Ron Underwood’s 2002 sci-fi comedy “The Adventures of Pluto Nash” is set on the Moon in the year 2087, after humans have colonized the surface and built entire cities there. Eddie Murphy plays Pluto Nash, a one-time smuggler who has settled into a more respectable line as a nightclub owner. He bought his nightclub from his friend Anthony (Jay Mohr) seven years earlier to get the mob off Anthony’s back, and in the ensuing years, has turned it into one of the Moon’s greatest hotspots.
The plot kicks into gear when a mysterious unseen Moon gangster named Rex Crater, wanting to buy Pluto’s club, sends some goons to “coerce” him. After a sudden conflagration involving bombs and the destruction of the nightclub, Pluto takes to the lam with a recently hired waitress named Dina (Rosario Dawson) and his faithful android sidekick Bruno (Randy Quaid). The three of them try to discern Rex Crater’s identity and run into a wide panoply of interesting Moon-bound characters played by an impressive supporting cast. Burt Young, Pam Grier, John Cleese, Luis Guzmán, Joe Pantoliano, Peter Boyle, and James Rebhorn all have supporting roles.
Perhaps surprisingly, “The Adventures of Pluto Nash” cost a whopping $100 million to make, likely all going to talent and to special effects. The film overall is balanced between slapstick farce and legitimate sci-fi crime story, and audiences didn’t really seem to be into either. “Pluto Nash” only made $7.1 million at the box office, which was noted, at the time, as one of film history’s largest flops. It’s certainly on the list. Adjusted for inflation, “Pluto Nash” lost the studio about $172 million. It lost more money than “Jupiter Ascending” and “Wonder Woman 1984.”
The Adventures of Pluto Nash lost millions of dollars
Critics weren’t kind to “The Adventures of Pluto Nash” either, and the film only has a 6% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes, based on 88 reviews. It was unusual for Eddie Murphy to star in a bomb of this caliber, as most of his movies up to that point had been hits. Sure, he had a few duds along the way (not many people like “Vampire in Brooklyn,” and “Holy Man” lost money), but even his kid-friendly fare like “Daddy Day Care” and “Dr. Dolittle 2” made multiple millions each. “The Adventures of Pluto Nash” was an unambiguous failure, and felt like a definite downturn in Eddie Murphy’s career overall (the “Shrek” movies notwithstanding). Bombs like “Norbit,” “Meet Dave,” and “Imagine That” were still ahead of him.
And here’s the thing… and I put my critical reputation on the line by admitting this, but … “The Adventures of Pluto Nash” isn’t that bad. Oh sure, it’s silly and overblown, and some of the jokes are pretty limp (the currency with Hillary Clinton’s face on it didn’t age well), but the film has colorful production design, and some fun performances from a great cast. I liked the laid-back attitude of the film, and Murphy could have chemistry with a tree. Even Randy Quaid is funny as the android Bruno, performing in this film before he kind of went mad online.
Ron Underwood is a talented director, too, having made some giant hits and stone-cold classics of his own. He was the man behind 1990’s “Tremors,” one of the best of all monster movies, as well as the box office bonanza “City Slickers.” And I loved his comedic fantasy “Heart and Souls.” He is good, even if “Pluto Nash” was bad.
Ron Underwood knows why Pluto Nash didn’t work
Ron Underwood spoke with “How Did This Get Made?” in the past about his career, and he admits that he was disappointed with the way “Pluto Nash” turned out. He said that he could tell that the film wasn’t quite working, but he didn’t have any brilliant ideas as to how to course-correct. He also said that the entire cast did a great job, and that he loved working with Eddie Murphy, but also that Murphy “wasn’t feeling that funny.” It seems that Eddie Murphy wanted “Pluto Nash” to have a straight-up sci-fi script with no comedy in it, and that he would bring the comedy through his performance. The script, however, still has some kookiness in it that clashed with Murphy’s intentions. The script is credited to Neil Cuthbert, but it’s hard to say how many screenwriters actually took a swing at the movie.
This is unconfirmed, but I recall rumors at the time that some critics had seen a rough cut of the movie before its release and lambasted it online. These reviews spooked the studio and led to extensive reshoots, driving up the budget. Again, this is based only on hearsay, and there are no sources to confirm. But it seems like something that might have happened on a production like this.
“The Adventures of Pluto Nash” once made the list of one of the worst films of the 2000s, and it’s frequently used as a punchline or an example of how to foul up a movie hard. It was up for the Razzie for Worst Picture, but “lost” to “Swept Away.” Underwood only directed one other movie, “In the Mix” in 2005, before moving to a prolific TV directing career. At least he survived.
Credit: Source link