Courtesy of Realitism Films
“Wrong” has reached Columbus’ Gateway Theater, drawing the interest of a small but satisfied audience.
Quentin Dupieux’s 2012 Sundance entry follows Dolph Springer (Jack Plotnick of “Drawn Together”) as he searches for his dog, Paul, with the unwelcome aid of animal abuse prevention and dog telepathy expert Master Chang (William Fichtner of “The Dark Knight”) and top-tier Detective Ronnie (Steve Little of “Eastbound and Down”).
In case nothing in that last paragraph tipped you off, this movie is weird. So if you do not like weird things, this film will not suit you. Given that the movie was made by the same director who brought the world “Rubber,” a comedy/horror film about a killer tire, I doubt any anti-weirdos are searching this out anyway.
However, if you do enjoy bizarre humor, you are in for a treat.
While I can imagine many filmmakers in the same position trying to be overtly odd or dark to stand out, everything in this film just seems to fit within the framework instead of beating you over the head with its strangeness.
Death, murder and other dark subjects come up, but not with major fanfare or over-embellishment. I expected this film to be far less balanced based on the trailer, but overall it is a very positive and somewhat reserved movie.
The cinematography, editing and music are all handled by Dupieux (though credited by his stage name, Mr. Oizo, under music), with each element complementing, rather than adding to, the weirdness.
The general narrative of the film is based on Dolph’s everyday life. He gets up at 7:60 a.m., talks with his gardener, Victor, while standing in the yard with him and goes to work at an office with a torrential indoor downpour.
It is clear that life is not going his way – for instance, his palm tree has inexplicably transformed into a pine tree. Thus, the loss of his dog is too much to bear and justifies the mystifyingly eccentric ends to which he will go to retrieve him.
Along the way we are delivered a multitude of red herrings and sketch-like scenarios that keep the comedic value of the film steady whenever the plot seems to lull.
Given its average runtime of 94 minutes, there were not a lot of instances where I found myself bored with the movie.
This type of film is usually not one to make you laugh out loud, but I found myself doing just that. Many of the jokes were incredibly low-key, though, so I would find it understandable if the film landed outside of a person’s humor range.
While I am sure you could get a lot out of this movie without seeing it in theaters, I would recommend anyone that does see it goes to the cinema. Independent films like “Wrong” need the direct support of its niche fan base in order to guarantee more films like it can be made.
I rate films based on how well they fulfill their own destiny. “Wrong” is everything it is trying to be, maybe more, and deserves more attention than I am sure it will ever garner.