Watching a movie
you hate is a funny thing. You’re sitting there, almost in shock of what’s
happening. You debate leaving the theater, but can’t stop to take your eyes off
the train wreck. You fool yourself with possible hints of redemption, and then
anxiously try to laugh it off when the film let’s you down yet again. And then,
at some point, you try to retrace your steps and figure out where it all went
wrong.
I say “you” but
I mean me, because what I’ve just described are only a handful of the feelings
that moved through me as I watched Judd Apatow’s new, impossibly frustrating,
hopelessly revolting film This is 40.
I’m not quite
sure how to best make my case here, but I suppose the film’s comedy (or
complete and utter lack thereof) is a good place to start. This is 40 is not funny. It certainly tries to be, and thinks it is, but the only laughs I had
(and everyone else in my theater) were the anxious ones I described earlier. I
feel no need to harp on this issue or slam my point home: the film simply is
not funny, but, to its credit, it doesn’t continuously try to be, either. Many
of the film’s scenes are extended arguments between Pete and Debbie, and, for
the most part, they are written and played out well. That is, until the
material seriously lets the actors down, and a realistic domestic disturbance
turns into a crude, last ditch attempt at humor to help break whatever
believable tension has been built. The comedy of this film is nonexistent, and
the drama consistently fails.
If that were
all, then we’d have a pretty shitty film on our hands. But sadly there is more.
Specifically a handful of scenes that I simply cannot ignore and will do my
best to present succinctly.
At some point in
the movie, Pete and Debbie are reading the Facebook messages their oldest
daughter, Sadie (who is 13) has been sending and receiving from a boy (who is
also 13, or younger) in her class. The messages basically end with the boy
calling Sadie a bitch (which, for the record, is presented like “Yo, leave me alone
biatch,” as opposed to something harsher, but anyway). Later in the film,
Debbie runs into that boy at Sadie’s school, and ends up telling him, in
private, that if he messes with Sadie again, Debbie will find him and “fuck him
up.” The boy flees, terrified and crying. Later, Pete runs into the boy’s
mother, Catherine (played by Melissa McCarthy) and Pete eventually tells her
that if the boy comes around again, Pete will “hit him with my car.” (The boy
hears all of this, by the way.)
The utterance of
these phrases is a criminal offense. Period. Yes, I’m well aware that Judd
Apatow wrote, directed and released his film before everyone in the world was
aware of Newtown, Connecticut for the worst reason possible. But it’s still appalling
behavior, especially when it is for comedic purposes. To top off the matter,
Catherine, Pete and Debbie are soon brought into the principal’s office to
resolve the issue. Catherine states her case by telling the truth, that both
Pete and Debbie physically threatened her child and should be punished (perhaps
criminally). Pete and Debbie lie their way out of it, pitting Catherine as a
compulsive liar and slob. The way the scene plays out is easily one of the most
offensive movie scenes I have ever witnessed. Basically, because Catherine is
overweight and crass, the principal ends up taking Pete and Debbie’s side. Yes,
Catherine’s weight is mentioned specifically. Yes, her foul language is as
well. But holy shit, what is Apatow saying here? Hey parents, it’s okay to
threaten the life of a little kid, as long as you blame it on the fat woman? Are
you fucking kidding me?
Now, as of
late, there has been a lot of talk concerning overtly negative movie criticism
among my circle of digital friends. Many think that the oft harshness toward contemporary
films on blogs and Twitter is extreme and unnecessary. And I’ll admit, there
have been a few times that I have relentlessly and rather pointlessly thrashed
a movie on this blog. No, I did not like those films at all, but perhaps I took
my negativity a little too far, which isn’t fair to my readers, or the film.
That’s something I’ve gotten better about over this past year. But, on the
flipside, if I know I want to review a film, then I’m going to review that
film. And fair is fair and I think I’m damn fair. Later this afternoon, I’m
going to see the Naomi Watts-starring The
Impossible, and if I think it’s a masterpiece, I’ll say so. But if I think
it’s exploitative, sentimental trash, I’ll say that too. I love Tarantino, but
if I find Django Unchained to be
discriminatory and ridiculous, then I’ll tell you, and I’ll tell you fairly.
My point is, I
had nothing against This is 40. No
preconceived notions, no hopes, no fears – no nothing. I was just a guy looking
to take his girlfriend on a movie date. And I honestly think I’ve been fair in
this review. I’ve hammered home my distaste for the film, but hopefully not to
the point of desensitization. Because the fact remains, This is 40 is one of the most worthless, vile, and idiotic films I
have seen in many years. Do I think Apatow was intentional in his offensiveness?
