|Index||9 reviews in total|
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
i hesitated a little when i read the reviews, only one said it was funny, i decided to trust that one guy and gave it a shot considering it had a nice cast. it wasn't the greatest comedy but then again, which one is? it was a nice comedy,with funny situation and specially funny shots.. i don't understand reviewers here.. is a comedy!! many sexual references, unexpected situations, but in the other hand some really obvious scenarios too, which is why it reminded me of the Farrelly brothers movies and for me that makes it a little original.. and of course, you cannot miss "Waterworld the Musical" that alone makes it worth your while.. watch it and write your own review... enjoy!
I wasn't expecting much seeing the IMDb rating for this title, after
watching it I'm learning more and more not to trust the ratings. The
film is really dam funny.
The outlook preserves it to be a chick flick but id put this more towards a bro's film if anything. The humour is guy only mostly and goes pretty far. Good old Frainces (MOTM) plays the lead really well and i was pleased to see him in a better roll=). The film goes on a steady beat of good jokes and comedic ac scenes and the directors successfully made it easier to concentrate on the context going on imbertween.
The film was a though a enjoyment to me and id recommend it to anyone else within its age rating.
Look, if you don't get the jokes then you don't have a sense of humor!
Every scene has a joke and it's a laugh out loud comedy throughout.
The acting isn't great but it's deliberate and adds immensely to the humor so if your all big on the acting quality then just loosen up for this film.
Why this wasn't a box office hit and didn't make a killing in sales I will never know. If this film had had a larger budget it would have been seen by many as one of the comedies of the past 10 years. In short, if you want a laugh then watch this, it never gets old no matter how many times you watch it.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Made For Each Other is pretty much like a live action version of the
cartoon show Family Guy, except not one of the good episodes. This is
like one of those Family Guy shows where you become convinced that Seth
MacFarlane has gotten too rich and is just mailing it in. This film is
the same non-stop avalanche of gags, flashbacks and cutaways, but most
of them aren't funny and more than a few leave you wondering how they
were supposed to be funny in the first place. During this whole movie,
I laughed only twice when it randomly veered off into some inspired
lunacy. The rest of the time, I self-satisfyingly smirked at how forced
and awful it all is.
Dan (Christopher Kennedy Masterson) is a newlywed who hasn't had sex with his wife (Bijou Phillips) in the three months since their wedding and everyone in town knows about it. Let me stop right here because the previous line gets at the heart of what's wrong with Made For Each Other. How does everyone in town know Dan isn't getting any? Not only is their no explanation, there's no possible explanation. More importantly, why does everyone know? It doesn't make sense and serves no purpose other than to facilitate a handful of lame jokes in a script already bursting with them. It immediately creates this cartoonish (in a bad way) sensibility that undercuts every following attempt at exaggerated or absurd humor. Most importantly, the whole plot of this movie turns on a secret plan of Dan's and another secret of his wife's. If everybody knows about Dan's embarrassing marital trouble, why don't they know about the other two secrets? Comedy, even at its more skewed and bizarre, needs an internal logic and reality. Without it, it takes absolutely razor sharp, brilliant wit that can stand independent of character and circumstance. The wit of Made For Each Other is about as sharp as an egg and as brilliant as a cast member of Teen Mom or The Jersey Shore.
Anyway, the sexually frustrated Dan winds up boinking his sister-in-law (Lauren German) and turns to his loser group of friends for advice. His buddy Mike (Samm Levine) suggests maneuvering Dan's wife into cheating on him, thereby inclining her to forgive his infidelity. Dan turns to an atrociously conceited traveling actor (Patrick Warburton) to do the deed, comes to regret that decision and things kind of dribble off after that. Oh, and Mike winds up screwing Dan's mom and then lying about being gay to cover it up. Yup, that's right. Straight guy awkwardly pretending to be gay is considered to be comedy gold in this thing.
Unlike a shockingly large number of alleged comedies, Made For Each other makes a concerted effort at being funny. It makes more attempts at humor in 5 minutes than many low-budget indy flicks do in their entire run time. But the overwhelming majority of them not only fall flat, they burrow into the ground like a frightened gopher. Let me give you another example. When Dan goes to meet the conceited actor, he first has to deal with the actor's imperious assistant (Debargo Sanyal). The assistant is first presented to the audience as this pretentious hanger on who thinks the actor is a great man and derives his own sense of importance from being a great man's assistant. Before the scene is over, the assistant has become a bitter ball of resentment who knows the actor is a buffoon and seethes at being subservient to him. Now, if the character had been played one way or the other consistently, that may have been funny. If he started out one way and later on, after the movie set up the joke, his real personality came out, that may have been funny. To have the character's personality do a 180 degree flip in the middle of his first scene, for no reason whatsoever, isn't funny. It's stupid.
