Judd Apatow (‘The 40-Year-Old Virgin’, ‘Knocked Up’) is known for his contained and loveable comedies, but this marks the first time he’s directed a film that he didn’t write or co-write himself. He co-wrote ‘The 40-Year-Old Virgin’ with his leading man Steve Carell, but he’s never not taken part in the screenplay of one of his films, at least not until this film. I personally walked into this film with a lot of hesitation, I’m not well-versed in Amy Schumer’s particular brand of humor thus I’m not sure how much I can trust her, but the trailers worked for me and Judd Apatow has never made a bad film in my eyes, and this is definitely not a slipup. I outright love this film. It’s a perfect blend of Apatow’s fluffy romantic-comedy, with Amy Schumer’s raunchy and reactionary sense of humor. I don’t laugh aloud in films often, it’s just not something I’m comfortable doing, but I actually laughed out loud a lot in this film. The type of humor that appeals to me is situational humor, and that’s what the vast majority of this film is comprised of. I understand how that can get under a person’s skin, the idea of a film going from scene to scene and basically banking off of the reactions of its leads can become a bit exhausting. ‘Trainwreck’ blends the heavier dramatic moments …show more content…
This gender swap gives way to an innocuous girl-power film that doesn’t in any way degrade or trivialize the male leads of the film. I love it when a film can be gender-centric yet still equal opportunity because it’s immensely difficult to find a sense of balance between those two. This film is friendly to both genders, and it actually has something to say about sexual orientation as well. It’s briefly mentioned in passing, but that one line easily sums up how the entire film feels about all types of
Acting of movie is very basic for todays standards. The actions of the Miles Bennell aren’t believable or logical. At some points the women of the movie tend of over action simple scenes. The rest of the cast is monotone and have little emotion.It ok casting, but they could of done better. You find yourself laughing at serious point in the film due to the poor acting. This movie could be recut to become a comedy movie, just based off their facial expression.
The auteur theory is a view on filmmaking that consists of three equally important premises: technical competence, interior meaning, and personal signature of the director. Auteur is a French word for author. The auteur theory was developed by Andrew Sarris, a well-known American film critic. Technical competence of the Auteur deals with how the director films the movie in their own style. Personal signature includes recurring themes that are present within the director’s line of work with characteristics of style, which serve as a signature. The third and ultimate premise of the Auteur theory is the interior meaning which is basically the main theme behind the film.
Overall the film was a very informative film for a more homophobic audience. The content was relatable and connected well with the information and discussions that have been within our society for a long time. It was a well-done film that really questions the homophobic opinions and while this is still a very real debate in today’s society the film does a great job at arguing the homophobic opinions.
Scott Pilgrim vs the World is a action and adventure/Comedy movie, based off of the comic book by Bryan Lee O’Malley, with a little bit of romance in the mix. It first came to theaters Aug 13, 2010. Directed by Edgar Wright, the man behind other comedies such as Hot Fuzz and Shaun of the Dead. Scott Pilgrim (Michael Cera) is a high school graduate who is jobless and lives in Toronto, Canada. Scott is 22 years old and is dating a highschooler named Knives Chau (Ellen Wong). Everything is all and well until Scott lays his eyes on the girl of his dreams, Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). He then has to face her “Seven Evil Exes.” Scott fights these exs of hers throughout the movie. This isn’t your typical fight for the girl romantic comedy.
