four
writers have implanted a series of occasionally funny but
mostly mind-numbing and sit-comish incidents into a sadly
fragmented and incoherent script. In one episode perhaps
intended to spoof the 1950s sci-fi genre, a giant hamster is
created when the professor's youth serum liberates
dangerous side effects, a rodent which attacks its enemies by
hurling its wastes scattershot into its audience, felling even a
policeman with drawn gun as though attacking with the
Redcoats' cannonball firepower in "The Patriot." Since the
hamster makes love as well as war, it seizes the opportunity
to jump the college dean (Larry Miller) while the administrator
is attempting to escape, haplessly, while wrapped in a blanket
of fur.
But the hamster is not the most irritable character in this
splintered, would-be comedy. The prize for that attribute can
be shared more or less equally with the Klump family, all of
whom are played by Eddie Murphy utilizing the ingenious
disguises of Rick Baker's makeup. While much credit need
be given to the special effects department for allowing the
interaction to take place as though the Klump family were
indeed a half dozen separate people, each member of the
group competes for the title of most vulgar, and the jury may
still be out on whether the hamster has routed the Klumps in
that department. Mama and Papa Klump advance a running
gag on sexuality, with Mama trying ever-so-hard to turn on
her defensive and seemingly reluctant husband in scenes that
could remind TV viewers of a similar running gag on
"Married...with Children." The octagenarian Grandma Klump
in one gross-out scene attempts to seduce young Buddy
Love, having surprised the much younger man in the garage
of the Klump household: "This must be your lucky night."
While the majority of the audience will probably reject this
counsel, director Segal would have done better to emphasize
the romance between the obese but charmingly shy Sherman
and the lovely woman of his dreams. Both are as intelligent
as they are decent and down-to-earth and both deserve far
greater time than Segal and his trigger-happy editor, William
Kerr, afford them.
Copyright © 2000 Harvey Karten