That's what Made For Each Other is like. There's no design or form or even intent to its humor. It's a bunch of guys who think they're funny flailing around on screen, while other guys who think they're funny flail around behind the camera. Now, I did laugh twice during this movie and it's possible others might get a guffaw or giggle out of stuff like a musical version of Waterworld of the inscrutable accent of Dan's sister-in-law. Mostly though, this is the sort of motion picture that leaves you sitting in your chair, thinking "Even I could do better than this". Skip it.
What a beautiful comedy! Me no get how come so few people liked it. I can understand how this couldn't be a big office hit... Its too much for bible belt America but that people here wouldn't give positive reviews? Yes it contains some sexual twists but it manages not to be vulgar as opposed to mainstream "comedies"of Dane Cook which I find tasteless. He uses sex and nudity purely to shock. This film takes on a difficult task of sex parody and does that with superb sense of humor... Enjoyed it immensely, a breath of fresh air in a vulgar obscene movie industry... And yeah, one needs a little sense of humor as well as intelligence to "get it"... Well done cast and crew! A gem...
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This movie suffers from two major problems, which are the core
ingredient of every comedy: - bad actors - with the worst definitely
being the stocky co-worker of the lead character and the assistant of
the diva - horrible verbal and situational humor (a running gag are the
barbecue-sauce smeared faces of the characters interacting)
I don't care so much about the plot, which is typically lame for comedies. It's more about what happens in between.
It's a movie for a really simple audience, with humor revolving around the following sub-topics: cheating, little people, homosexuality, anal sex, fetishes (e.g. for elderly people/nursing uniforms), buddy-ism, actor's diva-ism, slapstick and chicken wings. Out-of-place interludes (not the Family Guy ones) and boring flashbacks are also very common in this flick.
Don't get me wrong, I like nudity, obscenity etc. in comedies, but it has to be put together in an intelligent manner. And some scenes really had potential here. For example, when the neighbors prepare a tape for the lead character to show him how anal sex can make a relationship work and the lead character bends down - looking for the batteries of the remote - and it looks at if neighbor is getting it on with the guy: This could have been a really good scene had it been placed in a more social situation, e.g. in an office environment shortly before a meeting. Instead, its just some out-of-place scene within a movie that seems made up of scenes like that.
Also, don't be lured in by the in Malcolm-in-the-middle actor - Christopher Masterson. I know that he did a great job in the show, but that show also had a plot, many great actors and the right balance between verbal and situational humor. While Masterson does some OK acting in this movie, its just not enough to save this horrible movie. Do me a favor, don't make the same mistake I did - listen to the reviews and don't watch this movie.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I muddled through only because I wanted to see the local scenery on
celluloid. It was cool to see Bridgeport's Playhouse on the Green, The
People's Bank building, Ralph and Rich's, Hi-Ho, Beardsley Park, etc,
but the acting and writing were atrocious. When are anal sex jokes and
the 'f' word (used to describe gay men) funny? Why did the Mastersons
make this film? Surely the script wasn't better before they began
filming! Perhaps they owed some people some big favours.
And I still haven't forgiven the production crew for making me think we had a toy store coming to Bridgeport (before I realized it was part of a movie set).
This movie was labeled "comedy", which makes me kind of wonder really,
now that I have just watched it.
Let me start off by saying that the movie has sort of an adequate story. It isn't overly compelling or super interesting, but it does have its moments, and it never really sinks into a boring phase. But the story is not what makes the movie good.
The best part about this movie was all the quirky characters that are portrayed in the movie. They are what carries this movie and keeps it at a bearable level. There are so many crazy things and weird concepts to the characters, that they actually work well.
As for the cast, well I think that was an adequate cast, and most actually did perform well enough in the roles they were given.
Now, as for the movie being labeled as a comedy that strikes me odd, because I didn't even laugh once throughout the entire movie. I think I might have smiled once or twice, but that was about it.
The movie wasn't an utter waste of time, but if you sit down to watch it with the intention of being entertained and made to laugh, then you will be sorely disappointed. I am not saying that you should stay clear of this movie, just know that it is not really a comedy in the traditional sense. If you like Danny Masterson or Christopher Masterson, then sit down to watch the movie, because they actually did well in this movie, despite having little to work with.
I have no idea how this movie has a good rating. Everything required
from a comedy to be good is non existent in this movie. The jokes are
bad, the story is bad, the acting is bad and its completely unoriginal.
Usually when watching comedies I don't particularly care for originality as long as the film is funny but this film is not. The way each scene connects and pieces together makes the story and script feel like it was written by someone who failed at primary school English and then dropped out.
If you have a slight bit of intelligence you will find this movie extremely boring to watch. Each scene is more boring than the last and although you may chuckle at the lowest possible decibel at one point in the movie, that is about as good as it gets.
Save yourself the time and boredom. Do not watch this movie
|Plot summary||Ratings||External reviews|
|Parents Guide||Official site||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|