Gramps Goes to College (2014)
Director: Chip Rossetti
Screenwriter: Donald James Parker
Starring: Donald James Parker, Rusty Martin Jr., Courtney Lee Simpson, Carol Anderson, Kaitlin Borst
Gramps Goes to College opens in a dimly lit gym with an awkward profile shot of two men working out. The film quickly establishes a low-budget aesthetic and often exposes the production apparatus — light fixtures and camera reflections are visible in background windows. What follows is a disjointed, ideologically driven narrative that struggles with both craft and coherence. The result is a movie that feels amateurish in execution and heavy-handed in its messaging.
The protagonist, Ty Bounds — credited as “Gramps” and played by the screenwriter Donald James Parker — is a retired computer programmer who decides to return to college. Rather than portraying this as an emotionally complex decision, the film turns Ty into an infallible, quasi-messianic figure. Other characters react as if older adults attending college is shocking, but the film’s real problem lies in how Ty interacts with much younger students. He moves into a dorm, befriends undergraduates, attempts to arrange romantic pairings between students he barely knows, and repeatedly disrupts classroom sessions. These choices create uncomfortable dynamics that the script fails to address responsibly.
Ty’s stated motive for re-enrolling is ideological: he believes modern students are being “brainwashed” by liberal, secular professors. The movie frames evolution as the central battleground, and the protagonist spends much of his screen time arguing with a biology professor about the subject. Rather than presenting a thoughtful critique or meaningful debate, the film’s treatment exposes the writer’s limited grasp of the science he rails against. Ty lectures his peers about the brain as if it were simply a computer, yet he never engages in sincere research or meaningful dialogue. This leaves him sounding like a caricature of intellectual arrogance rather than a persuasive voice.
Plot elements are inconsistent and erratic. Ty organizes an intramural sports league that functions like a bizarre, low-stakes competition reminiscent of a children’s tournament: teams compete in ping pong, HORSE, and chess, and Ty is portrayed as naturally dominant in each discipline. Romantic subplots are handled clumsily — the biology professor, after an argument with Ty, inexplicably asks him on dates and then behaves in a way the film frames as sexually aggressive. Meanwhile, Ty’s college roommate, Brad, becomes involved with a “lapsed Christian” who speaks in an exaggerated Southern accent and introduces him to raucous college parties.
The film’s locations often feel improvised. Dorm interiors resemble hotel rooms, the biology lecture appears to be staged in a church auditorium, and the cafeteria scenes are set in what looks like an empty fellowship hall. Parties take place in houses that look unfinished. These production choices contribute to a persistent sense of unreality that undermines any emotional engagement with the characters.
One of the film’s most jarring sequences involves a drinking contest at a party. The scene depicts characters consuming massive quantities of high-proof alcohol in an implausible spree; one young woman takes twenty shots in three minutes and collapses, only to be pronounced dead by a fellow student moments later. The sequence is melodramatic and unrealistic, then swings into a scene in which a roommate revives the collapsed woman through prayer. The biology professor subsequently quits her job for reasons the movie never convincingly explains.
The film’s tone is erratic, shifting between farce, preachiness, and melodrama without a clear center. Performances are often casual to the point of appearing unprepared, and the pacing rushes through a succession of bizarre incidents in an attempt to hold viewer attention. The screenplay’s central character functions more as an avatar of the writer’s own grievances than as a believable human being: infallible, adored, and unfailingly right in every conflict.
As a piece of cinema, Gramps Goes to College struggles on nearly every level — from production design and acting to narrative coherence and thematic subtlety. Its heavy-handed critique of academia and evolution is presented without rigour, leaving the film more notable for its oddities than any persuasive argument. For viewers interested in unusual, amateur religious-themed films, it may hold a certain curiosity value; for most others, the experience will likely be frustrating and bewildering.
0/24