Delivery Man (2013)

deliveryman_2013_poster
Delivery Man (2013)
  • Time: 103 min
  • Genre: Comedy | Drama
  • Director: Ken Scott
  • Cast: Vince Vaughn, Cobie Smulders, Chris Pratt

Storyline:

From DreamWorks Pictures comes “Delivery Man”, the story of affable underachiever David Wozniak, whose mundane life is turned upside down when he finds out that he fathered 533 children through sperm donations he made twenty years earlier. In debt to the mob, rejected by his pregnant girlfriend, things couldn’t look worse for David when he is hit with a lawsuit from 142 of the 533 twenty-somethings who want to know the identity of the donor. As David struggles to decide whether or not he should reveal his true identity, he embarks on a journey that leads him to discover not only his true self but the father he could become as well.

5 reviews

  • (Rating: 2 / 5)”Delivery Man” is a rare case where the director is shooting his film a second time, now with a bigger budget and less inspiration. If his before work “Starbuck” could be classified with the celebrated labeled “indie”, Ken Scott now had to undergo the Hollywood filter that makes “Delivery Man” looks a product: with topicals and with harshness. At least this is better than the terrible “Movie 43″ but not even reach the level of a Seth MacFarlane

    With an argument as “extreme” in Delivery Man, one might think the worst. Fortunately there are not many heavy semen references, to give an example of what they could have done. But the film itself is mediocre, simply because everybody acts as abnormal and not by the will of the argument but because the writers are inept they think is funny change beastly the tone. There is a problem with the bad taste that often confuse the American moralism and has encouraged many to go with the flow or cut, which is an error of balance or rather Context: virtue is not: make extreme productions, but making movies distasteful without being gross. If one analyzes “Movie 43”, one realizes that it is not even half wild than John Waters (where he makes explicit pornography and actual cases of coprophagia), and yet the Farrelly brothers film is much more repulsive than any work of Waters: writer-director Waters was not stupid filming gore and pornography, but a man who knew conveniently use this heavy instrumental in a suitable context and with a purpose. His films were recreated in bizarre contexts, lower-class families and with tin homes but colorful. His films were a fairy tale for the “White Trash” and for the vindication of his homosexuality (which in the 70’s Waters was frowned upon), where his characters were perfectly normal with the only nice touch to be quite clueless about their bizarre and violent sexual stimuli. His films were funny

    All that said, “Delivery Man” is not a eschatological film in visual and nor possessing atomic stupidity as an iBabe, but as far as dialogue is overwhelmingly shocking to the tone. This is not a dirty and colorful village like “Desperate Living” but middle-class and with a “normal” psychology as the script profiled, and with their jobs. So, is hateful see that behave like aliens on many occasions, just because the writers are aliens. When Vince Vaughn aims to open his mind (and heart) to tell a friend about the possibility of being a father, his friend Chris Pratt begins to counteract all the dreams with jokes about the possibilities of abortion and the mediocrity of his sex life (he can not gets an erection)… and all this before a minor child is sleeping. It is not the only time we hear this nonsense, but the friend Pratt always bombards the protagonist with nonsense entering a serious bad taste, eg he wants to convince Vince to pretend to have mental problems so as not to face recognize his 142 childrens. One can mix comedy-drama poles successfully, as long as you know how to balance the dynamics of the two elements. For example there is the “English humor”, where actors say something silly in a not so proper context. But what of “Delivery Man” is pretentious and treacherous, no chance of a decent conversation that goes on a development. There is no one normal, including Vaughn: nurses are a little too arrogant for their profession, the subject of drugs is taken very lightly (Vaughn complies with his daughter present the bank), and directly the tone is very wrong: eg, when the protagonist seeks help his son at work (to attend an audition) , as we see Vaughn doing something noble immediately think of a phone call from his brother to tell a tremendous amount of nonsense about his laziness and incompetence. There is no ” normal ” conversations: at work, talking Vaughn with his brother and peers about the children and their complications, but the talks go through the question of whether the baby will not defecate with better quality than that of Vaughn nephew. What we’re trying to say is that the film is contradicted in seconds, posing a serious situation to immediately counter it with bad comedy; How can you see a film so undeveloped?

