ANGELS & DEMONS

“ANGELS & DEMONS” (Tom Hanks, Ewan McGregor, Ayelet Zurer, Armin Mueller-Stahl & Stellan Skarsgard)

Count me among the many that didn’t care for the first installment of this series, “The Da Vinci Code”. I liked Ian McKellen in it, but for the most part I found it to be a whole lot about nothin’. “Angels & Demons” has a better plot – there’s a real life & death situation at hand & a race against time to save hundreds of lives. True, we are talking about Catholic lives, but they still matter. That’s a joke, Catholics, lighten up for a change.
So I liked the premise – The pope has recently died & as the Cardinals gather to elect a new pontiff, 4 of the betting favorites are kidnapped by an organization calling itself the Illuminati; supposedly a group of scientist that tried to work with the church to come up with a plausible reason for creation while still keeping God in the picture. But the church refused to accept the Illuminati’s findings & drove them out of Vatican City in the 18th Century.
The voice of the Illuminati tells the world that one Cardinal will be assassinated every hour on the hour at 8, 9, 10 & 11 PM; then at midnight, a stolen canister of anti-matter will explode somewhere in the city causing mass destruction of biblical portions.
Since there are no Illuminati experts in the Vatican, nor in Italy – the police call on American symbologist, Robert Langdon (Hanks)
This is where the storyline gets tiresome, I enjoyed the racing against time to save the Cardinals idea, but it is how Langdon determines where the assassinations are going to take place that became irritating – There wasn’t anything clever about it – Hanks would strike a ‘deep into thought’ pose for a few seconds & then spout out some obscure location & off they’d go. I actually had to laugh out loud when at one point, Langdon points to 2 particular angel statues & says, “The angels are pointing the way!”
Ewan McGregor plays the right hand man of the deceased pope & thus is ‘semi-‘ in charge of the Vatican until a new pope is picked. The way this character ‘evolves’ thru the film doesn’t make a lot of sense unless you throw logic out the window; which, in a film regarding religion isn’t difficult to do, so why am I complaining?
Ayelet Zurer plays the female scientist that helped to create the canister of anti-matter & then allowed the Illuminati to walk out of their super-secret laboratory with the extremely dangerous ‘creation’.
Armin Mueller-Stahl does his usual fine job as a stodgy old Cardinal that finds it difficult to maintain his forgiving grin while being ‘told’ what he should be doing by McGregor’s ‘camerlengo’. By the way, I finally figured out why they call them ‘cardinals’ – they all dress in bright red plumage with matching beanies, so they do indeed look like a group of St. Louis baseball fans.
As head of the Swiss Guard (the protectors of the pope) Stellan Skarsgard acts as though he doesn’t WANT to help Langdon stop the kidnapped Cardinals from being murdered – making it over-obvious that he is indeed the mastermind behind the Illuminati. I don’t feel as though I’m revealing a spoiler with that because it becomes very apparent from the moment the character is introduced & denies Langdon access to the information he needs to decipher the location of the first assassination. Which I had a problem with as well; the clues are embedded in the brick flooring & the streets are swarming with tourists & anxious Catholics, yet Langdon is still able to find the exact clues he needs to lead them to the site.
Now, I don’t mean to pick on Catholics, even though I have, I just don’t ‘mean’ to – but at one point the ‘swarm’ is warned to evacuate the city due to a bomb threat (The anti-matter is the true culprit) A short time later a news reporter is announcing how even more people have entered the square since that warning was given... Seems as if those darn Catholics just don’t believe anything anyone tells them unless they're dressed like a big bird...
In the beginning, I liked the way this film was heading, by the time it gets to the finale, I was shaking my head in disbelief... which, for me, is nothing new. Hopefully you’ll find the shocking climax more ‘entertaining’ than I.