No, I do not. Do I think he’s a filmmaker who needs a serious career
reexamination? Yes, I do. I know it’s the time of year for giving and it’d
probably be a little more polite to be all holly jolly and cut the film a
little slack, but, come to think of it, that just wouldn’t be fair. F
I didn't passionately hate this as much as you, but I strongly disliked it as it was simply not funny majority of the time (I had some laughs though, which I guess I should be thankful for after reading this review!)
ReplyDeleteI had no expectations either, I didn't even realise what movies Apatow had directed apart from Knocked Up, but I found myself so frustrated, more-so at my boredom and how long the film was rather then it's morale lows. Still, they are there and it was a very frustratingly poor film for mine.
I'm not sure why so many have loved it. Originally I thought it was bias for Apatow but I know a lot of people have liked it so I'm at a loss really.
Good review Alex! As you said in your last two paragraphs, if you hate a film so much there is no point sugarcoating it!
Thanks so much for this comment, Alex. I know you enjoyed it more than I did, so I appreciate you voicing your opinion in a constructive way here.
DeleteAnyhow, I'm kind of stunned that people are loving this too, but hell, we like what we like, and we certainly hate what we hate. No argument from me either way, but damn, did I hate this film.
Great review, Alex. I have NEVER felt inclined to leave a movie early before seeing "This is 40." I saw no redeaming qualities in the characters, and the plot, wait - what plot? Having a family scream at each other for no apparent reason hurt my ears. The most nonsensical scene to me was Debbie confronting her store employee at a coffee shop and the girl apparently being high. It was bizarre and I wondered if I was the one tripping...
ReplyDeleteI hope your review saves a few people the $10 movie ticket.
Ha, thanks! Wasn't that scene you mentioned just batshit nuts? I mean, what the fuck was the point of that entire subplot anyway? It added nothing to anything. But I guess that can describe most of the subplots of this film, at least in my eye.
DeleteI've never left a movie in my life, but I was damn close here. Damn close.
Jesus! I feel like an ass for giving this one an 8, but really, I had a good time with this one. I laughed a lot and I felt real sense of heartfelt emotion towards these characters, even though they did fight a lot and never reconcile. Good review Alex. I guess I'm just too much of a Apatow fan to begin with.
ReplyDeleteHey man, don't ever feel like an ass for giving any movie any grade you give it. My go-to argument for things like this is that we like what we like and we hate what we hate. This movie in no way worked for me, but you dug it, so fair enough!
DeleteLol, this is one of the funniest reviews I've read all year round. I'm just not going to bother with any Apatow movies. The only decent film of his was The 40-Year-Old Virgin and even that I didn't like as much as I expected to. I do love some of the movies he's a producer of, however (Bridesmaids, The Five-Year Engagement). Either he makes a conscious effort to improve upon his films, which have become far too similar and predictable, or he just lets/helps other directors make better movies.
ReplyDeleteHa, thanks man. The thing is, with the exception of Funny People, which I did not like at all, I'm a big Apatow fan. I really dig his style of comedy. Love 40-Year-Old Virgin, like Knocked Up, and really dig Forgetting Sarah Marshall and a handful of others. Occasionally, his comedy can come off as stale, and his drama forced. But never have I found it offensive. Until now. Oh well.
DeleteWow, and I was wondering if you saw The Hobbit what would be the reaction... I've gotten so much warning from friends on this one that it has become ridiculous. So, I think I'll just skip this one. But, I think this is a good opportunity to ask which is worse, a movie like this that induces hate, or one that makes you indifferent? I'll say if induces hatred then it at least it induced a reaction, perhaps not the one the filmmakers wanted, but a reaction nonetheless. If a film just doesn't make you care about anything happening on the screen, i.e. the aforementioned Hobbit, I think it's thousand times worse and a true waste of time. You might as well have stared at a wall for the same amount of time. At least you felt something in the end, more than watching paint dry. For instance, there are movies that I "hate" on a technical and story-level a lot worse than The Good Shepard, (hello Spielberg's A.I...) but for the films entire running time I couldn't care less to what was going on. Given the talent involved an astonishing complete waste of time and space.
ReplyDeleteObviously, I'm very inclined to tell you to skip it. There's nothing I can do to recommend it.
DeleteVery interesting question you proposed there. Tricky argument: indifference is deadly, but hate is hate. If I'm indifferent toward a movie, then it's just a shrug of the shoulders, and a little griping over lost time. But hate, to me, is infinitely worse. Sure, it's a very strong feeling, but I don't like hating works of art placed in a medium that I absolutely love. To be perfectly honest, I'd say that the majority of the films I see (the new films, that is) provoke indifference in me.