    When there is a bad script (or bad improvisations), one expects at least enough actors to inject humanism on the total lack of normal… but no. Vince Vaughn in general was always mediocre (or had the misfortune of being in mediocre films) lacks the talent of Ben Stiller and his extremism is not even funny like antics of Adam Sandler, his talent is being excited and shout and spit out thousands of words in short periods of time. At least here is more moderate, but in situations like the basketball game he is in the stratosphere. But overall there is no actor to give humanism to the insufferable script, at some point every character are arrogant or, in the case of Vince, are elated with the dialogues

    All is not loss: some sequences have been directed with enough touch to be unscathed (the disabled child), and some interesting things like “variety” of the protagonist’ childrens, but also demonstrates that this movie would have worked better if was serious and focused , but instead tends to disperse (and logic holes: Did not anyone notice that the man who is known to everyone is their father?). In general terms, “Delivery Man” is not the failure of “Movie 43”, but it is not a clever film

  • For what it is worth, I think this movie delivered very well in being funny and entertaining. If you are expecting something beyond that, then you might be disappointed. It is a comedy with some heavy emotional moments, there were things that were not needed in the storyline, and ended on a bit of a weird moment. Although the entire film wasn’t hilariously funny there were points in it where it had a cinema cracking up in a uproar of laughter and it didn’t waver from Vaughn’s typical humour. Chris Pratt is brilliant as the overwhelmed- lawyer-best-friend-with-4-kids, and quite possibly gets the best part of the script. I still ended up enjoying this a lot more than I expected to, so I was pleasantly surprised with “Delivery Man”. Despite it’s many lows, it also has some highs that make this worth a watch.

  • A man with no responsibilities finds out, he is the biological father of 533 children. Now he must decide whether or not to come forward when 142 of them have filed a lawsuit to reveal the identity. Sounds ridiculously stupid? Well that’s a Vince Vaughn film for you.

    Negatives

    In the midst of the Oscar craze and the very high standards of films out in January there are the mediocre films. While there is nothing wrong with mediocre films from time to time, this is bad timing for this film. Why go see Delivery Man when you have far better films to spend your money on. This is a funny film, however it’s not hilarious, it’s not ground breaking and it’s not memorable. So if you want…

    To read the full review click here.

  • Delivery Man 2/10- There is not a whole lot I can say about this movie. I thought the premise of the movie had a lot of potential, but it was not directed well and as a result the movie suffered from it.

    A comedy where a man who is all ready down on his luck and then finds out that he is the biological father of 533 children sounds like a good comedy that Vince Vaughn could pull off. Sadly, the movie leans more towards the heartfelt side of cinema then comedy that we are all used to from Vince Vaughn. I have nothing against those feel-good movies and in-fact I enjoy them often, but I was really looking for a some laughs when I came in to this movie and I could not help but feel disappointed. The jokes were poorly written and executed. I think it was apparent that Vince Vaughn did not give his best effort in this movie, but again he had very few jokes to work with and it was hard to blame him for it. Everything else in the movie I had no problem with, but it just made me a little sad that a movie that looks hilarious with such a great idea turns out to be a heart-felt film with comedy on the side.

    For full review and more, http://reviewsbywest.com/that-awkward-moment–delivery-man.html

  • Delivery Man is sadly, just another Vince Vaughn movie. It tries to break away from this notion by showcasing a sort of toned down performance by him. And this vehicle manages to even stray away from being another proverbial Vaughn-like comedy (the trailer is a tad misleading). But in the end, we have him playing yet another version of his character from the breakthrough role he had in 1996’s Swingers. His performance in that landmark film is one that I believed, made him a big star. And now twenty years later, he is still giving versions of that performance which has been stripped down to almost nothing. Vaughn’s acting style involves talking fast (he improvises to the point of absurdity), walking like he’s hungover, nodding his head, yelling, and pointing (he also seems to like to have his hands on his cranium in almost every single movie poster). He likes to do projects that aren’t based on true stories, a book, or anything historical. His films are spawned out of silly, trivial ideas and thoughts. Finally, he plays characters who are simpletons or boys who are trapped in men’s bodies (there is also an imbedded “token” best friend in all his films giving him everyday advice). Following his most recent work, you sense that he has relieved himself of all of his integrity without even knowing it. And now after the recent revenue numbers for Delivery Man were next to nothing (whoever thought that this movie could go toe to toe with the release of The Hunger Games might need to be fired immediately), it’s safe to say that the Vaughnster is churning out box office flops faster than Usain Bolt in last year’s Olympics.

