While it may not be a universally exciting occurrence, but I am always fascinated when comedians decide to step behind the camera and make their directorial debut, which is often a moment in which great cinematic voices are born. It’s certainly more interesting when they go against the grain and direct in a completely different genre than what we may have expected, but there is still credibility in those that decide to stay close to what they know. In the case of Charlie Day, his debut was both inevitable and highly anticipated, since he has been doing incredible work for years as an actor in both television and film, and often expressed his admiration for different kinds of comedy that influenced his style, particularly his work on the iconic It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, where he has spent nearly two decades stirring up chaos with his motley crew of castmates and co-conspirators. As someone who appreciates the art of comedy more than most and has worked to hone his own skills as one of the more unorthodox voices in contemporary humour, Day had a lot of potential when choosing to direct his first feature, and while it may not be the smoothest or most consistent comedy, Fool’s Paradise is the exact kind of chaotic brilliance we would expect from him as a writer and director, bringing that same revolutionary spirit we have come to expect from his style, and transposing it onto a bigger platform, in which he demonstrates a great deal of comfort and ease, almost as if he has been directing for years. It may not be as revolutionary as some may hope in the light of other comedians-turned-directors that immediately establish themselves as auteurs, but Day makes an ambitious and thrilling debut with Fool’s Paradise, which is more likely to become a cult classic than an immediate masterpiece, which seems more than appropriate for such a film based on its storyline and execution, which are as eccentric and deranged as we would have come to expect from Day, who proves himself to be just as strong a director as he is a performer.

By this point, the concept of a Hollywood satire is beyond tired – we have countless examples of directors making films that take aim at the supposedly treacherous and perilous world of Tinseltown, ranging from major studio films to the most perverse independent productions, and it is clear that, regardless of who they are, everyone has something to say about the film industry. Choosing to make your directorial debut with a Hollywood satire seems slightly underwhelming, since these are often the easiest kinds of films to make – there isn’t any shortage of stock archetypes that can be used as characters (megalomaniac producers, vain movie stars, overly punctilious directors and morally-ambigious agents being some of the prime examples), and there are very rarely any opportunities where you can’t be punching upwards, which is always a benefit to satirists. However, once you remove the safety net that comes with this story, you find that there is still a lot of space to do interesting work, which is where Day focuses most of his attention. Taking his cue from silent era comedians such as Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin, as well as those who made films after that era but still paid tribute to their work (such as Jacques Tati and Rowan Atkinson), he leaps into the world of Hollywood in the form of a parable about a mute, childish mental patient who inadvertently becomes the biggest star in the world, all because of luck. Fool’s Paradise is a film constructed along the lines of Andy Warhol’s famous adage of everyone having their fifteen minutes of fame, coupled with Day’s outrageous and deranged sense of humour to propel it along and take it in unexpected directions. This is the great strength of the film, which is well-constructed and very intricately written, much more than we have expected on a cursory glance, our first impressions likely betraying us into believing this to be a run-of-the-mill Hollywood satire, rather than a demented and off-beat work of shocking brilliance, much closer to the work of John Waters and Mel Brooks than we may initially have imagined.

There is naturally much more to this film than initially meets the eye, which is part of the fun of seeing how far Day can take us on this journey before we finally start to see the holistic message that drives the story. While I’d not categorize it as too sinister of a comedy, there is a slight darkness that underpins Fool’s Paradise that is worth noting. This isn’t a film only about eviscerating the film industry, but instead depicting the carnivalesque nature of contemporary society. Day’s style of comedy has always been about skirting around the theatre of the absurd, showing the moral and intellectual degradation that underlies modern life, almost in a way that evokes Samuel Beckett, just with a lot of vulgarity and a healthy dosage of the most deranged blue comedy imaginable. Whether this has been intentional or just a pleasant byproduct of his work remains to be seen, but considering how Fool’s Paradise is essentially 90 minutes of watching a literal fool have a brief moment of fame, and then steadily decline into obscurity, forced into a position of complete despair as the public loses favour for him based on factors outside of his control, it’s clear that there was something much deeper in what the director was trying to do here. What starts as a very broad comedy eventually becomes almost Lynchian in how it presents a grotesque, nightmarish image of the world – it is perverse and strange, and focuses on the degradation of society and how the world is run by those who most certainly do not have the best interests of the public at heart – this is most notable in the film’s final act, where the character of Latte Pronto, a wordless, clearly unintelligent goon, is seen as a perfect candidate for political office, a hilarious but unsettling scene that is one of many shocking moments in a film that is not afraid to go for the jugular – and beig able to do so in the form of an offbeat, slapstick comedy is even more impressive, since the audience is delivered a harrowing message in a very upbeat manner, which can be quite a shock for those who aren’t expecting such a turn.

There is very little doubt that there is quite a bit of complexity that went into the creation of Fool’s Paradise, which is not as simple a film as it appears on the surface. It’s a primarily character-driven film, and it can sometimes feel quite jagged in how it portrays the various archetypes. As a result, the actors cast in these roles needed to be not only right for the parts, but have the flexibility to take them in different directions. One of the benefits of having worked in the industry for decades is that many friends are made along the way, and when you are as congenial as Day, they will gladly leap at the opportunity to collaborate, which is the case here. This film boasts quite an impressive cast, cobbled together from a blend of the director’s previous collaborators and a few newcomers, many of whom were generous enough to give their time to helping him realize this deranged vision. Day does double duty, playing the part of Latte Proto, the titular fool, and without even uttering a word (outside of the other character he plays, the loud-mouthed character actor who appears towards the beginning of the film), he turns in a genuinely wonderful performance that allows him to show off his incredible expressivity. Other actors such as Ken Jeong, Kate Beckinsale (a truly underrated comedic performer – she is somehow even better in comedies than she is in any other genre), Adrien Brody and Ray Liotta are all strong supporting performers that play very clearly-defined characters that all have a darkness to them. Smaller roles by Jason Sudeikis, Edie Falco and John Malkovich in one of his most terrifying performances to date also add nuance to this cast, which acts as a homogenous entity of satirical perversion, each one contributing something different to this strange but poignant ensemble.

Fool’s Paradise is the definition of an acquired taste, even if it does appear like it is trying to be universally appealing with the use of broad comedy and humour that is appreciated by a much wider audience than the one that is actually targeted here. The specific intentions were not clear, and Day has very smartly been quite elusive about discussing the deeper meaning behind the film, which both keeps the surprise alive, and prevents the film from being too overly obvious in its perspective, which can be a problem for those who go in with expectations too narrow to actually be met. Perhaps the film is as simple as it seems on the surface, and my reading is just the product of an over-active imagination and tendency towards focusing on the more subversive elements that drive this film. Regardless, Fool’s Paradise is extremely surprising and always keeps us engaged, which is quite an achievement for something that is playing on so many common tropes. It is often quite provocative in some of its subject matter, and its frequent use of certain ideas can be controversial to say the least, but they are never bawdy or inappropriate, and they are used extremely well. There is never any doubt that Day knew what he was doing when he set out to tell this story, and while it takes its time to reach its fundamental message, the journey to get there is entertaining, outrageous and thought-provoking, which is exactly what a film like this needed to aspire to be, proving that Day is an exciting new voice in contemporary cinema.