Man on the Moon is a biographical movie on the late comedian Andy Kaufman. Kaufman, along with his role on Taxi (1978), was famous for being the self-declared Intergender Wrestling Champion of the world. After beating women time and time again, Jerry Lawler (who plays himself in the movie), a professional wrestler, got tired of seeing all of this and decided to challenge Kaufman to a match. In most of the matches the two had, Lawler prevailed with the piledriver, which is a move by spiking an opponent head-first into the mat. One of the most famous moments in this feud was in the early 80s when Kaufman threw coffee on Lawler on Late Night with David Letterman (1982), got into fisticuffs with Lawler, and proceeded to sue NBC. Written by
Eli Boorstein <email@example.com>
Hello. I am Andy and I would like to thank you for coming to my movie. I wish it was *better*, you know, but... it is so stupid! It's terrible! I do not even like it. All of the most important things in my life are changed around and mixed up for dramatic purposes. So, I decided to cut out all of the baloney! Now the movie is much *shorter*.
In fact, this is the end of the movie. Thank you very much.
See more »
For all the attention he got, Andy Kaufman didn't leave much of a comic legacy. Mostly just his part on Taxi, where his Latka character could be amusing in small doses. So why make a movie about a secondary sitcom actor? Unfortunately, you'll still be asking that question when the movie is over.
What Kaufman was famous for is stunts involving feigned anger or outright verbal abuse that were designed to entertain only himself. People who watched him hoping to see something funny often just saw shouting and threats. He was called a comedian but he preferred being unfunny.
Man on the Moon carefully recreates these episodes. Makeup artists make Jim Carrey look exactly like Kaufman, and Carrey meticulously reenacts all of Kaufman's mannerisms. The producers even cast many of Kaufman's actual accomplices, like wrestler Jerry Lawler. The problem is, when you carefully, painstakingly recreate an unfunny event, you get a careful, painstaking unfunny event. This isn't a failed movie in the sense it doesn't achieve its goal; it's a failed movie in the sense that the goal was never worth achieving.
35 of 56 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?