The Kids Are All Right
2010
Directed By: Lisa Cholodenko
Starring: Annette Bening, Julianne Moore
Going into this film, I had no clue what it was about. I remember telling a friend I thought it was about a guy with a drug addiction. Nope. It's a very uncommon thing for me to see a film I have no clue about and like it the first time. But of course, there are those special times.
This film was inspirational, titanic, and flamboyantly recognizable (no pun intended). How could a film about a simple, middle-class family have such great valor and story telling ability? I don't know, but it did. The simplicity of the family life for a middle-aged lesbian couple and their two children focuses on the dynamic of living in a same-sex family. It did not feel weird to see two women raising their kids. The subtlety of the lesbian relationship really meant to me that they chose not to make a mockery of homosexuality.
The two children (each born from a different mother) had the same sperm donor. When the eldest, Joni, turns 18, she chooses to get in touch with the donor. This man meets her and her brother for lunch and they get to talking. The rest of the movie shows the man becoming involved with his new found family. Annette Bening's character does not like the idea of someone interrupting their life, but she know it is something she cannot avoid.
The plot was simple. The characters were pretty one dimensional. But this wasn't a bad thing. All five of the main characters brought through a sense of reality that made me not want the movie to end. The chemistry was there, whether it was a sad moment or a happy moment. Awkwardness was all around the characters, and you could feel that.
Really, this movie seemed like a really well-done reality show. You were able to like each and every character but hate them at the same time. The ability to see real people in the actors' eyes made the realism of the film really come through. I enjoyed learning about this family and each of their attributes. Each actor brought their own taste to the film and they meshed together well to create a family dynamic. The drama that ensues throughout the film seems genuine and not preachy. I enjoyed the film and kind of wished it was a little longer. Instead of wondering when the credits would finally pop up, I found myself wondering what would happen next in the story of this realistic middle-class family.
Stars (out of 10): 8
Friday, July 30, 2010
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Inception
Inception
2010
Directed by: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Ellen Page
It feels unfair for me to write a review for this. I saw it, of course, but I feel that I did not "experience" it. My initial reaction to the film was that I did like it. However, I soon found things I did not like about. The acting, terrible. The casting of Ellen Page as an intellectual American student studying in London, stupid. The director, well phenomenal. Really, the actual problem was that I was just not into it. It was visually stimulating, yes, but people try to tell me about how it compares to amazing movies. No it doesn't. Granted, my reviews are strictly my personal opinion, but I'm entitled to that.
Don't get me wrong. I liked the movie, but I found there were many things that lacked. Finding a positive acting point in the movie was very difficult to do, but I will give Joseph Gordon-Levitt some credit. He's the man. Anyway, I found that Ellen Page (who was supposed to be this sophisticated genius) completely lacked in her acting ability. Every time I heard her speak I had a flashback of some quip that she would spit out in Juno. Is she really that one-dimensional? And Leo. My boy Leo had a flat and redundant acting style.
For people who have not seen it, please stop reading now.
Who cared about his wife? I didn't. The story about Leo's wife felt overused and underdone. They took a really cool idea and spoiled it. I knew from the first minute they explain what Inception was that Leo did it on his wife. It's been done. The man sabotages his family's life to progress his success into whatever he sinks himself in to.
Don't get me wrong. I thought the visuals and the general idea and concept of the film were great. I feel that maybe if I see it a second time I will realize some things that I missed. But overall I felt that it fell short of the anticipation.
Christopher Nolan is a genius. Memento and The Dark Knight are two of my all time favorite films, but this one seemed a little rushed and very "cinema-y". He went for the huge names and huge effects. At least Dark Knight had Heath Ledger. He made that film what it became. Legendary. Inception fell a little short of legendary.
New rating system because it makes things easier for me:
Stars (out of 10): 6
2010
Directed by: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Ellen Page
It feels unfair for me to write a review for this. I saw it, of course, but I feel that I did not "experience" it. My initial reaction to the film was that I did like it. However, I soon found things I did not like about. The acting, terrible. The casting of Ellen Page as an intellectual American student studying in London, stupid. The director, well phenomenal. Really, the actual problem was that I was just not into it. It was visually stimulating, yes, but people try to tell me about how it compares to amazing movies. No it doesn't. Granted, my reviews are strictly my personal opinion, but I'm entitled to that.
