Reviews written by registered user
|4 reviews in total|
One has to be, I think, a particularly gifted comedian to adopt an
unlikable, mostly unsympathetic character and still create good comedy.
Few have that skill, and Lisa Kudrow (the one-hit wonder from that
cheese ball "comedy" aimed at teenage girls known as Friends) has none
This is why her show is on Showtime (the HBO for the simple minded, the unemployed, and the farm belt). But even with that easy-to-please audience, there is a snowball's chance in hell that this exercise in comedic mediocrity will be "rewarded" with a second season.
The premise, along with the title, seems to represent a desperate attempt to attach itself to the "hip new worldwide web," no doubt in response to Showtime's understanding of the fact that its subscribers would rather watch cat videos on YouTube, than to watch its low- budgeted, poorly written, and inevitably predictable programming.
My advice to Lisa is that she fall in love with a vampire before Showtime's viewers realize that their money is better spent on a web cam of their own.
Let's face it. Some of those around you are not very bright.
And given the public's ostensible preference for such anti-comedies as "Dude, Where's My Car," and "Big Mama's Barbershop House Party 5," it's wonderful to see a fiendishly clever movie like this. I just saw the movie tonight, and I can't say that I've laughed that consistently throughout a movie since Monty Python's Holy Grail. Sacha Baron Cohen is brilliant, and I hope he makes a truckload of cash for creating what is one of the most daring and ingenious characters I've seen in a long, long time. Mr. Cohen has precisely what it takes to make great satirical comedy: brains, a self-deprecating sense of humor, and lots and lots of chutzpah. He is exactly what we need right now.
If you like Monty Python, or, more recently and more analagously, Christopher Guest's work (This is Spinal Tap, Waiting for Guffman, Best in Show), then Borat is simply a must see. Borat has taken the "mockumentary" format to wonderfully dizzying heights.
Of course, if you are: easily offended, politically correct, not very bright, majored in Gender Studies or Multiculturalism, live in a nursing home, went to publik skool in Alabama, read self-help books, live in Portland or Denver, wear a hair net or name tag to work, practice yoga, take any homeopathic remedies, attend church or synagogue on a weekly basis, live in Kazakhstan or France, celebrate Earth Day, or attend U.C. Berkeley, then you should certainly avoid this movie at all costs.
And if you are forced to see it, despite falling into one of the aforementioned categories, then please don't proceed to register your grievous offense in a public forum. You will look like a boorish jackass who deserves a good flogging.
I give this a 4/10, based on a very simple formula: sophomoric plot +
horrible acting = bad movie. First, the plot. Without giving anything
away, suffice it to say that a distracted young chimp could anticipate
each of the so-called twists. Now, the acting. With the exception of
Montegna, who is the only remotely believable character, the
performances wouldn't pass muster at a community theater in the
outskirts of Boise, Idaho. Several lines/scenes are downright comical.
My only defense of the movie is that it may have been adapted from a play, because that's what it felt like - a group of mediocre stage actors, directed by a 20-year old drama major, collectively trying to muddle their way through their first film. The bottom line is that this flick certainly doesn't warrant the relatively high rating that the IMDb audience gives it. It misses the mark so badly, in fact, that it makes me question the credibility of the rating system itself.
I want my 2 hours back, and if your I.Q. is over 100, chances are that you will too.
The plot started out rather interesting, and I have to say that the camera work, along with much of the editing, was also rather good. But wow, does it go downhill fast. Cary Elwes delivers one of the single worst performances I've ever seen from an actor over the age of 8. Some of his moments are laugh out loud funny, he's so egregiously bad. He should be embarrassed, given all the acting experience he's had. Leigh Whannell, with much less experience, is better, but only marginally. Some of his moments are also laughably bad. Together with a plot that quickly becomes insipid, and dialog that sounds as if it were written by a high school dropout, Saw is a pathetic example of its genre. More than that, the favorable reviews of it here on IMDb are an example of how idiotic the movie watching public has become. I can't believe Danny Glover associated himself with this. He should summarily fire his agent.