Maybe some people like these kinds of movies, and maybe you should just accept that.TheTygerfire said:
I found the trailer to be pretty damn funny.
The 40 Year Old Virgin Who Knocked Up Sarah Marshall and Felt Superbad About It....*throws up*
- Thread starter TheTygerfire
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I found the trailer to be pretty damn funny.
The film must exist because there is demand for this kind of stupidity...the actors probably wanted better for themselves. I never said they didn't disgust me for agreeing to be in it, but I still feel bad for them.whycantibelinus said:
Well, I've just watched the trailer.
Please excuse me for 5 minutes as I find a corner in which to cry...
I abmit I enjoy a good parody. But what happened to the days of Mel Brooks and movies like Airplane? They were good parodies...now they're just stealing entire plots from movies and warping them and adding toilet humour and bad slapstick...
Please excuse me for 5 minutes as I find a corner in which to cry...
I abmit I enjoy a good parody. But what happened to the days of Mel Brooks and movies like Airplane? They were good parodies...now they're just stealing entire plots from movies and warping them and adding toilet humour and bad slapstick...
Overblown hyperbole maybe, but it still hurt to watch.blue_guy said:
EDIT: Thank you, lodo_bear, for defending a stranger on the internet from a flame he likely deserves! IOU 1 reward snack, please redeem your coupon at the appropriate counter.
So we're satirizing satire now? I think someone missed a few lit classes in college.
Exaggeration is the heart of satire. You take a romance or tragedy plot, you exaggerate it to absurd levels, and it becomes funny. There are obvious, over-the-top absurd like Mel Brooks movies, and there are more nuanced and subtle satires like The Princess Bride and Judd Apatow flicks.
These guys started with the right idea (is it the same guys? I don't even know). Take a serious, dramatic, tension-filled genre like horror or thriller and make it into a silly comedy.
But this movie isn't even a full satire; it's a remake of three satires, spliced into one movie. It's not Mel Brooks taking a serious scene from a classic movie and adding some jokes to it; it's an untalented hack taking the same scene with the same jokes and just making it somewhat more absurd.
Exaggeration is the heart of satire. You take a romance or tragedy plot, you exaggerate it to absurd levels, and it becomes funny. There are obvious, over-the-top absurd like Mel Brooks movies, and there are more nuanced and subtle satires like The Princess Bride and Judd Apatow flicks.
These guys started with the right idea (is it the same guys? I don't even know). Take a serious, dramatic, tension-filled genre like horror or thriller and make it into a silly comedy.
But this movie isn't even a full satire; it's a remake of three satires, spliced into one movie. It's not Mel Brooks taking a serious scene from a classic movie and adding some jokes to it; it's an untalented hack taking the same scene with the same jokes and just making it somewhat more absurd.
He's not necessarily trying to be sophisticated. He's just using humor to deal with the pain.blue_guy said:
Frankly, no one here is trying to be high-brow. Even my long literary criticism was just trying to make sense of it all, not trying to impress my English teacher (besides, how can I expect to be high-brow when I publicly admit how much I love Road Runner cartoons and Batman comics?).
There may be a couple funny parts in there (I haven't watched it yet - my current computer lacks speakers), but that's not enough. Trailer making is an art these days, and we've gotten good at it, to the point that it's possible to make a very good trailer for even a very bad movie. If the trailer can only boast one chuckle worthy moment, it's a very bad sign for the film that is to come.
I didn't laugh, not once. In fact I feel like I've gotten slightly stupider for having watched that.
I can see how some might find this funny, but my god... I will never get back the time I wasted watching that...
I could be the stereotypical 15 year old Internet loud type and say " yeah your stubit!!! and yo shoud fucking go in teh fuucking woods and die" But im not and im not talking about criticism , i´m simply just asking "why do you make a comedy spoof of a success full comedy?" so your not stupid, ive just chose poor words to describe my question.Cmwissy said:
Now, I know I said I'm not trying to be high-brow here, but I feel compelled to reference Moliere. You've been warned.
In "L'Impromptu de Versailles" (The Rehearsal at Versailles, also translated as A Versailles Improvisation), Moliere takes his critics head on in a most unusual manner. His critics had done this exact sort of thing we're talking about now, namely, trying to parody his works, which were comedies (and very sharp comedies, too).
Moliere's response was to tell them that they could never hope to write anything as funny as his stuff, that any humor in their stuff would be directly plagiarized from his plays, that nothing they could do could rile him up or get him mad, and he was just going to go ahead writing great plays and making more money than them - but because he was Moliere, he did it all in a play.
"L'Impromptu de Versailles" states all of the above very directly, but puts it all in the context of Moliere and his troupe in a last-minute rush to prepare a play for the king. He paints himself as frustrated and somewhat ineffectual and all his troupe as less than competent, and still manages to find time to make fun of the stupid things other theater companies did when they were trying to be serious and when they were trying to parody comedy, especially Moliere's comedy (we acted this out in 12th-grade drama class and had a marvelous time).
The play's not perfect, but it's still funny and still relevant, and Moliere's remarks on the futility of parodying comedy are quite relevant (some of the play can be read here [http://books.google.com/books?id=PBBRJssSobkC&pg=PA95&dq=rehearsal+at+versailles&ei=YbwZS5TZFKOykAT1pOXcCw#v=onepage&q=rehearsal%20at%20versailles&f=false], and if you read French you can get the whole thing here [http://www.site-moliere.com/pieces/imprompt.htm]).
Rather than parody a parody (or worse, parody a parody of a parody), Moliere parodies the people dumb enough to try to do so, and makes fun of himself while he's at it to give the piece some more depth. That's how it's done, and that's why we fondly remember Moliere 300 years later while we're doing our best to forget "Meet the Spartans".
In "L'Impromptu de Versailles" (The Rehearsal at Versailles, also translated as A Versailles Improvisation), Moliere takes his critics head on in a most unusual manner. His critics had done this exact sort of thing we're talking about now, namely, trying to parody his works, which were comedies (and very sharp comedies, too).
Moliere's response was to tell them that they could never hope to write anything as funny as his stuff, that any humor in their stuff would be directly plagiarized from his plays, that nothing they could do could rile him up or get him mad, and he was just going to go ahead writing great plays and making more money than them - but because he was Moliere, he did it all in a play.
"L'Impromptu de Versailles" states all of the above very directly, but puts it all in the context of Moliere and his troupe in a last-minute rush to prepare a play for the king. He paints himself as frustrated and somewhat ineffectual and all his troupe as less than competent, and still manages to find time to make fun of the stupid things other theater companies did when they were trying to be serious and when they were trying to parody comedy, especially Moliere's comedy (we acted this out in 12th-grade drama class and had a marvelous time).
The play's not perfect, but it's still funny and still relevant, and Moliere's remarks on the futility of parodying comedy are quite relevant (some of the play can be read here [http://books.google.com/books?id=PBBRJssSobkC&pg=PA95&dq=rehearsal+at+versailles&ei=YbwZS5TZFKOykAT1pOXcCw#v=onepage&q=rehearsal%20at%20versailles&f=false], and if you read French you can get the whole thing here [http://www.site-moliere.com/pieces/imprompt.htm]).
Rather than parody a parody (or worse, parody a parody of a parody), Moliere parodies the people dumb enough to try to do so, and makes fun of himself while he's at it to give the piece some more depth. That's how it's done, and that's why we fondly remember Moliere 300 years later while we're doing our best to forget "Meet the Spartans".