Don't get me wrong. I liked the movie, but I found there were many things that lacked. Finding a positive acting point in the movie was very difficult to do, but I will give Joseph Gordon-Levitt some credit. He's the man. Anyway, I found that Ellen Page (who was supposed to be this sophisticated genius) completely lacked in her acting ability. Every time I heard her speak I had a flashback of some quip that she would spit out in Juno. Is she really that one-dimensional? And Leo. My boy Leo had a flat and redundant acting style.
For people who have not seen it, please stop reading now.
Who cared about his wife? I didn't. The story about Leo's wife felt overused and underdone. They took a really cool idea and spoiled it. I knew from the first minute they explain what Inception was that Leo did it on his wife. It's been done. The man sabotages his family's life to progress his success into whatever he sinks himself in to.
Don't get me wrong. I thought the visuals and the general idea and concept of the film were great. I feel that maybe if I see it a second time I will realize some things that I missed. But overall I felt that it fell short of the anticipation.
Christopher Nolan is a genius. Memento and The Dark Knight are two of my all time favorite films, but this one seemed a little rushed and very "cinema-y". He went for the huge names and huge effects. At least Dark Knight had Heath Ledger. He made that film what it became. Legendary. Inception fell a little short of legendary.
New rating system because it makes things easier for me:
Stars (out of 10): 6
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Despicable Me
Despicable Me
2010
Directed by: Pierre Coffin, Chris Renaud
Starring: Steve Carell, Jason Segel
Children's movies now-a-days are usually pretty straight forward. There are cute depictions of characters in strange adult situations, then there are some pretty raunchy jokes that only an adult would fully understand. The allure of this movie revolved around the phenomenal advertising. The minion characters came through in the advertisements to showcase the movie in such a way that the movie seemed to possess a "can't miss" ability.
The movie itself, however, lacked a few key ingredients. I feel that the story and jokes were stuck in limbo between adult and child humor. Some of the key jokes were not so much geared toward one group of people, but stuck in a place that couldn't make a decision of whether to flop or be funny.
The story revolves around Gru, a not-so-talented super villian who needs to pull off a big heist in order to gain approval from the so-called "Bank of Evil". He battles fellow villian Vector and the "hilarity" ensues. The basis of the movie also focuses on the fact that Gru adopts three young girls to help him gain access to Vector's lair. The girls are young and fruitful and have lots of love for this strange man that adopts them. They win over his heart and during his villainy he develops a true appreciation for these cute ones. Their innocence transcends through his relationship with them. Does he act evil? Or does he change his ways for the better of the girls?
His assistant, an old doctor, sees how Gru is changing a bit and decides the girls must go. The rest of the movie shows the battle between Gru and Vector. But also there is a battle between Gru and his own soul. The flat, overused and redundant "humor" doesn't catch anything. There are absolutely cute and funny parts, but I found that the comedy factor was lacking. I enjoyed the movie but did not get a humor quotient I would normally expect from a movie with the hype it had. Without the presence of the girls and the minions the movie would have been a 100% bust. Steve Carell's unusual accent is off-balanced, and he should just stick to being the normal looking, goofy, funnyish guy.
Stars (out of 4): * *
2010
Directed by: Pierre Coffin, Chris Renaud
Starring: Steve Carell, Jason Segel
Children's movies now-a-days are usually pretty straight forward. There are cute depictions of characters in strange adult situations, then there are some pretty raunchy jokes that only an adult would fully understand. The allure of this movie revolved around the phenomenal advertising. The minion characters came through in the advertisements to showcase the movie in such a way that the movie seemed to possess a "can't miss" ability.
The movie itself, however, lacked a few key ingredients. I feel that the story and jokes were stuck in limbo between adult and child humor. Some of the key jokes were not so much geared toward one group of people, but stuck in a place that couldn't make a decision of whether to flop or be funny.
The story revolves around Gru, a not-so-talented super villian who needs to pull off a big heist in order to gain approval from the so-called "Bank of Evil". He battles fellow villian Vector and the "hilarity" ensues. The basis of the movie also focuses on the fact that Gru adopts three young girls to help him gain access to Vector's lair. The girls are young and fruitful and have lots of love for this strange man that adopts them. They win over his heart and during his villainy he develops a true appreciation for these cute ones. Their innocence transcends through his relationship with them. Does he act evil? Or does he change his ways for the better of the girls?
His assistant, an old doctor, sees how Gru is changing a bit and decides the girls must go. The rest of the movie shows the battle between Gru and Vector. But also there is a battle between Gru and his own soul. The flat, overused and redundant "humor" doesn't catch anything. There are absolutely cute and funny parts, but I found that the comedy factor was lacking. I enjoyed the movie but did not get a humor quotient I would normally expect from a movie with the hype it had. Without the presence of the girls and the minions the movie would have been a 100% bust. Steve Carell's unusual accent is off-balanced, and he should just stick to being the normal looking, goofy, funnyish guy.
Stars (out of 4): * *
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Grown Ups
Grown Ups
2010
Directed By: Dennis Dugan
Starring: Adam Sandler, Kevin James
I don't care what anyone says. I love Adam Sandler. I think he is not only funny now, but for my generation, he is comedy. He is an icon in my book. Now I know his latest stuff hasn't been the best, but who could compete with Billy Madison, Big Daddy, and Happy Gilmore? The reign of Sandler's career has been overshadowed by a few people, but he definitely is a pioneer of modern comedy.
As for this movie. Before I saw it I heard terrible things. The newpapers, the websites, and even my friends were telling me it was a horrendous movie. I take everyone's opinion, but if I choose to see a movie, I see it. I went into the movie with the negative reviews in mind. I also prepared myself for a typical Adam Sandler comedy. I just hoped it was better than Click. I turned out to be pleasantly surprised.
The movie started off a little slow with the character development, but soon we were whirled into the twelve-year old minds of five brilliant comedians. Every character had their niche. They all had seperate lives but when they came together at their old summer hang out spot, everything else seemed not to matter. Sandler plays a rich agent from LA with a hot wife (Salma Hayek) and two snotty ass kids who wouldn't look up from their cell phones and video games if someone spontaneously combusted in front of them. I'm not going to go into every character, but there was an example.
Anyway, the five of them come together after the death of their childhood basketball coach. They decide to bring their families to an old summer house on a lake for the weekend. The rest of the movie relies solely on these five men making jokes and making us laugh. The great thing about the cast was there was never a lull in comedy. When one person was done saying something there was always someone there cracking a quick joke. The relationships between the characters seemed very natural and they all pull it off quite well.
Of course it's just a slap stick humor fest. But that's good. Now, I heard people saying that it needs to be better than The Hangover in order to be funny. I think we all know that's probably never going to happen. So just take it for what it is. I enjoyed it. And yes I saw it two weeks ago and I've been busy. Deal.
Stars (out of 4): * * 1/2
2010
Directed By: Dennis Dugan
Starring: Adam Sandler, Kevin James
I don't care what anyone says. I love Adam Sandler. I think he is not only funny now, but for my generation, he is comedy. He is an icon in my book. Now I know his latest stuff hasn't been the best, but who could compete with Billy Madison, Big Daddy, and Happy Gilmore? The reign of Sandler's career has been overshadowed by a few people, but he definitely is a pioneer of modern comedy.
As for this movie. Before I saw it I heard terrible things. The newpapers, the websites, and even my friends were telling me it was a horrendous movie. I take everyone's opinion, but if I choose to see a movie, I see it. I went into the movie with the negative reviews in mind. I also prepared myself for a typical Adam Sandler comedy. I just hoped it was better than Click. I turned out to be pleasantly surprised.
The movie started off a little slow with the character development, but soon we were whirled into the twelve-year old minds of five brilliant comedians. Every character had their niche. They all had seperate lives but when they came together at their old summer hang out spot, everything else seemed not to matter. Sandler plays a rich agent from LA with a hot wife (Salma Hayek) and two snotty ass kids who wouldn't look up from their cell phones and video games if someone spontaneously combusted in front of them. I'm not going to go into every character, but there was an example.
Anyway, the five of them come together after the death of their childhood basketball coach. They decide to bring their families to an old summer house on a lake for the weekend. The rest of the movie relies solely on these five men making jokes and making us laugh. The great thing about the cast was there was never a lull in comedy. When one person was done saying something there was always someone there cracking a quick joke. The relationships between the characters seemed very natural and they all pull it off quite well.
Of course it's just a slap stick humor fest. But that's good. Now, I heard people saying that it needs to be better than The Hangover in order to be funny. I think we all know that's probably never going to happen. So just take it for what it is. I enjoyed it. And yes I saw it two weeks ago and I've been busy. Deal.
Stars (out of 4): * * 1/2
Friday, June 18, 2010
Toy Story 3
Toy Story 3
2010
Directed by: Lee Unkrich
Starring: Tom Hanks, Tim Allen
The funny thing about Pixar movies for me is that I usually need to see them twice or three times before appreciating them for what they are. This is the first time that I have seen a Pixar movie and liked it the first time. Scratch that, LOVED it the first time. I saw this movie with no certain expectations. I knew it would be funny. I knew it would be cute. I knew it would be a lot like the first 2. The relationship I had already had with the characters allowed me to focus in on the movie and not trying to decipher who was who and who was where.
It must be hard to write movies like this. Movies that integrate a lot of pop culture need to be spot on or they can just fall flat. Seeing Toy Story 3 was like seeing the first Shrek for the first time again. The integration of nearly every toy we had as a kid and it's "personality" seemed to fit for EVERY toy. Toy Story 1 and 2 did this as well. But there is just something about seeing a Ken doll acting like all of America thinks he would act. There is something about a unicorn with a deep voice that drew us all in. And I'll tell you, it worked.
The story, the characters (new and old), and the sentiment of the movie all rang true for so many of our lives. The animation was fantastic, the jokes were even better. There's just something about a movie that leaves you smiling that has you begging for more. The friends I saw it with and I walked out of the theater saying "I want to see it again".
Watching Andy get ready for college is the main plot of the movie. The toys are scurrying around hoping to be kept as Andy and his mother are packing boxes that either go to college, go in the attic, or get thrown out. The following adventure throws us into a world of a day care center, crazy toddlers, and a collection of toys we won't soon forget. The representation of each toy holds true once again in this film. And even though some of us might not know what certain toys are like, you still feel a connection with each and every one.
There were no dumb songs like in Toy Story 2. There was not a completely complicated story line that tried to reach too far. There was a story line representing the toys that they are and throwing them into an adventure that keeps people glued to their seats. On another quick note, the short film before it was phenomenal. It will soon be a very popular video I believe once a lot of people see it. The way it was shot was beautiful and words aren't needed for the characters to create a strong relationship.
Toy Story 3 was phenomenal. I don't really throw that word around too often. But it was. It was by far the best in the series and also the funniest. There are a lot of movies made now-a-days, but only a few actually catch my eye as really, really good. Toy Story 3 caught my eye.
Stars (out of 4): * * * *
2010
Directed by: Lee Unkrich
Starring: Tom Hanks, Tim Allen
The funny thing about Pixar movies for me is that I usually need to see them twice or three times before appreciating them for what they are. This is the first time that I have seen a Pixar movie and liked it the first time. Scratch that, LOVED it the first time. I saw this movie with no certain expectations. I knew it would be funny. I knew it would be cute. I knew it would be a lot like the first 2. The relationship I had already had with the characters allowed me to focus in on the movie and not trying to decipher who was who and who was where.
It must be hard to write movies like this. Movies that integrate a lot of pop culture need to be spot on or they can just fall flat. Seeing Toy Story 3 was like seeing the first Shrek for the first time again. The integration of nearly every toy we had as a kid and it's "personality" seemed to fit for EVERY toy. Toy Story 1 and 2 did this as well. But there is just something about seeing a Ken doll acting like all of America thinks he would act. There is something about a unicorn with a deep voice that drew us all in. And I'll tell you, it worked.
The story, the characters (new and old), and the sentiment of the movie all rang true for so many of our lives. The animation was fantastic, the jokes were even better. There's just something about a movie that leaves you smiling that has you begging for more. The friends I saw it with and I walked out of the theater saying "I want to see it again".
Watching Andy get ready for college is the main plot of the movie. The toys are scurrying around hoping to be kept as Andy and his mother are packing boxes that either go to college, go in the attic, or get thrown out. The following adventure throws us into a world of a day care center, crazy toddlers, and a collection of toys we won't soon forget. The representation of each toy holds true once again in this film. And even though some of us might not know what certain toys are like, you still feel a connection with each and every one.
There were no dumb songs like in Toy Story 2. There was not a completely complicated story line that tried to reach too far. There was a story line representing the toys that they are and throwing them into an adventure that keeps people glued to their seats. On another quick note, the short film before it was phenomenal. It will soon be a very popular video I believe once a lot of people see it. The way it was shot was beautiful and words aren't needed for the characters to create a strong relationship.
Toy Story 3 was phenomenal. I don't really throw that word around too often. But it was. It was by far the best in the series and also the funniest. There are a lot of movies made now-a-days, but only a few actually catch my eye as really, really good. Toy Story 3 caught my eye.
Stars (out of 4): * * * *
Sunday, June 13, 2010
The Killer Inside Me
The Killer Inside Me
2010
Directed by: Michael Winterbottom
Starring: Casey Affleck, Jessica Alba
Who would have thought a movie starring Casey Affleck, Jessica Alba, Kate Hudson, and Bill Pullman would be god-awful. A remake of a remake of a remake. This movie had zero emotional scale to follow. Even Transformers 2 made you like the characters and wonder about their fates. The Killer Inside Me took decent actors and threw them in a big pot of nothingness with no where to go. The story seemed all over the place, and the overall concept was a bore.
Dry. That's really the one word I can use to describe the acting style of Casey Affleck. I've always thought of him as a mediocre actor at best. Yes, Good Will Hunting was a fantastic film, but honestly, Matt Damon and Ben Affleck are better actors than Casey. I feel that every time I watch a Casey Affleck film, he's really nervous about something. His voice shakes, and he never really shows any true emotion. It seems like he doesn't care. Well I'll tell you what, he should care. He should realize that the acting job he does in a movie like this is the biggest part. Casey plays dry, mediocre roles. Maybe that's just his niche.
Focusing back on this atrocity they call movie, the story was weak, the characters were weak, the emotional aspect was weak. For no reason at all things begin to happen. I'm sure they happened for a reason, but who could tell with the droning, unbalanced voices? Speaking with a southern, out dated accent is one thing. But mumbling nonsense as if you're speaking under your breath is another. The urge to get up and check my phone for messages is the first sign that something is wrong with the movie. Dry, non-entertaining, utter nonsensical movies that actually have a good premice but no direction really get to me. Affleck is the worse of the two Affleck brothers in acting (that's right, I said it). So to wrap up. Waste of time. Waste of money. Waste of on-demand purchase. Get it right Winterbottom. You're not going to have a successful movie if Jessica Alba is only in the first 15 minutes and Kate Hudson looks fat.
Stars: 1/2
2010
Directed by: Michael Winterbottom
Starring: Casey Affleck, Jessica Alba
Who would have thought a movie starring Casey Affleck, Jessica Alba, Kate Hudson, and Bill Pullman would be god-awful. A remake of a remake of a remake. This movie had zero emotional scale to follow. Even Transformers 2 made you like the characters and wonder about their fates. The Killer Inside Me took decent actors and threw them in a big pot of nothingness with no where to go. The story seemed all over the place, and the overall concept was a bore.
Dry. That's really the one word I can use to describe the acting style of Casey Affleck. I've always thought of him as a mediocre actor at best. Yes, Good Will Hunting was a fantastic film, but honestly, Matt Damon and Ben Affleck are better actors than Casey. I feel that every time I watch a Casey Affleck film, he's really nervous about something. His voice shakes, and he never really shows any true emotion. It seems like he doesn't care. Well I'll tell you what, he should care. He should realize that the acting job he does in a movie like this is the biggest part. Casey plays dry, mediocre roles. Maybe that's just his niche.
Focusing back on this atrocity they call movie, the story was weak, the characters were weak, the emotional aspect was weak. For no reason at all things begin to happen. I'm sure they happened for a reason, but who could tell with the droning, unbalanced voices? Speaking with a southern, out dated accent is one thing. But mumbling nonsense as if you're speaking under your breath is another. The urge to get up and check my phone for messages is the first sign that something is wrong with the movie. Dry, non-entertaining, utter nonsensical movies that actually have a good premice but no direction really get to me. Affleck is the worse of the two Affleck brothers in acting (that's right, I said it). So to wrap up. Waste of time. Waste of money. Waste of on-demand purchase. Get it right Winterbottom. You're not going to have a successful movie if Jessica Alba is only in the first 15 minutes and Kate Hudson looks fat.
Stars: 1/2
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Get Him to the Greek
Get Him to the Greek
2010
Directed by: Nicholas Stoller
Starring: Jonah Hill, Russel Brand
There's something appealing about Jonah Hill and Russel Brand coming together for 2 hours of mayhem and misunderstanding. Predictability led the way in this "spin-off" of Forgetting Sarah Marshall. Now at first I didn't like FSM, but after watching it a second time, I grew to like it. I do not feel I would have the same reaction if I saw this again. Did I laugh? Yes. Did I care about the characters? No. I had no care about anything going on except getting to the next joke.
Jonah Hill plays a record producer trying to make his way to the top. P Diddy (or whatever the hell he goes by now) is his fast talking, Ari Gold-like boss. Diddy tells Hill to go to London to retrieve Brand for an anniversary concert in LA in 72 hours. Of course Brand, being a washed-up rock star, does not go so fast. He is not reluctant, but he has a mentality that coursing through life will bring him happiness.
Russel Brand plays the predictable, lovable rocker. Jonah Hill plays the predictable, fat boy fan. The jokes are very few and far between. I laughed at a few parts, but honestly it felt like they were trying too hard. For the most part, I am a fan of this genre. The quick-talking, hilarity ensuing, slightly dramatic pursuits. But it seems that the heart was brought in too much on this one. This was the same for Funny People. Hill and Brand played colorless characters that you never really seem to care about.
There is a side story of Hill's girlfriend issues, which again, I didn't care for. The lack of humor and the strong presence of trying to make this about how we need to coddle rock stars really brought the wrong type of movie to the screen. I felt like I was watching a sequel to Dude, Where's My Car, except Ashton Kutcher is funnier. I enjoy the heart aspect sometimes, but I felt that it was a little overplayed. The best part was a specific scene in a Las Vegas hotel room. But only that scene had a few funny parts.
Trying too hard is not the way to make a movie. A hilarious movie (The Hangover, for example) seemed effortless. Hilarity and a fun story to follow should be the components of this kind of comedy. I'm not sure what the writers were trying to do with this movie. Maybe they were trying to make it heartfelt. Maybe they were trying to make it a run-around comedy with few jokes and even fewer high points. I felt as if most people in the theater were only laughing because of the actors on the screen and not because of things they were doing or saying. People feel inclined to laugh when they see someone who is known to be funny. This movie did not make Jonah Hill or Russel Brand any funnier.
Stars (out of 4): * 1/2
2010
Directed by: Nicholas Stoller
Starring: Jonah Hill, Russel Brand
There's something appealing about Jonah Hill and Russel Brand coming together for 2 hours of mayhem and misunderstanding. Predictability led the way in this "spin-off" of Forgetting Sarah Marshall. Now at first I didn't like FSM, but after watching it a second time, I grew to like it. I do not feel I would have the same reaction if I saw this again. Did I laugh? Yes. Did I care about the characters? No. I had no care about anything going on except getting to the next joke.
Jonah Hill plays a record producer trying to make his way to the top. P Diddy (or whatever the hell he goes by now) is his fast talking, Ari Gold-like boss. Diddy tells Hill to go to London to retrieve Brand for an anniversary concert in LA in 72 hours. Of course Brand, being a washed-up rock star, does not go so fast. He is not reluctant, but he has a mentality that coursing through life will bring him happiness.
Russel Brand plays the predictable, lovable rocker. Jonah Hill plays the predictable, fat boy fan. The jokes are very few and far between. I laughed at a few parts, but honestly it felt like they were trying too hard. For the most part, I am a fan of this genre. The quick-talking, hilarity ensuing, slightly dramatic pursuits. But it seems that the heart was brought in too much on this one. This was the same for Funny People. Hill and Brand played colorless characters that you never really seem to care about.
There is a side story of Hill's girlfriend issues, which again, I didn't care for. The lack of humor and the strong presence of trying to make this about how we need to coddle rock stars really brought the wrong type of movie to the screen. I felt like I was watching a sequel to Dude, Where's My Car, except Ashton Kutcher is funnier. I enjoy the heart aspect sometimes, but I felt that it was a little overplayed. The best part was a specific scene in a Las Vegas hotel room. But only that scene had a few funny parts.
Trying too hard is not the way to make a movie. A hilarious movie (The Hangover, for example) seemed effortless. Hilarity and a fun story to follow should be the components of this kind of comedy. I'm not sure what the writers were trying to do with this movie. Maybe they were trying to make it heartfelt. Maybe they were trying to make it a run-around comedy with few jokes and even fewer high points. I felt as if most people in the theater were only laughing because of the actors on the screen and not because of things they were doing or saying. People feel inclined to laugh when they see someone who is known to be funny. This movie did not make Jonah Hill or Russel Brand any funnier.
Stars (out of 4): * 1/2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)