Courtesy | teaser-trailer.com

At the end of it all, we’re all just trying to make the grade. Anyone this side of sociopathy probably has at least some desire to face their final hour content in all the roles they played. One of the first times any of us had a tangible experience of being affirmed and accepted was receiving our college acceptance letters. So it’s interesting to wonder whether the Tina Fey vehicle, “Admission,” makes the grade.

Film teeters on mediocrity

Portia Nathan (Tina Fey) is an admissions officer at Princeton University. She holds the keys to the education of plenty future movers and shakers and, on top of all that stress, her longterm boyfriend (Michael Sheen) leaves her for another woman early on in the film. Into all of this steps John Pressman (Paul Rudd), the witty and compassionate head of a school dedicated to unorthodox learning methods. Pressman’s got a student, Jeremiah Balakian (Nat Wolff), who’s got his eyes set on Princeton. But he’s also got a strong hunch Portia is Balakian’s mother. From there on out, the line between coolheaded Princetonian and mama bear blurs for Portia as she does everything she can to get her potential boy into the college of his dreams.

Films like “Admission” are my least favorite to review. They tend to be filled with charming actors and capable of evoking genuine feeling without resorting too often to sentimentality on the fritz. But there’s just something missing. In this case, there are quite a few things missing.

Leads aren’t as charming as they could be

Casting Fey and Rudd in your leading roles should be a good career move for anyone. They’re stars whose celebrity is dictated more by their ordinariness than any sense of media hubris. Fey leaves the more acerbic of her Liz Lemon qualities at the door, giving viewers a chance to see her at her least sarcastic and most motherly. Rudd’s been known to turn in a great “big fat jerk” role every once in awhile, but here he’s doing what he does best: playing an everyday guy. Like John Cusack before him, Rudd has a quality defined by likability and understated charm. Unfortunately, for some reason, the two don’t seem to shine as much as they could. Their chemistry is undeniable but, for pairing two of the most likable people in Hollywood, it just doesn’t seem like it’s even close to what it could be.  

Paul Weitz’s direction is also mystifying at times. Any film’s editing is to moviegoers what a band’s bass player is to concert attendees. If its presence ever becomes too noticeable, it feels like a magician’s trick gone wrong. I wouldn’t even bring it up if it weren’t for the fact that some cuts are so awkwardly chosen and distracting that  it’s hard to stay focused on the action. Karen Croner’s screenplay can veer into underdeveloped subplots or dialogue too bland for the talents on screen.

So that’s the bad news. The good news is for every two moments of subpar cinema, there’s at least one that is genuinely heartwarming. Good art tends, for whatever reason, to flit along the boundaries of the more depressing and disturbing aspects of human nature. In some ways, it’s too easy to make a piece of provocative cinema and have it proclaimed from the rooftops as aesthetic sublimity. “Admission” is a movie about good people trying to be good to each other. Not a bad film at all, just nothing for the history books.