The reviews have been fantastic, so we went to see it yesterday.
OK, it wasn’t horrible…but it was hardly a burst-your-spleen laugh-fest either. Mostly predictable storyline, a couple of funny lines, rare full frontal male nude scenes for a main-stream film and some nice scenic shots of Hawaii.
However, there was lots of dead space, some strange cinematography where they often didn’t get the characters centered on screen (2% of the hair on the top of their heads was lopped off - as if just a bit too close up and didn’t realize it until later) and there were a few moments where the film turned into maudlin soap opera.
Still, when it comes out on DVD you might want to take a look - but no need to dash off to the movie theater to see this one.
The main thing I keep hearing about it is a record setting amount of male frontal for a mainstream film (though not of anybody you’d particularly want to see naked).
The framing problems had to be the projectionist at your particular theater. I didn’t notice any issues when I saw it.
I thought it was screamingly funny, but…as with all comedy, your mileage may vary. I was kept amused through most of it, and one particular line made me laugh so hard I nearly peed myself.
It was “chick flick” with a guy in the lead, so it had to follow the conventions of the genre. Every man in this film was playing a role that might as well have been played by a woman. Jason Segel was playing the role that might normally be played by Cameron Diaz or Julia Roberts. I loved it, but then again, I’m a guy who loves “chick flicks” (and my wife loves Hong Kong action flicks. She saw “Fight Club” before I did. Am I lucky or what? )
I’m going to see it tonight. My girl and I both love 40-Year-Old Virgin and Knocked Up, although I liked Superbad and Walk Hard a lot more than she did. Somehow I have a feeling she’s going to like this one more than I will.
Saw it earlier, laughed a lot. I found parts of it terribly depressing, though, and most of the Apatow movie protagonists make me take long evaluations of my own life to see if I’m the same kind of affable loser schmucks that they are – Carell in Virgin, Rogen in Knocked Up, and now Segel in this movie. I don’t think I’m quite as loserish as they are/were, which makes me feel somewhat better (although I was definitely Michael Cera’s Superbad character back in high school).
Anyway, the highlights of Sarah Marshall were seeing all the Apatow regulars and other familiar faces. Jonah Hill shows up in the trailers, but Bill Hader of SNL (and a tiny role in Knocked Up) has a meatier part here, and we get Paul Rudd, Jack McBrayer, and even a bit of Jason Bateman. Jason Segel as the lead was likeable more often than not, but Kristen Bell’s extreme bitchiness took away from her surprising hotness. Mila Kunis is a knockout, too – I never had a moment of patience for That '70s Show, so it was nice to see her in something that didn’t make me want to punch through the screen.
That’s one problem I have with the movies of Apatow and his crew (since I know he didn’t write this one). His male protagonists are flawed man-children, but they usually learn lessons and grow up along the way and emerge better people for the experience. His female characters are rarely portrayed as sympathetically, and often come across as shrill, shrewish bitches. I love the man’s work, him and all the regular actors and writers he works with, but it’s just a trend that bothers me a little.
I talked about this with my girlfriend today before we saw the movie (which we both loved.) I told her that I had heard this criticism and I asked her what she thought about it. She told me that the men are the losers and they have to change, but the women are the heroes and already have it together and don’t have to change. IOW, she doesn’t see them as shrill, shrewish bitches, and thinks they are portrayed sympathetically. I’m not sure I agree with her, though, but it’s another perspective.
I agree that the females start off more mature- when i think of the females in his movies they normally have jobs/ aren’t addicted to drugs/ fit in socially/ normally very pretty (not a maturity thing but the girls are better off)
I guess it never bothered me since I figured they were supposed to be exaggerations- like from Superbad the males sees girls as perfect and for the most part unattainable- i found that kind of endearing.
but besides all that i think Bill Hader is hysterical and I loved Freak and Geeks so I plan on seeing this film
saw the movie this weekend. It was made up of many many funny parts that didn’t quite come together to gel into a funny movie. More the problem of the inexperienced director than anything else, I think.
Note - to anyone who’s seen the film - weren’t the “tv shows Sarah Marshall starred in” bits hilarious?!
He was easily the funniest character in the movie. Technically speaking, he’s a reprehensible piece of shit who should have had some sort of terrible karmic retribution* visited on him before the end of the film. But he’s just so damn cool, you can’t help liking him, despite the fact that he’s a dishonest, vacuous scumbag who can’t sing.
There’s also something kind of guileless and amiable about him that keeps him sympathetic. He’s crass and narcissistic but he’s never really mean and he never tries to be anything but friendly to the Segel character. I even felt for him in his desire to stay on the wagon. In most movies he would have been presented as a one dimensional jerk and it was nice to see him as someone who could make you cringe, yet still be someone you’d want to hang out with.
I also loved his line to Jonah Hill about his demo:
Oh, yeah…I was going to listen to that, but then I just carried on living my life instead."
That’s Russell Brand, UK comedian and all-round dandy. I haven’t seen the movie, but from what I’ve heard he’s essentially playing himself, just a bit more of a bastard (he dresses pretty much the same in real life, incidentally). In fact this:
pretty much sums up my opinion of Brand in real life. I’m not a huge fan of his standup, but he’s definitely a funny man, if an acquired taste.
He’s currently trying to “crack America” so you can expect to see a bit more of him over the next year, unless it all goes horribly wrong (and given that he appears to be getting good reviews for this movie, I suspect it won’t do so soon).
Actually, in the movie, all we get is a photograph of Mila flashing (i.e. nothing jiggles). The overwhelming bulk of the nudity is male - and played for laughs (naturally).
Nevertheless, the movie did convince me that Mila Kunis is my ideal for female beauty (the dark hair, the olive skin, the petite, yet curvy body…erm, I’ll be right back).
Meanwhile, if you love Kenneth in 30 Rock, you’ll love the fact that Bill Hader plays the same character in this movie. Except now he has to deal with newlywed sex.
I’ll also agree that the Brit rock star was endearing. Actually, I liked all the characters. As seems typical in Apatow movies, there’s a good mix of raunchy humor with decent people who you come to like. Even Sarah Marshall was a good person.
The funniest parts, though, were the “tv clips” of Marshall’s acting, along with the Music Video clip in the beginning (I love the sign that reads “I want to sodomize intolerance” - I think I remember that line right).
Jack McBrayer, you mean. Hader played the supportive best friend role, usually reserved for the likes of Janeane Garofalo in more typical chick flicks, where the sex roles are reversed.