STAR TREK

“STAR TREK” (Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Karl Urban, Eric Bana & Leonard Nimoy)

When I heard about this ‘prequel’ idea of starting ‘Star Trek’ over from scratch, I hated it. Being alive when the original series aired (& being a kid, a fan of it) those characters & the actors portraying them had been intertwined for most of my life – the thought of having a different cast taking over the roles seemed ludicrous. After seeing the preview, I became even more determined to avoid it – I hated the idea from the beginning & the trailer made it look more like a ‘Star Wars’ type of ‘kiddie’ flick, rather than the more character driven ‘Trek’ style that I grew up with. Then the critics started raving about it; the prominent line being ‘You don’t have to be a ‘Trekkie’ to enjoy this movie’.
Well, I liked the show, I liked movies #2-3-4, but I’m not a Trekkie. I laughed when Bill Shatner told the goofballs dressed up like Vulcans & Klingons to ‘Get a life!’
I felt it important to reveal my background so you would understand where I was coming from before starting my review – Which is – this is a spectacular film. With one minor complaint, which I won’t reveal due to it being a bit of a ‘spoiler’, this movie started strong & gained momentum with practically every scene.
The plot involves a villain from the future named Nero (Eric Bana) a Romulan who travels back in time to alter the future destruction of his home planet & seek revenge against the Federation Ambassador who promised to save his world & failed. Said Ambassador being an elderly Mr. Spock (Leonard Nimoy)
Since time travel isn’t new to the franchise (both the TV series & ‘Voyage Home’ enlisted that ‘impossible’ plot device) it was easy to buy into the concept of using a time traveling bad guy to alter the lives of the original ‘Star Trek’ characters. People & planets that existed during the run of the series & movies are at risk when Nero ‘alters’ their lives with futuristic weapons.
I liked ‘Star Trek’ because it also pays homage to what I call the ‘best’ Trek’ movie – “The Wrath Of Kahn”. Heck, it doesn’t just pay homage - it practically steals the entire plot! But in hindsight, I believe that is what makes it work – even when they give fans obvious ‘winks’ in tribute to the cream of the crop; Bana’s Nero screaming ‘Spock! Spock!’ imitating Shatner’s Kirk bellowing ‘Kahn! Kahn!’
Kahn was the perfect villain – a returning character from the series that seeks revenge against Kirk / Nero seeks revenge against Spock. Kahn gained control of the ‘Genesis’ device which could create life on a dead planet; which Kahn threatened to use on planets where life already existed / Nero brings a device from the future that can implant a black hole into a planet, thus eradicating it from existence (Once a deep enough hole has been drilled)
If you want to rag on it for being a ‘copycat’, I can’t argue that point, but... probably due to the new cast, it worked for me.
As for the cast, I didn’t have a problem with any of them (With again, one minor complaint) The biggest surprise to me was Bana – other than doing a decent job in ‘Troy’ I have not been impressed with his work. A good villain makes or breaks a series & Eric doesn’t hit any sour notes – he isn’t given the complexity of a Kahn, nor does he quote Melville; but his character is bent on revenge, with a preconceived plan as to how it must be doled out. In displaying this side of Nero, Bana delivers an impressive performance. Going down the list – Chris Pine as James Tiberius Kirk; the one actor that was the least similar to the original portrayer, it obviously took a little longer to warm up to Pine, but in the end I had to admit that I couldn’t find anything negative to say about his ‘take’ on Kirk (After all, the story opens with his birth being altered by Nero’s invasion into the past, so we are dealing with a whole new Kirk in a sense)
