Milking Rose Byrne For Laughs: Bad Neighbors Fails Entirely!

The Good: One or two laughs, Convincing-enough performances
The Bad: Largely banal and repetitive humor, Dull plot, Obvious character arcs, More misses than hits on the jokes, No stellar performance moments.
The Basics: The Seth Rogen/Zac Efron vehicle Bad Neighbors is a listless comedy not worth wasting time and money to watch.


As Summer Blockbuster Season begins, the popular alternative to special effects-driven action films is raucous comedies. This summer, the search for quality alternative programming seems to have skipped the entire comedy genre . . . at least if the new film Bad Neighbors is any indication.

Bad Neighbors is a Seth Rogen and Zac Efron vehicle that has a ridiculously simple premise that it barely delivers on. The movie never truly gets deeper than the one-line summary for the film and the result is a movie packed with jokes that barely pad the flick up to 96 minutes and leave the viewer feeling largely cheated for the entire running time. Bad Neighbors has a thirty-something couple with a newborn baby living next door to a fraternity house and the two houses go to war over their different lifestyles. Only, the family being terrorized by having the frat house next door, the Radners, is barely more mature than their tormentors next door. The result is an extended prank movie that is hardly original, not at all audacious, and only minimally funny.

Mac and Kelly Radner have poured all their money into a small house in the suburbs where they believe they can happily and safely raise their new daughter, Stella. After attempting to christen their dining room – but failing because they are creeped out by Stella watching them have sex – the Radners see that the house next to theirs is on the market and has some (apparently) serious potential buyers. But when moving day comes, the quiet gay family they think is going to move in is replaced by a small fraternity from the nearby college. Bringing their leaders, Teddy and Pete, a joint, the Radners think they have solved their problems by asking the frat brothers to keep the volume down. That night, though, there is a loud party and rather than keeping the neighborhood quiet, Mac and Kelly actually join Teddy, Pete, and the frat brothers of Delta Psi Beta for a night of revelry.

When the loud scene repeats itself the next night and Teddy does not answer his phone (as he had asked the Radners to call him before they call the police), the young parents try to get the frat party shut down with police intervention. The Delta Psi Betas trash the lawn for the Radner’s house and vow to keep disrupting their lives for being so uncool to them. When Mac smashes a pipe that floods the frat house basement, the fraternity brothers band together and make molds of their penises in order to make dildos, which they then sell and raise so much money they are able to afford a pool in addition to the repairs! When the Radner’s confront the Dean after Stella nearly swallows a condom on their lawn, they find the college officials largely unhelpful, though she details the school’s three-strike rule for the frats. To try to get the frat shut down, Kelly tries to get Pete to put “hoes before bros” by getting the drunk (but smartest of the) frat boy to have sex with Teddy’s girlfriend. Using a hazed-upon pledge to infiltrate the house to try to get the last strike, Mac and Kelly bond as the fraternity comes apart at the seams!

There is so little to Bad Neighbors that it is almost surprising that the film was even made. To flesh out the thin revenge plot that has two groups of shockingly immature people going to war with one another (without much in the way of real world consequences, despite such things as fireworks getting shot into a police car, yet not burning the hell out of the officer inside), Bad Neighbors includes scenes like Kelly realizing she had too much alcohol to nurse and Mac having to milk her in order to relieve the pain in her breasts. Even that scene, though, is truncated in an odd way for an R-rated comedy, making one assume that there will be an unrated director’s cut released on DVD that is even more graphic than the theatrical release was.

The characters in Bad Neighbors are universally foul-mouthed and largely monolithic. Mac is hardly mature and the Radner’s obsession with weed and sex mirrors the frat boys’ binge drinking and casual sex. Neither group is particularly compelling to watch and outside the joy of the cameos (the young men of Workaholics, Andy Samburg, and Lisa Kudrow all have brief appearances in Bad Neighbors) the only real strong moment of comedy is the first appearance of a detached airbag going off and flinging Mac a great distance.

Bad Neighbors is not going to be the shining point of any of the participant’s resumes. Seth Rogen is playing a remarkably familiar stoner/slacker character that he has done to death and Dave Franco’s part of Pete is basically a slightly smarter version of his brother’s type familiar party animal character. Rose Byrne and Zac Efron do not show off any skills that they are likely to be proud of. In fact, Efron’s role in the movie seems to be to show off his new, buff self as opposed to creating a character with even a modicum of pathos, as he did in 17 Again (reviewed here!).

With its lack of original humor or engaging characters and hampered by a predictable plot and juvenile gags, Bad Neighbors completely fails to entertain or create a film worth writing more about.