I'm just not a hateful person, you know? I don't like to hate movies, so when I do, I'm pissed.
(Also, you couldn't pay me to see The Hobbit. Not my thing. I'm fairly certain I'd... hate it.)
I thought the film was very average overall, but I definitely see where you are coming from with your strong dislike for it. I found Debbie and Pete to be rather annoying humans who instead of communicating with each other, hid things and told lies. We're then supposed to feel sorry for them when it blows up in their faces? I'm sorry, but they dug their own ditch. Also - this film was criminally over-long. Holy shit Apatow, hire an editor.
ReplyDeleteGreat review Alex - don't ever stop calling it how you really see it.
Thanks for the support here, Sam. I really do appreciate it. I always get a little nervous when posting such a negative review, and your "don't ever stop calling it how you really see it," really relieved some of my anxiousness. So thanks.
DeleteI'm hesitant to discuss the faults I had with this movie, because I don't think it'd ever end, and would have me looking like a fucking loon. But, yes, I agree with everything you said, only my hate heightens it drastically. Moving on from this one!
Wow... I knew reviews were mixed about the film but fuck.... you killed it.
ReplyDeleteI did managed to read a copy of Judd Apatow's script. There were moments that I thought were good but some material I felt needed to be cut out. I was wary about the running time though I don't usually have problems with long films. Yet, I think Apatow wants to be all sorts of things but has no idea what to do.
Thank you for saving me the money to not go see this. I've already decided to go see Django Unchained for tomorrow and Les Miserables for the weekend, hopefully with The Impossible if it's playing in the same theater.
Really couldn't help myself man. I was tempted to just not review it and move on, but if a film so seriously offends me, then I feel compelled to share.
DeleteI'm glad I could save you some $$ to be spent on presumably far better flicks!
This wasn't on my list to see, mostly because after limping through Knocked Up, I felt no urge to revisit any of those characters.
ReplyDeleteMore broadly, there is one critical rule of entertainment:
Comedy is hard.
It's easy to make dick and fart jokes, but I'm not going to laugh at them. Because I'm not eleven years old. Maybe I'm just a stick in the mud, but puerile "humor" just isn't funny, at least to me. Bridesmaids? Same garbage, different gender. The equality is nice, I suppose. Almost everything recent by SNL grads - not funny. It's not sharp enough, it has to be slowed down so that mass audiences can digest it. But good comedy doesn't wait for you like that. It says keep up or miss the joke.
Of all the good movies (and tv) that I encounter, almost none of them are comedies. I'm trying to think of anything from the last decade that really made me laugh hard... Aristocrats, but that's really more about deconstructing one joke. Inevitably, I sit and wonder, why am I watching this and not anything by the Marx brothers, or Dr. Strangelove, for the umpteenth time? (TV is the same wasteland - I can't get through Happy Endings without hitting pause, I'm laughing so hard, but everything else I could live without.)
As a writer, I happily admit that comedy is hard. As hell. Much harder than drama. That's why I don't write comedy. Ha.
DeleteIt's funny... I really loved Bridesmaids, but aside from that, this new trend of American comedy has completely lost me. Farting, dicking, sucking, fucking - it's just not there. It's a tough racket for comedy right now, at least for those of us who don't enjoy crass humor, and many many people do, so that's fair enough. Who the hell knows.
ouch. yeah it wasn't great. i didn't think it was terrible though, like you did. i thought the intention was there, and the performances were as well. but it got stale after the first 45 minutes. it was all jokes and no real story off of which to base a full movie. real disappointment.
ReplyDeleteLike I said, I don't think Judd Apatow is a masochist. I think his intentions were (and always are) good. But this one really didn't work, on so many levels for me. I enjoyed your review a lot, and yeah, I'm fairly certain no one will hate it as much as me. Ha. Oh well!
DeleteWow, this might be the biggest discrepancy between our tastes ever. I liked this. Quite a lot.
ReplyDeleteBrother man, you know how highly I respect your opinion. Regarding film, life - everything. But like I said on Sam's site, can you help me understand something: (and please please please don't take this as me being condescending, I promise I'm not). But how is two adults physically threatening the life of a child funny? Or was it not supposed to be funny? If it wasn't, then what was the point of that whole ordeal? And then to go and blame it on the fat woman... I mean... I just don't understand how that's excusable. But I know that's just me. (sigh) Who knows.
DeleteI completely understand your response to that sequence and the film as a whole Admittedly I did laugh at how crazy those sequences got (something I feel a guilty about now) but they were a tangent that could have been left out all together. I guess they were left in because of Melissa McCarthy. I enjoyed the sequences when the couple are at home or at work, or with family. I felt a lot of it was really honest and stripped bare - real pressures being handled immaturely by the couple. I wanted them to work it out and there were times I was quite moved. And I found myself laughing more than I expected. I absolutely respect your opinion too - and it is a film that has received very mixed reviews, but some of their atrocious behaviour aside, I enjoyed the couple of hours with them.
DeleteYou definitely seemed to take away what Apatow wanted people to take away from it. I read an interview that he wanted it to feel like a "slice of life," with all its randomness and complexities. And I guess you dug that part of it. Just not for me!
DeleteYikes! Though I'm not a big fan of Apatow's films, I do like Paul Rudd's work in them. If I can squeeze this one in, I will, but I won't make it a priority.
ReplyDeleteI mean... do what feels right, my friend haha. I'm honestly not a fan of Paul Rudd's, as an actor. I think he's a really cool, down to Earth guy, but as an actor, he has one role, which I just don't like. (Admittedly so does Woody Allen, and Edward Burns... but those work for me more often than not.)
DeleteThe only thing worse than Apatow trying to bring his movies "to another level" are people whining about negativity in reviews. Good God. If I spent 2-3 hours of my precious time on something that turns out to be a bad movie, why shouldn't I be allowed to review it a way I see fitting? Honestly, people behaving like the only thing movie fans should do is praising movies are reasons why I stopped following certain blogs lately.
ReplyDeleteAbout Apatow - he used to put obnoxious little serious scenes in his comedies at the end of them but lately he seems to be doing it more and more, trying to shoot something "deeper" than just a funny movie. It appears he finally failed completely. Making Leslie Mann and Paul Rudd into something other than charming and likable is an accomplishment, and not a good one :(
I knew you'd be with my on the movie negativity argument. And that's a really good point... if I've spent 2 hours watching something I loathed, then I should have the right to say about it whatever I'd like. I don't think hating a movie means you hate movies. It just means you hated that movie. So I'm with you.
DeleteYeah, Apatow has always tried to slide in those dramatic scenes, and they've never fully worked for me, but I did appreciate his effort. Here, nothing worked for me whatsoever. A complete disaster.
Went into this film a bit cautious after seeing your review, but I had a great time with it, it coaxed a lot of laughs out of me and I loved all the cultural throwbacks to Lost, Mad Men and the music Pete listens to. But comedy is the most subjective genre of film and I feel that with this film it will please Apatow fans and do nothing to convince people who dislike him.
ReplyDeleteWell hey, I'm glad you found it worthy of your time. That's really what it's all about, you know? I didn't mean for my review to articulate that I'm not a fan of Judd Apatow. I am, a great deal in fact. I think he's partly responsible for the best show on television (Girls), and I love The 40-Year-Old Virgin and Knocked Up. This is 40 was just a huge fail for me. But oh well!
DeleteOk, I hope I can explain this right, but those scenes regarding yelling at the kid and the confrontation with Melissa McCarthy and so forth I liked in theory. ONLY in theory. I think Apatow's point of the film - and I honestly don't even know if he REALIZED it was the point - is how poor these two are as parents. Right? And that whole tangent with the kid and the parent underscores that point, I thought, in a really hardcore, really bold way. The problem, however, is that then Apatow completely lets them off the hook without that whole tangent properly coming back to bite them in the ass or wake them the hell up to how they're parenting.
ReplyDeleteI think if Apatow had any real sense of craft he could make tougher movies but he just doesn't know how. He still just writes in sketches.
I think your comment is very fair. And I can see that being the point of the film, but I'd also agree that that wasn't Apatow's point of the film. Your idea of Apatow still just writing in sketches is spot on to me. Did you review this one? I'd love to read it.
DeleteMaybe that's part of his problems? His movies are so long and chock full there ends up being NO point? Maybe he just needs to take a screenwriting course on the weekends.
DeleteHere's my review of it. http://www.anomalousmaterial.com/movies/2013/01/scattered-this-is-40-is-a-two-hour-2nd-act/
HA! Yes, maybe he does indeed need to do that. Off to scope your review now. Thanks for linking.
DeleteI finally saw this movie last night and absolutely hated it. Mostly because the characters are so hate-able- was this intentional? Are we *supposed* to hate them? Everybody was a self-absorbed yuppie. The only part I enjoyed was when Paul Rudd gets punched in the stomach by the guy who rightfully was upset that he didn't watch where we was biking.
ReplyDeleteGlad I'm not alone on this one. Honestly man, I don't remember a whole hell of a lot about this movie. I tried to push it as far out of my mind as possible. But yes, I do not remember seeing a shred of a redemptive quality in any of the characters. Yuck.
Delete