    Taking off without much character development or heightened buildup, and containing a scene where two people have a conversation in pouring, torrential ran for no reason, Delivery Man follows the sad sack existence of one David Wozniak (Vince Vaughn). He lives in a cluttered apartment, works in the family business by driving a meat truck (while watching this thing I was wondering, was Vaughn’s character adopted because he stands about a foot taller than his two brothers and his father, just an observation), owes $80,000 to the kind of people you don’t want to mess with, and dates a woman police officer who reveals to him that she is pregnant with his child. Now David is really bad at his job (the only reason why he doesn’t get fired I suppose, is because his father is his boss) and doesn’t have much direction in life until he gets some shocking news. Twenty or so years ago, he made over 600 sperm donations to make money and because of his outstanding reproductive count, he ends up fathering 533 of them. When these young adults become curious about their long lost daddy, they end up forming a large support group and even signal for a class action lawsuit in order to find the identity of the person they never knew. Vaughn’s character, not revealing himself to any of the supposed children, acts as a quote unquote “guardian angel” to them and helps them get by in everyday life. His donations long ago, resulted in examples such as an NBA basketball player, a struggling actor, a musician, and a troubled drug addict. What’s strange is that even though two decades have passed, the kids all seem to still live in New York City. What’s even stranger is that there are so many of them (did it have to be 533, I mean why not like a hundred or so, geesh).

    Now despite being predominantly creepy (the guy has half a thousand kids and one on the way, seriously) and calculated by outlandishly sketched ideas, Delivery Man still manages to be very well made. It has a brisk pace, it doesn’t contain any major plot holes, and it manages to pull at the heart strings ever so slightly in the last half hour. But don’t kid yourself, there are a few things wrong with it. For instance, why is it that none of the children’s moms are ever seen? I mean not even once (added to that, his best friend in the movie has four kids and his wife is never in the picture. Does Delivery Man have something against women in general?). I know that these people are in their twenties, but it just seems kind of closed off and weird. And what’s with Vaughn’s David dating a sophisticated, mature police officer. It seems kind of odd that this woman would ever consider being in a relationship with an underachieving schlep like Vaughn (I guess it benefits him when he gets tons of parking tickets in the first twenty minutes of the film and I’m thinking he doesn’t have to pay for them). Then there is the fact that 90% of the kids he created don’t look anything like him. I’m sure that the casting director could find a few more actors here and there that at least fit Vaughn’s facial description (only a couple of said young adults did any real acting in the film anyway so maybe the casting department could find a dozen lookalikes right off the street). Finally, there is a scene where he goes on sort of a wilderness retreat with his 500 plus sons and daughters. They don’t know his identity as the sperm donor even though it’s painfully obvious that they could probably figure it out. This leads me to define Delivery Man’s biggest problem: it thinks it’s as smart or smarter than the audience. We as ticket buyers, know better. Trust me.

    Now on the acting front, the supporting cast that surrounds Vaughn’s Wozniak, is exhaustively weak. The one exception however, is Chris Pratt who plays his best friend Brett. Acting as his attorney full of life changing advice and hard nosed tough love, Pratt gives a better performance than Vaughn and the whole flick itself. And despite the fact that his character talks down to Vince’s character telling him that he has and I quote, “serious has mental problems,” Pratt’s Brett still manages to make a grand impression on the audience (this is evident even though there is a simple one note feeling that Delivery Man projects). One of his best scenes is in the last act and it’s microcosmic movie gold. I got a feeling that maybe someday he might helm his own cinematic endeavor.

    In retrospect, Delivery Man is not necessarily a bad film. In fact, like most of Vaughn’s recent work (especially The Internship), it’s totally harmless. But as I said in the last paragraph, it’s a one note exercise that being reminiscent of Vaughn’s last 4-5 outings, could only pass as a sitcom or a low rent TV movie. I give director Ken Scott (Delivery Man is a remake of his other film, Starbuck in 2011) credit however for adding a soggy dramatic center to the proceedings. This allows Vaughn to at least kinda branch out as an actor and try to switch gears a little (just a small amount mind you). Bottom line: as a meaningless way to kill an hour and a half, this November release will fill a void. As a complex farce destined to be taken seriously, Delivery Man ultimately, just doesn’t quite deliver.

    Rating: 2.5 out of 4 stars

    Check out other reviews on my blog: http://www.viewsonfilm.com

Write your review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *