Change Your Image
Ricky-Roma
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Funny People (2009)
Confused narrative but some funny moments.
'Funny People' comes at a time when Judd Apatow - perhaps the reigning king of Hollywood comedy has to provide an 'answer' to the phenomenally successful (and in my opinion slightly overrated) 'The Hangover' and so, comes 'Funny People' starring the love-him-or-hate him Adam Sandler and Seth Rogen. I have to say that i've found Sandler always a little 'hit and miss' but find Rogen consistently funny. Even though it has to be said that he always plays the same character in his movies. . .But like a younger, Jewish version of Kevin James. It's hard not to like him.
'Funny People' is yet another example of Sandler attempting to escape the perceived 'juvenile' humour of his earlier movies. But the problem here is that Sandler isn't really a serious actor and in spite of his decent turn in "Reign Over Me" his dramatic acting almost always veers into overwrought sentimentality and that provides a problem in 'Funny People' as it doesn't seem to be sure whether it is an out and out comedy in the manner of previous Apatow hits such as 'Knocked Up' and 'Superbad' or a drama. With the plot moving from the story of a successful comedian George Simmons (Sandler) who is preparing himself for death by enjoying what's left of his life and taking a protégé under his wing to the story of a man trying to break up a family and get back with his ex-girlfriend (something that doesn't endear you any more to Sandler's character or for that matter Leslie Mann's and you wonder why instead of these two unlikable characters being given the screen time it isn't given to the far more lovable Ira (Rogan)). You wonder what is important to the writers here? The relationship between George and Ira? George and Laura or Ira's improving fortunes in both his career and personal life. How can the audience know if the writer doesn't?
Another issue with this movie is the running time with it clocking in at almost two and a half hours and it does provide a problem. The narrative drags at various points due to there being far too many leaden 'talky' parts that do little to make you think that they couldn't have been cut and helped the movie to clock in at under two hours.There are also too many characters who are given some of the long running time but too underdeveloped to justify being in the film (eg.RZA's 'Chuck' character).
There are some amusing scenes in 'Funny People' such as the merciless ridicule of Sandler's doctor for looking like a number of people from popular culture while the German doctor 'doesn't understand the reference.'. Some of the many cameos are also very funny. Most notably those by James Taylor, Eminem and Ray Romano. Although some of the cameos (such as Andy Dick) would have been best left out. The appearance of Eric Bana towards the end of the movie as Mann's cheating passive-aggressive Aussie husband comes as a boost as he is very good, although by this point you are wondering why new characters are being introduced to a movie which should probably have finished by now.
Overall, 'Funny People' is a film that is worth watching, particularly if you are a fan of the two main stars, Apatow's previous work or if you are relatively open-minded about your viewing. But it's also a movie that will no doubt disappoint many who are either expecting another light-hearted jaunt like 'Knocked Up' or the drama of 'Reign Over Me'. 'Funny People' falls somewhere in-between, which is a place that many not find favour with much of the mainstream audience.
Electra Glide in Blue (1973)
It Was Nothing Until The Ending
"Electra Glide In Blue" was shown late one night on TV and I can't really tell you what made me watch it. Some movie that is over three decades old about some short cop who wants to be like "Dirty Harry"? I thought it'd be a comedy. It wasn't and seemed to be aiming at being deep and philosophical when in reality there was much filler and a faint whiff of pretentiousness. This movie was made in the aftermath of Vietnam and you can really tell because there is a less than subtle message here questioning "What is happening to America these days?".
The movie has also dated quite badly. You see, this is a movie that could ONLY have been from the early to mid 1970's. It has the same feel to it as many movies of that era complete with the then customary downbeat ending for movies of it's genre. But WHAT and ending! and it is the ending that is in my opinion - the saving grace of this movie and what undoubtedly sticks in the memory about the viewing experience. Where we see "Big John" Wintergreen (Robert Blake) following a van before being blown off his motorcycle by one of the van passengers. This takes you totally off guard and it is quite heartbreaking as you see "Big John" laying on the freeway shocked at being blown away before dying as the epic and quite fitting "Tell Me" by Chicago starts up. Then, as the movie closes, the camera draws away up the freeway from Blake's corpse as the afformentioned track plays and no, not like in a modern movie - where they would roll the credits after fifteen seconds. No, the camera continues to pull away as "Tell Me" hits its cresciendo with no sign of the credits for what appears to be an eternity (didn't time it but it couldn't be short of five minutes). Many moviegoers may see that as boring. But it is easily the most deep and philosophical moment in a movie that tries and fails for most of it's running time to be deep and philosophical and fails. But they really hit the motherload at the end and THAT, I feel is what makes this movie memorable and worthwhile.
Hercules in New York (1970)
Awful. But Unintentionally Hilarious
Now, there can be no real doubt when you watch this movie that it is absolutely awful. Bad as bad can be. Because it is. "So why oh why have you given it a score of three as opposed to a score of one or two?" you might ask. Well, the reason is that it is the most unintentionally hilarious movie that I have ever seen. It is listed as being an "Action/Comedy/Fantasy" which would lead one to believe that it is meant to be funny. I saw the version in which the mighty Arnold speaks for himself in his customary Austrian brogue. I have not seen the dubbed version so I don't know how much of the comedic value the movie loses based on Schwarzenegger and his dialogue being the funniest part of the movie.
It's the parts that are supposed to be serious that are the really funny bits of this movie. Such as Arnold regularly proclaiming (with an even thicker Austrian accent due to him not yet mastering the English language) "I am Hercules". Having a weightlifting contest with Arnold Stang and pushing over N.Y taxis.
I'm a huge Schwarzenegger fan. I always have been. But the irony is that in the late-1980's he felt the need to display "range" as an actor by trying to branch out from his heavy-hitting actioners into comedy with movies such as "Twins" and "Kindergarten Cop" but the fact of the matter is that Arnold for all his trying was at his funniest right back at the start of his movie career.
If you are a fan of Arnold and love his inimitable manner of delivering lines. You need to see this. Ignore the non-existent plot and acting and just roll along on the river of cheese in a film that is so bad it is hilarious.
Three is a low score, yes. But when you consider that this movie should have a score of one you know that those additional points are on comedic merit alone.
Guess Who (2005)
Lazy Movie-making
This is a movie that offers absolutely nothing new. Even the racial jokes that Kutcher's character tells around the dinner table have been heard so many times before. The movie borrows and then oh so cleverly switches the premise of the Sidney Poitier drama "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner" and uses the "Meet The Parents" template to make their movie. It doesn't work.
This movie doesn't work fundamentally because this is movie making without any soul. It is what you might call a "movie by numbers". Bernie Mac is okay although he isn't utilised to his full comic potential and the much derided Ashton Kutcher does nothing to win over his critics although to be fair it would have been hard for anyone to have done any better with such lazy and uninspired material.
On the front of the DVD box it said "If you liked 'Meet The Parents' - you'll love this" to which I say - Yes I did and no I didn't.
The Thin Red Line (1998)
Poetry On Film
This is not a movie for the "MTV Generation". This is not a movie for those with short attention spans. This is not a movie for people who want some disposable entertainment to "veg out" to. No. This is quite possibly, one of the deepest and thought provoking movies to have come out of Western cinema and is quite possibly to deepest view into the hearts and minds of men at war that has ever been seen. I think the perfect definition of this film would be to liken it to poetry on film. There is much introspection from the characters involved particularly the lead character (played by James Caviezel). To compare it to the likes of "Saving Private Ryan" which was released several months earlier would be unfair because "The Thin Red Line" goes about it's business in a far different manner. It does not try to "check the boxes" so to speak as regards the war movie genre. What it does do however, is portray a fascinating insight into the minds of these young men and the way they feel as regards the brutality that they see each day and their own mortality. Director Terrence Malick has triumphed here. As I said - It's not a movie to watch if you want some light viewing. But if you want something more substantial and thought-provoking. Then this could be the movie for you.
Be Cool (2005)
Supremely Average Entertainment
This is a movie that I really did want to like. It's got Travolta, DeVito, Keitel, Thurman, Woods and Vaughn to name a few in a great ensemble cast. You can see from the movie poster exactly how proud the film-makers are of the cast as almost every one of the characters featured (also including The Rock, Christina Milian, Andre 3000 and Aerosmith's Steven Tyler) is displayed on the poster. But that's where the main problem with this picture lies in my opinion. The reliance on the cast alone to make this film work at the expense of anything plot related. The "plot" that is there is but a simple one and is not particularly stimulating either. There is the opportunity for Travolta and Thurman to reprise their dance partnership from "Pulp Fiction". Vince Vaughn to ham it up as a fake ghetto pimp and The Rock to act "fruity" in the role of a bumbling gay bodyguard. This movie truly is a case of "style over substance" if I ever saw it. If you haven't seen "Get Shorty" then see that instead. This movie isn't awful by all means but it does very little to excite in it's near two hour running time.