It's time for another installment of He Said/She Said with the bromance I Love You, Man. It's She (Morrow McLaughlin) and He (Nick Allen).
She Said I feel like I spend the majority of these dialogues bitching and moaning and I was really hoping to dole out some kudos this time around the block--especially when the previews looked so funny and there is nothing that perks me up quite like a fun buddy movie. I love Paul Rudd, I love Jason Segel, I love the idea...it should've been one big love fest that ended with me pirouetting happily around the theater.
Instead, I spent most of my time trying to force myself to laugh so I could talk myself into liking it, thus, putting myself in a position to not be the big downer AGAIN. It feels like a film that was flimsily constructed around the core concept of the friendship between Pete and Sydney, and therefore anything that strayed from that storyline was tepid at best. I didn't really care about the relationship between Pete and Zooey, except as an obstacle between me and the next funny Peter/Sydney scene.
The movie was just so devastatingly average when I was really hoping for some laughs.
The idea of this film is great, and lends to the unique experience of I Love You, Man. The entire movie is focused on finding that special best man in one's life - Peter has already found his female ultimate, Zooey. Thus, I don't think the relationship between Pete and Zooey was really that important, something that was the intention of the film. Zooey is not ignored but she is simply not as key an element to the plot as most fiancee's are in romantic comedies.
The phrases "devastatingly average" and I Love You, Man do not compute for me. This was a refreshing and hilarious take on a whole different kind of courtship that leads to love. It was cast correctly with likable yet believable actors, (in both genders) and offered a whopping amount of humor - the kind that explode out of your stomach. During the scene at the Chinese restaurant, I almost choked on the gum I had been chewing.
If that had happened, I'm sure the tone of the movie would've influenced a fellow bro to give me CPR.
Don't get me wrong--I usually love this type of comedy, which is why I was so disappointed in this movie. The idea was so cool and the actors were so perfect and it all came out as gruel. Why was Zooey his perfect mate? The movie just states that she is without giving any substantial reasons other than "'cause we said so." When Sydney starts to question why Peter is getting married, I thought Sydney's point was pretty valid, but the movie doesn't have the balls to follow through. Apparently, we need the feel good formula with very little challenge in between.
The basic idea of the "bromance" is so awesome and the actors chosen for the roles were perfect. I'm happier if they present me with an average/stupid idea (a.k.a "Fired Up") and then surprise me with an unsual twist, then get me all excited over a fresh idea and than serve up more average-mildly above average comedy with almost zero originality.
I went into this movie way too pumped up and it let me down. I need to stop doing that.
I don't agree with the idea that this film had zero originality. I mean, this movie was slightly innovative - when has the phrase "totes magotes" ever been used before?
But in all seriousness, I have a feeling that some of the extensive humor might have weighed on you. It's just a theory. But if this is correct, I sort of agree with you. Though Paul Rudd is a very funny guy, the film gives him too much time to riff on one gag. Some mildly amusing guffaws become a bit exasperated when Paul Rudd is just saying "slappin da bass" for the 95th time.
I didn't feel like the film gave him too much time; I felt like the film didn't give him enough material and therefore, out of necessity, he had to keep squeezing the crap out of the same joke. Again, luckily, Rudd is one of the most likeable people in the universe, otherwise the movie doesn't eek out the better reviews. I really think the critics are giving Rudd and Segel the benefit of the doubt because they are so fun together--put two blah actors in there without the built-in fan base, and the movie would be quasi-disastrous.
One of my guy friends asked me if I was being too hard on the film because I'm not a dude, and I don't think that's the case--but I can't rule it out either. I love buddy movies, male or female, and I think I'm just the demographic for this movie, but I gotta ask you...do you think the inherent differences between men and women make this movie more enjoyable for guys?
That's a great point. Let me list what this movie has going for guys, and if I make a few mistakes that are too gender-specific don't hold it against me. It has plenty of Hulk jokes, Lou Ferrigno, Rush, jokes about farts, jokes about sex related "activities", jokes about puke, jokes about poker, jokes about gay guys, jokes about Macbook speakers, jokes about manliness and oodles of bro-cabulary.
From this list, I wonder if the film does lean more towards the masculine side, despite being a "romantic comedy." Is it really just another guy movie with somewhat of a heart and attractive male stars? I'm not sure.
But as a guy who has relationships with his significant brothers, I thought this movie was hilarious. Maybe a repeat viewing will make for a solid man-date. I loved it.