Amazon.com
Eddie Murphy's remake of
The Nutty Professor used the good professor's alter ego, Buddy Love, in much the same way that Jerry Lewis did in his brilliant original: a representation of the id out of control that plays like an admission of the actor's off-screen sins. In the sequel, Murphy expands on his Klump family from the first film and makes them major characters. Consequently, his dark side has plenty more places to express itself, particularly through the oversexed grandmother, Sherman's aggressively impotent father, and his just plain surly uncle, as well as Buddy Love (all played by Murphy).
The movie opens with professor Sherman Klump barely holding onto his sanity as his internal Buddy Love makes him say inappropriate things. He decides to extract his mutant Buddy Love gene (a sort of genetic version of electroshock therapy), but afterward is unable to maintain his original personality and intelligence. Sherman is the most bland character of the bunch, and the audience gets stuck with his boring romance with fellow professor Janet Jackson, his struggle to be nice, and generic intrigue surrounding a Fountain of Youth formula he developed. When it's not trying too hard to be nice--heck, one character is anally raped by a giant hamster--the movie works. The moral of the story is that Sherman needs to reconnect with their inner Buddy Love. That goes for Murphy, too.
--Andy Spletzer
It's hard to imagine a comedy any broader than "The Nutty Professor," but somehow Eddie Murphy manages to expand the waistline a few more inches with this crass and corpulent sequel. He plays six roles, including the affable Sherman Klump and various other members of the Klump clan. The only character to be demoted is Sherman's alter ego, Buddy Love, who was such a diabolical presence in the first movie. This time around, Murphy is no longer lampooning his own smooth reputation, but simply staging a one-man parade of appetite and effluence. Janet Jackson is the co-star, Peter Segal the director, and gene-splicing the topical plot hook, but none of them impinge on the unstoppable Murphy routine. For most moviegoers, all this will look like a giant backward step, but no doubt the joke is on us. -Anthony Lane
Copyright © 2006
The New Yorker