Zachary Quinto as (Young) Mr. Spock; I liked the way they explored his childhood of being ridiculed by ‘full’ Vulcans for being a half-breed – It immediately put you on the side of this pre-robot-to-all-things-logical being. My friend Chris wondered how they could show Spock totally flipping out in the preview & expect ‘Star Trek’ fans to buy into this. Chris, go see the film – You will understand why that scene was necessary & made sense – In fact, it’s a ‘highlight’. Old time fans should see enough of the Spock we knew & loved in Quinto’s performance to accept him as the new Spock without a single complaint.
Karl Urban as Dr. ‘Bones’ McCoy; everyone should at least smile, if not chuckle out loud when Kirk meets young Dr. McCoy & the reason for his nickname coming into being is revealed – It has nothing to do with his profession, as we all would have surmised. Urban may be the best of the lot here – he probably comes the closest to capturing the essence of the original portrayal (DeForrest Kelley) & does a flawless job – You’d think the guy was a direct descendant of Kelley.
John Cho as Sulu; Plays him just like the original – no flashy personality – a no nonsense guy that keeps a stiff upper lip even when he makes a major boo-boo.
Anton Yelchin as Chekov was the ‘supporting’ cast member that I expected to have the most trouble accepting; I liked Anton in the short-lived series “Huff” & in “Charlie Bartlett” (Where I’m sure working with Robert Downey, Jr. was an enlightening experience) But Anton isn’t Russian, nor does he possess a manly set of vocal cords. So, yes, Anton had to grow on me after a rocky start of impersonating Walter Koenig’s Chekov’s way of pronouncing vessels as ‘wessels’ & Vulcans as ‘wulcans’ – He endeared himself to me with his mumbling of “I know how to do this, I know how to do this” as he races thru the Enterprises corridors to save Kirk & Sulu.
Zoe Saldana as Uhura; Well, looks-wise, she’s a major improvement (Sorry, Nichelle) but Zoe is the one character I had a bit of a problem with – However it had nothing to do with her acting ability, it had to do with the new direction they took her character – I didn’t approve.
& that leaves last but not least, the one actor I knew well going into this ‘re-structuring’, Simon Pegg as Montgomery Scott; Scotty is the last ‘regular’ to join the team in the film, but he makes up for it by being the most welcomed change – Simon is a comedic actor, so he easily makes Scotty his own while delivering ‘standard’ Scotty lines at the same time.
Now, as all die-hard Star Trek fans know, Kirk is supposed to take command of the Enterprise from a crippled Captain Pike, & Pike(Bruce Greenwood) is involved as a major character, but remember, you Trekkies that can’t accept change, the future for all of these characters is altered when Nero appears – so Captain Pike’s fate is altered as well.
Each character is introduced in a way that reminds you of the original – You’ll find yourself thinking, ‘Oh yeah, that’s ‘Bones’ all right’ – or whatever character is being spotlighted – So credit is to be given to the entire cast for making the transition not only acceptable, but welcomed. I will be looking forward to the next Star Trek film, & that’s something I haven’t said in 23 years!
Great job done by everyone involved, & I have to go along with the ‘sheep’ on this one – Even if you’re not a ‘Star Trek’ fan – if you like your films fast paced & action filled, while still taking some time for character development - I think you will walk out of the theatre saying, “Wow, that was a damn good movie!”
I walked out calling it ‘Spectacular’.