It fails to produce necessary laughs containing a wonderful and talented cast including Adam Sandler, Harvey Keitel, Patricia Arquette, and Quentin Tarantino. The jokes in “Little Nicky” are dumb, tasteless, and not that funny while Sandler’s character is horrifying to watch. Somehow, it made over $61 million dollars. He still kept on churning bad films. “Mr. Deeds”, “50 First Dates”, “Anger Management”, “Click” “ It’s a Wonderful Life”, “Back to the Future” and “The Longest Yards” which fails to produce necessary laughs. They made almost 1 billion
Quentin Tarantino has proven time and time again to be one of the most confusing directors to understand when attempting to unravel the personal ideologies in his films. Each of his films deals with race, sexuality, and gender to some extent, and it is often difficult to know whether or not Tarantino is making a commentary on these things or if he truly believes much of the problematic discourse found in his films. Kill Bill Vol. 1 and 2 are a testament to this understanding of Tarantino’s films, as they appear to be extremely feminist films at surface level yet, upon deeper inspection, have some very problematic qualities. Looking at Kill Bill Vol.’s 1 and 2 through both a feminist and anti feminist lens can allow the audience to better
Sandler's Happy Madison production outlet ticks over nicely on the back of his own hits; less so when he exec-produces -- as if sadistically -- for his friend Rob Schneider (The Hot Chick, 2002, etc). After a mildly awkward patch at the start of the decade (including Little Nicky, 2000, and Mr Deeds, 2002), Sandler re-established himself in the nine-figure-grossing league with Anger Management (2003) and 50 First Dates (2004); and the director of those two pictures, Peter Segal, is also at the helm for Sandler's remake of Robert Aldrich's The Longest Yard. Alas, this is Sandler's most formulaic outing to date, the most by-rote script he has yet committed to.
The original film has a lot of things going for it. It has a lot of comedic heavyweights in it, like Ted Knight, Bill Murray, Rodney Dangerfield, Brian Doyle-Murray, and Chevy Chase. The film is a winner with all of its quotable dialogue, great characters, and slapstick humor. In the sequel, only Chevy Chase returned after a lot of pushing on the studio 's part. It was a needless sequel that should not have been made.
If you like movies about drugs, sex, and violence, this is a movie for you. At times, the movie will mess with your mind a bit. There aren’t many movies out there that deal with heroin addiction. It follows Renton as he attempts to clean up his life and keeps you interested as it’s a serious topic but will make you laugh at times. The movie will make you think and is very interesting to learn about the life of a heroin addict. The movie has a sense of style with the camera angles and soundtrack as well as visual hallucinations the characters go through. However, if you get grossed out easily I wouldn’t recommend seeing this movie if you’re sensitive to stuff like that. Trainspotting may disgust you and make you feel uncomfortable but it definitely keep you entertained and is highly recommended to see at least once.
this man s a comic genius I didn t know that before and now I do [Music]snatched so snatched is a comedy starring Amy Schumer Amy Schumer plays Amy Schumer it s all those cases where you see Amy Schumer in a movie you know exactly the character she s going to play and she plays like there however this movie also sets you up to be super selfish don t look to a delusional degree I need to compartmentalize those I m not saying Amy Schumer is super selfish true in almost delusional degrade I m just saying among the constructs in thismovie that is Amy Schumer that s the variable character it s also a selfish piece of shit and after she comes by her boyfriend her and her mom played by Goldie Hawn go to this exotic
The use of original practices, the costumes and male characters used to play the role of female characters are due to the different gender identity attributes and sexuality concerns from the play. Although the producer insists that the use of male characters to play female roles was mainly to show case the original set-up and forms of acting it can also be attributed to the producer wishing to raise different sexualities from the audience. The different actors who play the roles of females while they are male characters have been used by the producer to raise different sexualities since the heterosexual people in the audience view of the audience since gender as asserted by Bulman is performative rather than
Finally the movie is a good movie. Actually this movie doesn’t need any improvement. The writer, actresses, and actors did their best. They tried to make a point and be a creative about it and that is exactly what they did. It is an amazing movie. I
Switching the gender roles in such a way would be comical because that's not the way it's done. When we read about, watch, or listen to our fictional heroes and heroines, we expect certain behaviors from them. We have a set of rules by which we define male and female characters, and characters that don't adhere to the general rules are anomalies and misfits.
The world went insane when the news broke that Thor was going to be a female now. A lot of people did not quite like the Avengers turning into an all-female group either. It 's on the different spectrum than ethnicity, but it is on a spectrum nonetheless. More so because these females characters are being swapped from men, now feminists would argue why do they have to come after men. Why can 't they have their own characters? I know you 're trying to adapt to the diversity, but why cannot they be their own character? On one hand, that is true. Thor was created from a historical context, Thor was meant to be male. What is the effect of changing Thor to a female? Even the effect of a female Captain
I like the film very much. I think its one of the best films I’ve seen ever. The comedy in the film is just my humour, and the action was okay.