Topic: Congratz to Adam Sandler on his Monumental Achievement

[David E.]

Sandler Sweeps Razzies, even wins Worst Actress.

Ninety-seven percent of the critics at Rotten Tomatoes disliked Adam Sandler's two-for-one twaddle-fest of a twin comedy JACK & JILL — and apparently 100% of RAZZIE® Award Voters agreed. In April Fools' night ceremonies in Santa Monica, JACK & JILL set a new record, becoming the first film in the 32-year history of the RAZZIES® to "win" every single tacky trophy handed out at the annual Oscar® spoof — a total of TEN Dis-Honors.

[andrewclunn]

Movies are just a bad format for comedy.  I don't know why people continue to watch them.

[Kessdawg]

Movies are just a bad format for comedy.  I don't know why people continue to watch them.

Interesting.  What did you think of The Hangover or Borat?

[andrewclunn]

Movies are just a bad format for comedy.  I don't know why people continue to watch them.

Interesting.  What did you think of The Hangover or Borat?

The Hangover wasn't funny at all.  Borat got a few laughs from me at the start, but the premise got old fast.  I recall the naked wrestling scene, attempted kidnapping scene, and frat boy scenes to be entirely meh, and the national anthem scene was cringe inducing.

[andrewclunn]

Plot is the enemy of humor.  Super ridiculous movies with entirely unbelievable characters can be amusing, but it gets old well before the hour and a half mark.  Doing an over the top 45 minutes followed by a moralistic family values wrap up second half (pretty much 2/3s of 'comedy' movies these days) is just tired and played out.  And even when the first half does manage to be legitimately funny, I can't buy into the supposedly "true to life" second half because these previously "too over the top to be real" characters suddenly start acting more real and I'm supposed to not notice the blatant shift and still see them as the same character?

Sketch humor and stand up will always be better than comedy movies.  The only truly brilliant comedy movies are the unintentional ones that were made for MST3000.

[Johnny Slick]

...or Annie Hall, The Producers, Philadelphia Story... every comedy that isn't a classic isn't a classic comedy!

[andrewclunn]

...or Annie Hall, The Producers, Philadelphia Story... every comedy that isn't a classic isn't a classic comedy!

What are you talking about?  I laughed my ass off when I saw Philadelphia 

[Guillermo]

Plot is the enemy of humor.  Super ridiculous movies with entirely unbelievable characters can be amusing, but it gets old well before the hour and a half mark.  Doing an over the top 45 minutes followed by a moralistic family values wrap up second half (pretty much 2/3s of 'comedy' movies these days) is just tired and played out.  And even when the first half does manage to be legitimately funny, I can't buy into the supposedly "true to life" second half because these previously "too over the top to be real" characters suddenly start acting more real and I'm supposed to not notice the blatant shift and still see them as the same character?

Now there's your problem.

[Kessdawg]

Oh god... lol


I disagree that movies can't be funny though. While I have detested just about every Sandler movie I've seen, there are many other movies that can be funny.  40 Year Old Virgin, Shawn of the Dead and Pineapple Express for instance.  I'd add History of the World Part I, but that falls more under your category of sketch comedy.

I see what you are saying though, I enjoy me a good stand up routine.  My favorite has to be Leary's "No Cure for Cancer".  Oh my god!

[Johnny Slick]

Yeah, Sandler's issue isn't that he makes comedies, it's that he makes stupid, derivative comedies that look like they would have made a not-very-good SNL sketch. You can't pad Adam Sandler dressing like a girl out to 90 minutes. Who knew? Fortunately there are lots and lots of comedies that come out every year that aren't like this.

[ting-bu-dong]

Yeah, Sandler's issue isn't that he makes comedies, it's that he makes stupid, derivative comedies that look like they would have made a not-very-good SNL sketch.

There is this argument out there that Sandler films aren't simply bad movies, they are money making schemes:

http://blip.tv/play/AYLfnHEC.html

(argument starts at 2:20)

Conspiracy theory and cherrypicking or reasonable?

[PANTS!]

Movies are just a bad format for comedy.  I don't know why people continue to watch them.

Yes.  Clearly that is what is wrong with Adam Sandler's movies.  If only he made say documentaries, he would be making art to change the world.

[Johnny Slick]

That's Half in the Bag, right? (I can't watch videos at work) I think their take on it was pretty spot-on. It's not really a conspiracy theory on the level of 9/11 or anything to say that Sandler makes a lot of money, he knows this, producers know this, and so when he comes up with a craptastic idea he finds buyers for it anyway. The downside of this (from his perspective, anyway; certainly not from mine) is that he only gets to do this kind of cash grab as long as his movies make money. According to IMDB, this movie cost about $80M and so far has only made $75M. It'll almost certainly break even in international sales and rentals but it can't be said that Adam Sandler is box office gold anymore, at least not with this film.

Mike Myers was in a similar position last decade and, well, look at Mike Myers now. If you can find him.

[Johnny Slick]

Movies are just a bad format for comedy.  I don't know why people continue to watch them.

Yes.  Clearly that is what is wrong with Adam Sandler's movies.  If only he made say documentaries, he would be making art to change the world.

In fairness, he's made 2 serious movies (Punch Drunk Love and Funny People), both of which are actually pretty good. See also: Robin Williams, who went from making shitty comedies to being a pretty decent dramatic actor in his own right.

[ting-bu-dong]

That's Half in the Bag, right? (I can't watch videos at work) I think their take on it was pretty spot-on. It's not really a conspiracy theory on the level of 9/11 or anything to say that Sandler makes a lot of money, he knows this, producers know this, and so when he comes up with a craptastic idea he finds buyers for it anyway.

It certainly isn't in the lizard overlord territory of conspiracy theories, but it did attribute an intentionality and a scope to the whole thing that make me cautious, especially the part where the production costs are hugely inflated, which surely can't be in the interest of the studio. If they made the movie for 10 or 20 million, they would have made a decent profit with revenue of 75 million. This way the only ones to really profit are Sandler and his friends.

Of course, at the end of the day if people want shallow, unfunny comedy with intrusive product placement, that's what they get which means the system works as intended.