The SOLOIST

“The SOLOIST” (Robert Downey, Jr. & Jamie Foxx)

A film that is both beautiful & ugly, uplifting & depressing, “The Soloist” is a well-crafted (A hate that phrase, but here, it applies) story of two men from entirely different walks of life, meeting by chance and becoming close friends – Albeit ‘unique’ friends, in that one becomes a reluctant ‘God’ to the other.
The pulse here is that friendship – Some might argue that the pulse, or heart of this film is ‘music’, but I would completely disagree. The music for me became a bit of an annoyance in that it was all ‘classical’; I don’t mind it in small increments, in fact I would say I enjoy it in minimal doses, but it dominates the soundtrack – with the exception of 2 Neil Diamond tunes, which I found odd since the film is based in L.A. & Neil was strictly a New Yorker. Neil’s inclusion does make sense with a whimsical scene in which Foxx’s character puts Neil’s picture up thinking it’s a photo of his new friend.
Robert Downey, Jr. plays Steve Lopez... Yeah, I know what you’re thinking, but what did you think when you heard that Robert Downey, Jr. was playing an Australian who becomes a black man? In other words, it doesn’t hurt the story that Downey doesn’t look Latino. Steve is a reporter for the L.A. Times. He suffers a bad fall off his bike in the opening sequence & spends an un-enjoyable evening in the Emergency Room.
Always on the look out for potential stories, Steve hears the plaintive sound of a 2-stringed violin being played... ‘Plaintive’ – I haven’t heard that word since the O.J. trial...
Steve follows the sound & meets an oddly attired homeless man named Nathaniel Anthony Ayers, Jr. who spells his name out for Mr. Lopez, including both the full version of J-u-n-i-o-r and the shorter ‘J – R – period.’
Nathaniel at first appears to be speaking incoherently, his sentences run together endlessly without a moments pause even for a breath. By listening intently, Steve comes to realize that Nathaniel’s ramblings aren’t jibberish at all, he just runs every word together without inserting vocal commas, pauses or periods.
To Steve, Nathaniel is a future column – especially when he checks out the homeless man’s claim that he attended the prestigious Julliard School of Music at one time.
After Steve’s first article on Nathaniel is printed, an aging musician with arthritis donates her cello to Nathaniel so he can have a real instrument to play. This brings about the problem of owning something of value while living on the streets, so Steve helps Nathaniel find shelter. And so the story goes with each column Steve writes, someone else steps forward to offer a helping hand, including a religious music teacher with an ulterior motive.
Although Steve is aware of the fact that the best conclusion to this series is to have Nathaniel return to a ‘normal’ life, the fact is Nathaniel is not mentally equipped to return to normalcy & thus the friendship is tested – Somewhere along the way, the ‘story’ takes a back seat to Steve wanting to help this man get his life back as a promising musician.
Catherine Keener played Steve’s ex-wife & boss who becomes upset with him for making the statement, “I’ve never loved anything as much as he (Nathaniel) loves music!” Keener does an outstanding job of showing how that line hurts her, even though it is spoken by the man she divorced. She then makes a ‘scene’ at an awards ceremony that reveals how she still has special feelings for her ex & that his profound friendship & acclaim are digging away at her as she wonders why he never put forth that much effort to keep their marriage intact.
Acting wise, Downey continues to excel at his craft – I think he’s fantastic, no reason to keep piling on the accolades – the man can virtually do nothing wrong these days. But I need to speak against those that are calling Foxx’s performance weak – Is it because he said something mean to a spoiled teenaged celebrity on his radio show? (Which he also apologized for saying the next day, folks – How many ‘shock jocks’ apologize for ANYTHING they’ve said until their jobs are threatened?)
Yes, Nathaniel, for the most part is a one-note character that doesn’t have a metamorphic change, ala Steve, but it obviously wasn’t easy nailing those ‘rambling’ yet coherent lines. Don’t give the man crap for what he said outside of the realm of acting – I’m the first one to say he didn’t deserve to win an Oscar for ‘Ray’ – Judge him on the merits of his performance – just think of how difficult it must be to act toe-to-toe with Robert Downey, Jr. and not come out looking like the lesser talent? All things considered, I thought Jamie gave one of his better showings & he deserves a pat on the back for this portrayal. Just like all the hoopla over the Miss America bimbo that spoke her mind about gay marriage – Do you people not realize that living in the United States of America means every person has the RIGHT to say what they believe? I don’t agree with what she said either, but she sure has the right to feel that way. I hope she becomes enlightened & changes her mind, but it’s none of my business if she doesn’t... Sorry, had to get that rant off my chest.
As long as I’m in a bitchy mood, my one complaint about this film was the inclusion of a scene that takes an unwarranted pot shot at atheists. Other than that, I found ‘The Soloist’ to be a very touching film. Just for the record, it comes in as my 4th favorite so far in ’09 - #1 SUNSHINE CLEANING
#2 STATE OF PLAY
#3 DUPLICITY
#4 The SOLOIST
#5 INKHEART

STATE OF PLAY

“STATE OF PLAY” (Russell Crowe, Ben Affleck, Rachel McAdams & Helen Mirren)