For other works with Rose Byrne, be sure to check out my takes on:
This Is Where I Leave You
X-Men: First Class
Bridesmaids
Adam
28 Weeks Later
Marie Antoinette
Star Wars: Episode II – Attack Of The Clones

2/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my Film Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2014 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

The Argument Against Long Dramedies: The Five-Year Engagement

The Good: One or two lines, The acting is okay
The Bad: Not particularly engaging characters, Not particularly funny, Pacing, Dull plot
The Basics: The Five-Year Engagement took me so many times to get through, I can’t possibly recommend it.


It always amuses me how fast the current flavor of the month is parlayed into new opportunities by producers and studios. The Five-Year Engagement is billed as a comedy by the producers of Bridesmaids (reviewed here!) and it may be one of the biggest drags of a mainstream dramedy in recent memory. In fact, my wife, who loves comedies, put off watching the film for four weeks and when we started it – despite the fact that she was looking forward to seeing it based on her love of Bridesmaids, Horrible Bosses, and Bad Teacher - it took her fifteen laughless minutes before she decided she was out. It took me three more weeks to bother trying to sit through it again.

The Five-Year Engagement is a stacked-deck cast that seems like it would deliver comedic gold. With the likes of Jason Segel, Mindy Kaling, Kevin Hart, Chris Parnell, and Brian Posehn, it seems like The Five-Year Engagement should be riotously funny. Alas, though, it is surprisingly flat on the humor front, opting more toward realism and painful awkwardness than anything that will generate laughs.

After dating for a very short time, Tom Solomon proposes (awkwardly) to his girlfriend, Violet Barnes. After a disastrous announcement dinner where Violet’s sister messes around with Tom’s idiot best friend, Alex, Violet fails to get her dream job. Instead, she gets a teaching job in the social psychology department in Michigan. Tom’s job prospects dry up in Michigan and he finds it impossible to keep with the status quo.

As Tom and Violet begin fighting about her continued work, his desire not to have children and his lack of direction in life, Tom becomes an outdoorsman and hunter. Violet tries to confide in her professor, Winton Childs, who takes the opportunity to make a move on her, and their engagement stretches on for years as a result.

Jason Segel and director Nicholas Stoller co-wrote the script for The Five-Year Engagement and Segel seems determined to make another version of Forgetting Sarah Marshall (reviewed here!) in terms of mood and characters. The Five-Year Engagement has pacing that is so slow it is excruciating to watch. None of the characters are particularly likable and the humor falls so flat that the longer it went on, the less interested I was in how the film might get resolved.

By the halfway mark, I found myself considering the career of Rhys Ifans. Ifans appears in The Five-Year Engagement as Violet’s boss, Professor Childs. I was thinking of how last year, when The Five-Year Engagement was a good year for Ifans. He appeared in this and as the villain in The Amazing Spider-Man (reviewed here!). I could have lived with him being cast as the villain in Skyfall (reviewed here!) and he could have really hit the trifecta. It seems like he had the gravitas for Silva, the villain in SkyFall and the fact that The Five-Year Engagement was so slow and dull that I was left thinking about that should be all that really needs to be said about how bland the film is.

Despite not having likable characters and any number of lines that are more awkward than funny and the rest of the film being not particularly funny, The Five-Year Engagement has fairly competent acting. Jason Segel has a good dramatic presence and Emily Blunt plays pretty much the same type character I have seen her play in virtually everything I have seen her in (including interviews where she is just playing herself). The Five-Year Engagement does not use most of its comedic firepower to actually deliver funny lines and for me to write more about it seems to just be beating this particularly dead horse. I cannot think of a movie in recent memory that I flat-out enjoyed less than The Five-Year Engagement.

For other works with Emily Blunt, please visit my reviews of:
Looper
The Adjustment Bureau
Salmon Fishing In The Yemen
Charlie Wilson’s War
Dan In Real Life
The Devil Wears Prada

1.5/10

For other film reviews, please check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2013 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Forgetting Sarah Marshall Is Not Forgettable, But It Is Not The Unforgettable Film I Anticipated.

The Good: Good character study, Moments of real humor, Good DVD bonus features
The Bad: Somewhat predictable, Plays the same note over and over again.
The Basics: Funny, but as often moody and compelling for the difficulty one man has in getting over his romantic relationship, Forgetting Sarah Marshall is worth seeing.


For the last few years, there have been very few comedies I have actually wanted to see. One of the few, though, was Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and truth be told, I cannot remember why it was that I wanted to see it. I think it may have been on the strength of Jason Segel, whose work I began enjoying with Freaks And Geeks. Since then, it seems like Segel's star has been rising. As well, I have generally enjoyed the works of Kristen Bell, save her appearance in Couple's Retreat (reviewed here!), so Forgetting Sarah Marshall seemed to have a lot to offer me.

