Skip to main content

The Hangover - Haven't seen it. Already have a problem with someone else about it

By

Where I take Richard Corliss to task over his critique of a movie I have never seen.


I'm not one to argue. No would label me a dissenter. I stick to the status quo and rarely cause trouble or rabble rouse. And while none of these statements are technically true I thought they would help in gaining, you the reader's, trust before I go off on Time's Richard Corliss for his review of The Hangover.

I haven't even seen the movie yet and I already have a problem with something someone wrote about it. Does that say I don't have a life and need to find a better Friday night/ Saturday morning activity? Probably. Does Corliss need to be taken to task? Most assuredly.

In his review of The Hangover, after admitting that its Rotten Tomatoes rating is a stunning 85%, he questions the producer's (or studios) choice of actors. To quote Mr. Corliss:

You want to make a comedy about guys who learn the true meaning of bromance on a horrible weekend in Vegas, but you can't spend a lot of money on talent. Which actors do you cast? The leading role of Phil, the smart, energetic audience surrogate, might have suited Jim Carrey or Vince Vaughn, so go with Bradley Cooper, who was Carrey's pal in Yes Man and Vaughn's preppie torturer in Wedding Crashers. Steve Carell would have been perfect for Stu, the amiable, henpecked dentist; but Ed Helms, Carell's cohort on The Daily Show and The Office, costs so much less. Now for Alan, the roly-poly cute guy with a surfeit of energy and a sociopathic streak: can't afford Jack Black, give stand-up comic Zach Galifianakis a chance. OK, we got ourselves a movie!
Look, I like Corliss. I am one of the few, under age 35 people with an actual Time Magazine subscription so I read his movie reviews regularly. (Not like I couldn't on the internet for free). But this criticism is just plain stupid. Lambasting a studio for not casting the world's most popular comedic actors (sorry Will Ferrell) for every single role in a movie and blaming the studio for chincing out on said talent? WTF? Short of Ocean's Ten Eleven Twelve whatever, what movie does this? None.

And besides that, does a casting of these actors help the overall movie? Probably not. Consider if any one of those actors is cast in any one of the roles (much less all of them). What does the movie become? A Carrell, Vaughn, Carry, Black vehicle without any of the inherent "bromance" because movies like this work when the actors are all on even footing. Its funny because each actor is just popular enough in their own right. They are all sitting in that in between "that guy" and "I love that guy" phase. thats what makes these kind of ensembles work so well. No actor steals the spotlight from the other and more importantly, the writers don't feel pressured (or obligated) to hand more scenes off to the star. Instead it becomes exactly what was intended, a "bromance."

Like I said, I haven't seen The Hangover though I intend to. but without even viewing the movie I can tell Corliss's review is massively off base. Condemning a movie for not hiring every (or even any) big name actor is like telling the Tampa Bay Rays they shouldn't have been in the World Series last year because Arod or Pujols wasn't on the team. It doesn't make any kind of sense. If you thought the movie was bad, fine. If you want all of your favorite guys in one movie? That's a different story.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Office - Cafe Disco

By
The Office hasn't been the same since Michael came back. At least that's his claim and it precipitates the inception of the "party room." Who wouldn't love this in their job? A room where they played techno music and everyone raved all day? Scratch that, I would hate it. Michael doesn't have the same connection with the larger staff at Dunder Mifflin as he had with his workforce of three at Michael Scott Paper (Pam and Ryan). He yearns for the same connectivity and tries to achieve it through exxpresso (sic) and house music at annoyingly loud decibels. He turns the old Michael Scott Paper into a meet-and-greet disco type place for office workers to kick back and relax. Unfortunately, no one can take it easy with Michael around. Nor do they want to. It isn't until Michael gives up all hope of the space that the two Kelly's (secretary and customer service) take it over and make it into the party atmosphere Michael dreamed off. I loved how th...
Post a Comment
Read more

Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia - The Gang Exploits the Mortgage Crisis

By
This summer Mrs. Channelup was dying to see "The Nightman Cometh," Its Always Sunny's broadway-esque rendition of the Charlie's season 3 ending play. I balked, but now regret it to some degree. The gang would have probably made a fairly hilarious spectacle. It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia is like Curb Your Enthusiasm for the young, drunk and stupid crowd. I mean this is the best possible sense. The formula of Ridiculous premise + inane ranting dialogue + actors and actresses that can pull it off = comedy fucking gold. There aren't many funnier shows on television. Consider tonight's season premiere where Dee strives to become a surrogate mother strictly for the cash and residual benefits while the rest of the gang exploits a family foreclosing on their home. Does any other show make so much light of two topics more unfunny? That the gang is too stupid to pull either ploy off makes the show that much better. I always wonder how much of Its Alwa...
5 comments
Read more

Parks and Recreation - The Stakeout

By
Leslie is such a active member of the the Pawnee landscape that she literally has started a community garden in the vacant pit. Can you blame someone for growing pot in said garden? I cannot. The Stakeout was an interesting episode for Parks and Recreation . I liked it for a couple of reasons. for starters, it featured considerably less Leslie Knope. This is a positive move considering the writer's seeming over reliance on her character. Tonight's episode spread the wealth in such a way that I didn't feel The Stakeout was about any particular character but instead about the cast as a whole. It was about everyone and no one all at once. Mark and Ann's date, Tom's idiocy in the name of racial profiling, Ron's hernia, and Andy's decent into the literal pit of hell. I liked The Stakeout for it uniformity. A couple of other notes on the episode. It isnt easy making a guy just sitting totally still and doing nothing funny. Damned if Ken Tremendous and the...
Post a Comment
Read more