Movie Review: ‘Identity Thief’ Boring, Wholly Unoriginal

Identity Thief  has more than a few good things going for it: It boasts a funny and talented cast, it features some amusing comedic chemistry between its two leads, and it has a plot that’s both rooted in the real world and ripe for some amusing and wacky cinematic hijinks.

And yet, Seth Gordon‘s latest squanders every bit of promise it has to its name, with the final product ringing up as a mostly humorless, morally questionable, and wholly unoriginal pile of boring trash.

The film is purely formulaic – the sort of comedy where you can see every beat (especially the “emotional” ones) from a mile away and nothing is capable of surprise. To be sure, there are “shocking” moments – sequences of violence, poorly considered sexual escapades, and even one hell of a car accident – but none of that jolts the viewer because it’s sharp or smart or interesting; it’s all sort of stagey, like the comedic version of a horror film jump scare.

What’s most grating about Identity Thief is that it’s such a tremendous waste of time for everyone involved – from stars Jason Bateman and Melissa McCarthy to the very audience paying to watch it. Save your money. Keep your credit cards in your pocket. Stay home.

The plot of Identity Thief is relatively simple – that is, before screenwriter Craig Mazin apparently junked it up with all sorts of unnecessary and confusing side stories. Sandy Bigelow Patterson (Bateman) is a nice, regular guy. He has a nice, regular job at a financial management firm, and he has a nice, regular wife (Amanda Peet, who manages to excel in her slim role) and some nice, regular kids (Mary-Charles Jones and Maggie Elizabeth Jones). Things are nice. They are regular. It’s fine.

Unfortunately for the real Sandy Bigelow Patterson, there’s another “Sandy Bigelow Patterson” out there – a criminal mastermind who has been stealing the identities of all kinds of people for many years so that she may buy stuff to fill the giant hole in her heart. McCarthy’s Sandy Bigelow Patterson (or “Diana,” or whatever her name is) has outfitted her life with all kinds of crap – literal and figurative – because she’s just so damn lonely.

Diana’s handiwork has ruined Sandy’s credit, and when he discovers that (thanks to a busted credit line and a bust by the cops), he sets out on a cross-country quest to find her in Florida, capture her, and bring her back to his hometown of Denver to ‘fess up to the cops.

Wait, sorry, what? Isn’t that what credit card companies and lawyers and law enforcement is for? Not in the world of Identity Thief, where Sandy’s new job is on the line because of his bad credit and where cops advise victims to go find their assailants and no one, no one, seems to think this is a bad or dangerous or stupid idea. Let’s be clear here – this is a bad and dangerous and stupid idea.

And that’s before Sandy even meets the drug dealers that Diana is mixed up in or the insane bounty hunter (Robert Patrick) who is tracking her down. Yes, this plot was already convoluted enough, and now we’ve added in drug dealers and bounty hunters…

Read More: filmschoolrejects.com

Independent journalism still matters.

We hope this story was worth your time. For over 14 years, Atlanta Black Star has stayed Black-owned and independently run. We didn't get here by waiting on ad budgets that were never built to prioritize us. Our readers did that.

Corporate support for Black media has always been thin. Outlets like ours get roughly 1% of the $170 billion spent on U.S. advertising each year, and that margin is shrinking further as advertisers walk back the DEI-linked commitments they made in 2020. That's the backdrop. It's not why we're asking.

The wider picture isn't any steadier. Newspaper ad revenue has fallen more than 80% since 2005, and local newsrooms are closing at a rate of roughly two a week nationwide. When outlets go under, it's rarely the ones built to center a Black perspective from the ground up that get to stick around.

We know a request for support isn't why you came here. But without readers choosing to fund this work directly, the depth of reporting we can do at home and abroad shrinks along with everyone else's. If you're not in a position to give, that doesn't change how much we value you as a reader.

If you are able to, a recurring contribution does more for us than a single one-time gift, because it lets us plan the next investigation instead of just the next invoice. It takes about 30 seconds, no long form, no account. Thank you for continuing to support independent journalism and freedom of the press.

Back to top