In a surprising cinematic development, Bradley Cooper's third directorial feature adapts the life story of Liverpudlian comedian John Bishop into the film 'Is This Thing On?', starring Will Arnett and Laura Dern. The project has generated considerable attention for its unlikely source material and Hollywood treatment of a British comedy figure's personal journey.
From Runcorn to New York: An Unlikely Transformation
The film represents a significant Americanisation of Bishop's original story, relocating the narrative from Liverpool to New York City and transforming the comedian's experiences into a universal tale of marital breakdown and personal rediscovery. Will Arnett portrays Alex Novak, a character loosely based on Bishop, who discovers an unexpected talent for stand-up comedy following the amicable separation from his wife Tess, played by Laura Dern.
A Story of Therapeutic Comedy and Marital Healing
The narrative follows Alex's accidental entry into the comedy world when he takes the microphone at Greenwich Village's famous Comedy Cellar. What begins as an impromptu performance about his marital troubles evolves into a therapeutic outlet that gradually helps heal his relationship with Tess. The film explores how comedy can serve as both personal catharsis and relationship therapy, with Alex becoming a fixture on the stand-up circuit as his burgeoning career facilitates emotional reconciliation.
Mixed Critical Reception and Performance Analysis
Critical responses to 'Is This Thing On?' have been decidedly mixed, with reviewers praising the performances while questioning the film's overall execution. Will Arnett's portrayal of Alex Novak has been described as a 'decent shot' at a challenging role, though some critics note that his character's comedy routines within the film fail to deliver genuine laughs. Laura Dern's performance as Tess has received particular acclaim, with reviewers describing her work as 'quietly fabulous' despite concerns about the authenticity of her character's athletic background.
Directorial Choices and Narrative Concerns
Bradley Cooper, who also co-wrote the screenplay and appears in a supporting role as Alex's chaotically befuddled friend Balls, has drawn criticism for certain directorial decisions. Reviewers have noted issues with 'wobbly camera work' and 'fashionably mumbled dialogue' that occasionally detract from the viewing experience. The film's pacing has also been questioned, with some describing it as 'a tad slow' despite its relatively straightforward narrative.
More fundamentally, several critics have expressed concerns about the film's emotional authenticity. While based on true events from John Bishop's life, some reviewers argue that 'Is This Thing On?' makes the touching story 'look fake' through forced emotional beats and peripheral characters that prove 'hugely irritating'. Alex's midlife crisis is described as feeling 'forced', while the comedy routines that should form the film's emotional core reportedly lack genuine humour.
Comparative Context and Industry Positioning
'Is This Thing On?' represents Cooper's third directorial effort following the acclaimed 'A Star Is Born' (2018) and 'Maestro' (2023), and is widely considered the slightest of the three. The film enters a crowded genre of comedy-dramas about personal transformation through performance, inevitably drawing comparisons to productions like 'The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel', though reviewers note it lacks that series' visual flair and consistent humour.
The project's unusual development - transforming a British comedian's memoir into an American-set film with major Hollywood stars - has created particular interest in how cultural elements translate across the Atlantic. Notably, Cooper avoided attempting a Scouse accent by completely relocating the story, a decision that has generally been welcomed by critics concerned about potential accent misfires.
Final Verdict: Heart-Warming but Slight
Ultimately, 'Is This Thing On?' occupies an uncertain space between comedy and drama, leaving viewers 'undeniably heart-warmed' but potentially 'slightly short-changed'. The film's strengths lie in its central performances and the genuine emotional core of Bishop's original story, while its weaknesses emerge in execution and authenticity. For audiences familiar with John Bishop's work, the film offers a curious Hollywood interpretation of his life; for general viewers, it presents a watchable if somewhat flawed exploration of healing through humour.
