If you like Hot Fuzz (2007) you’ll enjoy Normal (2026). That said, Normal is less of a spiritual successor and more of a distant cousin. The latest entry in Bob Odenkirk’s pivot to action, Normal is an R-rated action comedy set in a small Minnesota town called Normal. Brought to you by director Ben Wheatley (Meg 2: The Trench), Normal delivers good times with a smattering of occasional discordant vibes as Wheatley’s horror pedigree bleeds through into how the action is presented. 

Ulysses Richardson (Odenkirk) has just started working as a temporary sheriff for Normal, MN. The previous sheriff died under odd circumstances, and they need an interim replacement until a proper election can be held. As Ulysses quickly comes to realize, Normal is a particularly lucky example of a small Midwest town. Businesses that usually shutter in tiny towns stay open, local fundraisers attract millions of dollars of donations, the former sheriff even lived in a tidy McMansion on the edge of town.

Much like Hot Fuzz, the second Ulysses finds out why things are off in the town kicks off a ton of gunplay and fight sequences for the rest of the movie. Some are joyful celebrations of over-the-top action violence and comedy, some under-deliver like they forgot or ran out of budget. In one scene a character can be vaporized by a grenade, in another a guy literally holding a stick of dynamite just gets knocked back a few feet. 

The Pacing of Normal

I enjoy the premise of Normal. I wish I could say the same about the movie itself. There are several scenes peppered throughout that feel like the movie itself is tapping its watch, irritated about how much time it’s taking to get to the next action sequence. There’s also a marked lack of trust in the audience early on. In what feels like a late addition, the opening sequence has Odenkirk plainly explaining his situation to his unseen estranged wife.

Except the framing device is he’s leaving her voicemails he’s not even sure she’s listening to. Voicemails that go on for several minutes and sound more like narration from an episode of My Name is Earl. It grates to the point I yearn for movies to go back to accepting the idea people keep journals. The half-assed framing device of Ulysses dictating the plot to the audience simply doesn’t work. Point being: you’re gonna have to eat your vegetables (clunky writing) to get to the dessert (Odenkirk being charming before killing tons of people). 

The Tone of Normal 

I’ll freely admit: I am new to the Liam Neeson-ification of Bob Odenkirk. I am aware of Nobody and Nobody 2, and openly welcome the idea of an incredibly funny actor dipping his toes into movies where he occasionally has frantic knife fights and punches people. I purchased a ticket to Normal expecting an action-comedy about a pithy Bob Odenkirk character shooting and/or punching six kinds of snot out of random people. I’d seen the trailer several times and was fully down for the premise. Normal delivers on that premise. But then the tone brings something… complicated to the mix. 

Throughout the movie there were occasional laugh lines that got the theater chuckling, but at no point did it ever particularly feel… funny. Much in the same way there’s tons of horror movies that only tangentially qualify as horror, Normal almost feels like it calls itself an action-comedy because that’s an easier sell than just action. 

I had not looked up director Ben Wheatley before seeing Normal. As soon as I got home from my screening, I looked him up and things started to fall into place. His background in horror filmmaking brought several funky vibes in Normal into sharp focus. My notes for Normal make multiple mentions of how many scenes felt like a horror-hound trying to make an action movie. Turns out, that’s exactly what’s happening here. There’s a glee to how Normal executes (pun unintended) some of its more creative kills that usually is only found in self-aware slasher horror. 

If one watches enough horror and action movies, they can gain a sixth sense for shots that clearly have a violent punchline. Characters are conveniently positioned in frame in perfect lighting, usually with the wind-up of an inspiring speech or important monologue. Something where it’d be hilarious if they suddenly exploded into a fountain of gore. 

To be clear: this kind of shot can be used to great effect. Look at one of my favorite horror comedies in recent years. Ready or Not 2 uses blood explosions to great impact throughout its runtime. So much so the blood explosions are an inherent part of the marketing. RoN2 pre-movie interviews and trailers gleefully reference the fact that bad guys explode into fountains of blood if they break their contract with the devil. The timing and anticipation of such effects shots something both the audience and the characters in the movie are actively anticipating. 

The problem is, once you divorce that kind of moviemaking language from horror, it becomes far more obvious. And Normal has zero qualms about going back to the well a second, third, fourth, or even fifth time. I can’t tell you how many times tertiary characters are killed mid-sentence or run into a room with an impressive weapon only to get immediately killed. There are some good jokes in Normal, but the joke of using the hyper-violence to wantonly kill characters off is over-used to the point it stops being anything. 

That’s not to say extreme/frequent violence is inherently bad. Look at shows like Rick and Morty. Death is a constant bedfellow in Rick and Morty, and with the maturity that has blossomed in later seasons that violence has taken on a new perspective.

What used to be cheap punchlines in service of a nihilistic worldview is now almost an unspoken extra antagonist for the main characters. The sheer amount of casual violence both Rick and Morty deal with on a regular basis can shock them (or, even better, they occasionally are disturbed by how not-disturbed they are). 

Normal is not trying to be Hot Fuzz, but it very much is a movie made by people who love Hot Fuzz. It’s in conversation with Hot Fuzz. Problem is, Hot Fuzz was an intentional homage to specific tropes and directorial styles in the action genre. Violence has a specific purpose and is used both wantonly and sparingly with precise care. Normal only pauses its violence to allow one of the few recognizable actors a monologue before they’re also murdered in some ridiculous way. 

The Bottom Line 

As someone who hasn’t seen Nobody, I can’t take the easy way out and say “if you liked Nobody you’ll like this.” What I can say is despite some irksome moments, I had a good time. Your mileage will vary greatly depending on how much you like Bob Odenkirk. It’s very much a movie predicated on you enjoying the presence of Bob Odenkirk. To the extent several side characters are whisked away unceremoniously to give Ulysses more screen time. 

Three out of five stars. A fun popcorn-muncher, could be a must-buy on physical media if Odenkirk or Wheatley do a commentary for the blu-ray. As an isolated bit of entertainment, Normal is fun and a good enough time. With a little extra polish or supporting material, it could be a fun movie to revisit every few years. Normal lives in a fun-but-complicated middle zone. In the way not all whiskey is bourbon but all bourbon is whiskey, Normal isn’t Hot Fuzz but if you like Hot Fuzz there’s a good chance you’ll enjoy Normal.