I have been writing movie reviews for a couple of years now & I’ve found the better the movie, the less entertaining the review – This is going to be one of those bland reviews because ‘State Of Play’ is a very good film. One of those that I really can’t find anything wrong with - Even with Ben Affleck & Jason Bateman in the cast! It is a film in which you have to pay more than a minimal amount of attention in order to follow the plot, but it doesn’t get so overwrought in plot twists & character additions that you lose track even if you’ve been diligent with your focus.
Russell Crowe plays veteran newspaper reporter Cal McAffrey; he is matched with a young ‘blogging’ reporter (Rachel McAdams) when they are both assigned to cover the apparent suicide of a Congressman’s aide. The Congressman, Stephen Collins (Affleck) is Cal’s old college roommate, so it is hoped that Cal can get the inside scoop. One little snag in that plan in that Cal had an affair with the Congressman’s wife (Robin Wright Penn)
By bribing cops with coffee (& I’m sure a donut or two had to be thrown in off-screen) Cal comes into incriminating photos proving that Congressman Collins was having an affair with the deceased aide. There are several impressive bit roles in ‘SOP’; in fact, everyone is at the top of their game here so credit has to be given to director Kevin Macdonald (Who also made the great ‘Last King Of Scotland’)
Affleck actually shines when questioning a sleazy businessman during a congressional hearing, & Jason Bateman, also playing a sleazy character, delivers his best acting performance ever. Jeff Daniels has evolved into a 'bit part' specialist & has become very adept at adding a nice touch to each role.
For a great deal of the film I wondered why Helen Mirren agreed to play the part of McAffrey’s boss, since she had very little to do other than utter the stock line “I’ve got a newspaper to run!” They could have simply inserted scenes of Perry White from the old ‘Superman’ TV series (Complete with ‘Great Caesar’s ghost!’) but it all became clear as to why they needed Helen in that role with her ‘wanker’ line. In a film full of snappy, witty lines, this was by far the most humorous.
And I also wondered what older actor had to drop out at the last minute leading to Affleck being cast in the role of Collins since he looks a little too young to have been Crowe’s college chum & Robin Wright Penn’s husband. But as the clues unravel & twist & turn, it is Crowe that keeps everything glued together. Like my favorite actor, Sean Penn, Crowe may be a bit of a jerk in real life, but there’s no denying the fact that the man is one hell of a good actor. In the hands of someone less talented this film could have easily become bogged down.
Other than a little too long non-chase scene in a parking garage, “State Of Play” moves along at a nice clip & actually takes the time to explain to the viewer what is going on & they don’t pull any surprise endings that don’t make sense, just for the sake of making people say “Well, I never saw THAT coming!”
Should this film & it's actors be remembered at Oscar time? Probably not. But for a late April release, it is VERY high quality.

OBSERVE & REPORT

“OBSERVE & REPORT” (Seth Rogen, Ray Liotta & Anna Faris)