Whatever my preconceptions of Forgetting Sarah Marshall were before I sat down to watch it, it took very little time to realize the movie was not what I thought it might be. Honestly, I suspect that I thought it was somehow related to Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind. Forgetting Sarah Marshall is nothing like that other movie. The title is a misnomer for those who are raised on science fiction. Instead, Forgetting Sarah Marshall is a surprisingly stark and real exploration of the end of relationships. Outside the improbability that comes from the opportunities the celebrity protagonists have in it, Forgetting Sarah Marshall is surprisingly realistic and filled with an emotional depth that most comedies do not possess.

Peter, a composer for "Crime Scene: Scene Of The Crime," is heartbroken (and naked) when his girlfriend, Sarah Marshall (the star of "Crime Scene") dumps him after a 5 ½ year relationship. Sarah begins dating pretentious pop singer Alice Snow (lead singer of Infant Sorrow) and the two head off to Hawaii. Trying to get over her, Peter ends up at the same resort at the same time as Sarah and Alice. Humiliated by not being able to afford a room at the posh hotel, Peter is rescued by Rachel, the hotel's clerk. As Peter goes through his day, he tries to avoid Sarah, gets very drunk and tries to surf.

But there is trouble in paradise for Sarah and she soon realizes Alice is a pretentious jerk. Peter learns to enjoy life with Rachel who takes him hiking and jumping off a cliff. She illustrates that he should not give up on his dreams, encouraging him to finish his rock opera on "Dracula." While Sarah begins to see the value of Peter, Rachel fears he will go back to her and Peter must find his own way.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall is brilliantly self-referential at a key moment when Peter describes his rock opera of Dracula as a tragedy that others have mistaken as a comedy. There is a lot to laugh at in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, but more often than not, the film is a character study of a deeply depressed man who is motivated by powerful emotions stemming from a strong sense of loss. Peter is sad and awkward as he is difficult to watch through most of the movie because of his self-destructive tendencies and . . . depressed people are not fun to watch.

But what works well for the film and for Peter is that he is both a creative genius and a romantic. Peter's complex emotions do not stop him from having tendencies that are very much those of a realist. So, he knows that his musical accompaniment for the television show is little more than annoying mood music fragments and this has left him feeling professionally and creatively unfulfilled much the way he is emotionally unfulfilled following Sarah leaving him. Still, just as he has potential in a relationship with the sarcastic and disenchanted Rachel, he has the chance for professional satisfaction and growth through his rock opera and once he stops being s depressed drunk long enough to mention his other interests, he becomes truly realized and entertaining to watch.

Written by Jason Segel, Forgetting Sarah Marshall is predictably easy for Segel to perform in. Segel is playing the part he wrote and he comes to it with an ease that does not seem to push the limits of his acting ability. The obsessive nature of Peter, for example, is a note Segel played in both Freaks And Geeks and Undeclared. As such, it is hard to say the movie has great acting. It does, however, have fairly inspired casting and Segel performs his own words quite well. He capitalizes on his sense of comic timing as well as dramatic tension when his character is brooding.

But more than that, Segel is surrounded by a great supporting cast. Kristen Bell is very much the stereotype (or archetype) of the blonde celebrity and Bell plays the unlikable role convincingly. She is able to play cruel and heartless well and her role accents Peter's inherent goodness. The one who truly dazzles is Mila Kunis as Rachel. Kunis is often cast in roles that play her as conceited or manipulative and in Forgetting Sarah Marshall she has a surprisingly wholesome role that she is exceptionally likable in. This is a stretch for her as an actress, but she meets the challenge with a looser body language and this becomes one of her more memorable roles.

And while the movie is occasionally dark and emotionally heavy, it is still funny. Forgetting Sarah Marshall features crude humor and male nudity as humor. Most of the jokes are verbal, with characters spacing out or getting into uncomfortable situations, like Peter, Rachel, Sarah and Alice having dinner together. As well, there are quick one-liners, like Alice offhandedly mentioning he has genital herpes, but he hasn't mentioned it to Sarah because he is not having an outbreak. The film has a number of quick jokes like that and it is likely to satisfy those who enjoy the style of humor of Judd Apatow films (he was a producer on the movie and he essentially discovered Jason Segel).

On DVD, Forgetting Sarah Marshall includes such bonus features as a slew of deleted and extended scenes which are actually quite funny. As well, there is a gag reel and a few of the scenes that were not included in the theatrical release are highlighted in a special featurette. There is also full-length commentary track, which is funny and informative. Fans will enjoy the bonus features.

Anyone who can handle more moody comedies will find something to like out of Forgetting Sarah Marshall, but those looking for a pure comedy are likely to be unpleasantly surprised. The movie, while predictable in the character arcs like most romantic comedies, is surprisingly dense and emotionally-driven. This makes it a better movie than it might initially seem, but also a very different type of film.

For other works featuring Mila Kunis, please check out my reviews of:
Black Swan
Family Guy Presents: It’s A Trap!
Date Night

5.5/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.



| | |