We drove to a theatre & decided we’d make our decision based upon what was playing next – since ‘Adventureland’ wasn’t going to start for 5 hours, ‘Observe & Report’ won out over ’17 Again’.
I can’t say that I liked ‘O & R’, but neither did I dislike it – It was a unique film in that it couldn’t make up its mind as to what it wanted to be – A dark, disturbing black comedy, or a silly, Adam Sandler-ish style dumb comedy without laughs. & there were no lines blurred between the two – it was either one or the other from scene to scene, which in the end made it a piece of crap, really – but like I said, a ‘unique’ piece of crap. I wished they had gone with the dark comedy because that was clearly the most interesting aspect of the film, whereas the dumbed down (Or as the film itself would call them ‘retarded’) scenes just didn’t work at all.
Rogen plays Paul Blart:Mall Cop, who dreams of becoming a ‘real life’ cop. So when Ray Liotta’s detective comes to the mall to investigate the appearance of a perverted flasher that has been molesting women in the parking lot, Blart is literally looking over his shoulder ‘observing’ how an actually police detective conducts an investigation. &, being the egomaniac that he is, Paul constantly questions the detective’s techniques. A potentially interesting plot is created between the two ‘protectors’ of the citizenry, but instead of keeping it taut & edgy, the climactic scene culminates in a stupid mall cop vrs. the entire police force fight scene that is just plain idiotic.
Anna Faris is the ‘pretty & she knows it’ girl that works the cosmetics counter that Blart is infatuated with... I used to like Anna, but last being seen in ‘House Bunny’ & now this; she’s quickly losing her appeal. There’s some nice scenes involving Paul & the shy religious girl that works at the coffee shop, but that possibly interesting angle deteriorates into a bland, predictable finale.
Michael Pena (excellent in ‘Crash’) shows some range playing Blart’s 2nd in command, but just as his character steps into the spotlight, he disappears.
The relationship between Paul & his alcoholic mother showed promise - & if they’d stuck with the ‘feel’ of those scenes throughout the entire movie, they would have had a much better film on their hands – but there isn’t enough of ‘mom’ & way too many scenes of Blart moving in slow motion with his three chins flopping up and down in ripples in some lame attempt to make the chubby mall cop look ‘macho’. Again, this film didn’t have a clue as to what it wanted to be so it was all over the place. Okay, so maybe the several scenes of fat guys (one nude) running endlessly through a mall was ‘supposed’ to be a parody of the genre, but Simon Pegg already wrung all the comedic moments out of that dishrag in “Hot Fuzz”.
But this Paul Blart, unlike the Kevin James’ version, isn’t very likeable – In fact he’s a complete jerk. One wonders of the screenwriter actually ‘wrote’ the dialogue between Blart & an Eastern Indian mall employee, or if the two actors decided to ‘improvise’ saying the words ‘F- You’ to one another a dozen or so times & the director thought that made ‘celluloid magic’ & he kept it in... He couldn’t have been more wrong. It took a long time for me to come around & start finding things to like about ‘O & R’ because that scene (Which I’m sure many 4-6 year olds found hilarious) was so off-putting.
There was a potential good movie here, but it fails due to misguided direction. They should have kept it ‘dark’ throughout & discarded all of the slapstick & ‘look how tough the tubby mall cop is’ scenes. But they didn’t, so it’s a mess.

SUNSHINE CLEANING

“SUNSHINE CLEANING” (Amy Adams, Emily Blunt & Alan Arkin)

This is a marvelous little film about slightly broken people – the fact that they’re not completely broken makes them worthy of caring about. I could relate to the 2 main characters despite their being female. One reason is timing – they both were struggling to find their place in the world from an occupation standpoint & the other reason I won’t reveal here, other than to say they both were haunted by a tragic moment from their past.
Amy & Emily play sisters, Rose & Norah. Rose works as a maid for a housekeeping service & Norah’s temper keeps her from holding a job for any length of time.
Alan Arkin plays their father, who bounces from one money-making scheme to the next. The one drawback I had with the script is the fact that how the tragedy from the past affected ‘Dad’ is never mentioned.
Steve Zahn, proving he can do more than just provide some mild comic relief, plays a smarmy cop who is cheating on his wife with Rose. It is Zahn’s character that suggests to Rose she get into the ‘cleaning up crime scenes’ business. It’s messy, but lucrative...
So Rose & Norah start ‘Sunshine Cleaning’ which leads them from one disgusting crime scene aftermath after another. Along the way they encounter Winston (Clifton Collins, Jr.) who guides them along on the proper way to proceed with their new business. Collins is splendid in the role as his character is required to relate his thoughts through his facial expressions. Without saying a word, we know that Winston thinks Rose is hot & her son is a brat. Besides an obvious shyness, Winston's setback is that he only has one arm & you know that's why he thinks he doesn't stand a chance with Rose.
Rose’s son, Oscar (Jason Spevak) is also slightly ‘off’ center – he’s been expelled from school, so mom starts Sunshine Cleaning in order to earn enough to send him to a private school. There is a very funny scene in which Aunt Norah tells the boy he should proudly wear the badge of ‘bastard’.
Mary Lynn Rajskub, despite playing her normal frowning frumpy dour character, fits into this story perfectly. Norah befriends her after finding her photo among the belongings of a woman that had recently committed suicide.
So often I come out of the theatre telling my wife how I would have altered the film to improve the story – Not so with ‘Sunshine Cleaning’ – Everything is included in the box, including the batteries. In the end, I was alright with the fact that Dad’s background wasn’t explored more – the film centered on the 2 sisters & that’s how it should have been.
I appreciated how the story unfolded as well, Rose makes a very unwise choice to leave her son with Winston, a man she definitely doesn’t know well enough - & yet, it is the seemingly innocent decision to send Norah on a job without her that causes grief.
When Rose shuns her responsibilities to attend an ex-high school friend’s baby shower, she takes the opportunity to brag about her recent accomplishments & then makes an early exit with a beaming smile on her face. Then, like the rest of her life, the joy is short-lived. Maybe it’s due to the fact that the story often reminded me of one that I wrote & that’s why I enjoyed it as much as I did. The acting didn’t hurt either – Amy Adams is fast becoming my favorite actress – to go from ‘Enchanted’ to ‘Doubt’ to this, she is showing the ability to tackle any role & make it believable.
It may take a long time before I stop saying ‘My favorite movie of 2009 is Sunshine Cleaning’. Go see it & I believe you will be very pleasantly surprised that a film about cleaning up after bloody suicide victims could be so entertaining...

I LOVE YOU, MAN

“I LOVE YOU, MAN” (Paul Rudd, Jason Segel & Rashida Jones)

For a movie that’s supposed to be about straight males, this film is more than a little gay. It’s almost like a ‘chick flick’, except that it does have a few comedic moments. Thanks to the likeable Paul Rudd, he overcomes the not-so-likeable Jason Segel. The best part about Segel’s performance is that he kept his pants on this time!
But scenes involving farting in a museum & ‘dudes’ that sit around talking about masturbating... well, let me just say that men from my era didn’t look at other guys’ butts, so we couldn’t tell if they were withholding gas & I have never cared what any of my male buddies whacking techniques are.
The premise as well is very chick flickie – Peter (Rudd) proposes to his girlfriend, Zooey (Rashida Jones) which sets off a discussion among Zooey’s girlfriends as to who Peter might ask to be his best man. They giggle over the fact that his best friend seems to be his mother. Peter’s younger brother is a gay man(Andy Samberg as Robbie) so naturally Peter asks him to set him up with prospective best man material. Adding to the 'eeww!' factor is when Reno 911’s Thomas Lennon ends his man date with Peter by sticking his tongue down Peter’s throat. This would have been slightly humorous if Peter had immediately backed away & let Frenchie know that he didn’t swing that way – Instead – in chick flick fashion - Peter takes all that Frenchie has to give & the tongue lingers inside Peter’s oral cavity for several seconds. To quote an old National Lampoon LP, “That’s Not Funny, That’s Sick!”
With Rudd in the starring role, it’s natural to compare this to “Role Models” & “I Love You, Man” just comes up short in almost every category. The only thing ‘ILY,M’ has in its favor is a delightful send up of a—holes with Jon Favreau’s total d-ckhead character, Barry. I have to admit the only scene that made me laugh out loud was when Peter has an unfortunate projectile vomiting incident. It’s a disgusting, yet funny sight gag that works because it’s unexpected & Barry is such a humungous jerk. Jamie Pressley as Barry’s wife, Denise doesn’t seem to like Barry either. She’s very pretty, but Jamie is either stuck being type-cast, or, she doesn’t have the talent to play any other role than the bitchy wife.
I was hopeful with the casting of J.K. Simmons & Jane Curtin as Dad & Mom, but they really aren’t given any funny lines.
If I had to put my finger on the main reason Segel’s Sydney didn’t work for me, it would have to be that he doesn’t pick up his puppies poop & actually thinks it’s funny when others step in the crap. It seemed he purposely walked the dog on a main walkway, just so the pup wouldn’t have the choice of finding a discreet area to eliminate... I hate those people. Although this movie’s infatuation band is an improvement over Role Model’s Kiss tribute, it just doesn’t work at all. Hearing Rush’s ‘Tom Sawyer” & “Limelight” – probably my 2 favorite songs by them – butchered by Rudd & Segel isn’t my idea of entertainment – If I wanted to hear amateurs sing karaoke, I’d start watching American Idol... & that’s NOT going to happen.
But there is something about Paul Rudd that makes his projects seem better than they look on paper & despite all my little rants here, I didn’t totally dislike this film. It was an ‘okay’ fluff piece for an early Spring release...