If fart jokes and predictable plot/gags are your thing, then you surely won't be disappointed. The setup is promising enough, two hetero guys in masculine (some might suggest homoerotic) job such as firemen, get a civil partnership in order to reap the benefits if Chuck (who isn't covered by similar life insurance policies, unusual in a fireman- the same cynical few would say), dies in a toasty manor... cue 'flaming queen jokes'
You can't help but wonder if Southpark's Awesome-O pretend robot could do a much better job at picking Sandler's movie choices.
The plot (for what it's worth) was allegedly 'borrowed' by Rob Schneider (will get to him later) from the movie Strange Bedfellows (2004, Paul Hogan) and then passed on to Adam Sandler when the were in 'Animal'. The first half of the film is given to proving that Larry is somewhat of a ladies man, and like, totally not a gay; coercing two sisters he is cheating on at the same time to kiss, bedding strippers 4 at a time (...ok we get the point Sandler) and other such activities that are only permissible through a somewhat strenuous suspension of disbelief.
Chuck on the other hand, is a family man who has recently lost his wife, has a daughter and rather camp son who he doesn't understand, but has a talent for doing the splits that does raise a wry smile.
The turning point in the film is when Chuck and Larry 'rescue' a morbidly obese man from a fire, wisecracking all the way, escorting him out through the burning building (without any form of breathing apparatus) they trip and, predictably he lands on Sandler. And then farts. nope...didn't see that one coming either. Later on Chuck saves Larry's life and then owes him one so he makes him marry him. Fine...whatever...I'm not giving myself a hernia with this one.
The presentation of women in the film is truly the grimmest spectacle since White Chicks. They are brainless top-heavy morons whose only purpose in this film is to swoon over the irresistible charms of Sandlers character. One is a Doctor, one is a Lawyer...both are apparently pole dancers, and gullible ones at that.
The only redeeming feature of the film is that in order to achieve a saccharine, preachy ending, the characters of Chuck and Larry soften in their attitude to gays, even though from 'What, you mean like f*ggots?' the only way can surely be up, and the jury is out whether you can spend 99% of the time saying 'f*ggots are wrong and weird', and the end 1% saying, 'sure they're wrong and weird, but the correct vernacular is 'gay'. (I gave one star for the use of the word vernacular in such a low-brow film)
What is such a let down in the film, save every labored setup and grim inevitable gag, is such a rich mine was not tapped, not even skimmed. All cultures are funny, especially gays they're ripe, even ridiculous in parts. Where were the references to Brokeback Mountain (a film needing a good spoofing if e'er there was one) the Birdcag-esquire situations? Even 'In and Out'...at least steal some decent gay jokes.
It is a sad reflection of the LBGT community that they are so trod upon that the best they can hope for is;
"in its own disarming way, it's a call for equality and respect."(GLAAD) ...REALLY? Hey, I'm glad these people don't represent me...so in its own way Benny Hill was a plea for understanding in a world of a masculine oppression? right?
You can make a big deal of the 'yellowing-up' Chinese character played by Schneider, with 'me so solly' etc, but it's not worth your time, society has moved on and this is barely post-ironic, just pathetic.
More disturbing is the underlying homophobia throughout the film. There is no heart, no empathy, all the jokes are cruel and lame and will do nobody any favors. Except Sandler who will win an MTV award for comedic performance, get $25,000,000 at the least and sit smugly in his mansion knowing that every race, sexuality and religion save his own has been rightly put in its place.
So is this just harmless entertainment? or a disgusting endorsement of every cruel playground stereotype...you decide. Personally I don't like to be preached to about acceptance by a movie so utterly homophobic that it's almost certinaly just over compensating for something...not that there's anything wrong with that.
You can't help but wonder if Southpark's Awesome-O pretend robot could do a much better job at picking Sandler's movie choices.
The plot (for what it's worth) was allegedly 'borrowed' by Rob Schneider (will get to him later) from the movie Strange Bedfellows (2004, Paul Hogan) and then passed on to Adam Sandler when the were in 'Animal'. The first half of the film is given to proving that Larry is somewhat of a ladies man, and like, totally not a gay; coercing two sisters he is cheating on at the same time to kiss, bedding strippers 4 at a time (...ok we get the point Sandler) and other such activities that are only permissible through a somewhat strenuous suspension of disbelief.
Chuck on the other hand, is a family man who has recently lost his wife, has a daughter and rather camp son who he doesn't understand, but has a talent for doing the splits that does raise a wry smile.
The turning point in the film is when Chuck and Larry 'rescue' a morbidly obese man from a fire, wisecracking all the way, escorting him out through the burning building (without any form of breathing apparatus) they trip and, predictably he lands on Sandler. And then farts. nope...didn't see that one coming either. Later on Chuck saves Larry's life and then owes him one so he makes him marry him. Fine...whatever...I'm not giving myself a hernia with this one.
The presentation of women in the film is truly the grimmest spectacle since White Chicks. They are brainless top-heavy morons whose only purpose in this film is to swoon over the irresistible charms of Sandlers character. One is a Doctor, one is a Lawyer...both are apparently pole dancers, and gullible ones at that.
The only redeeming feature of the film is that in order to achieve a saccharine, preachy ending, the characters of Chuck and Larry soften in their attitude to gays, even though from 'What, you mean like f*ggots?' the only way can surely be up, and the jury is out whether you can spend 99% of the time saying 'f*ggots are wrong and weird', and the end 1% saying, 'sure they're wrong and weird, but the correct vernacular is 'gay'. (I gave one star for the use of the word vernacular in such a low-brow film)
What is such a let down in the film, save every labored setup and grim inevitable gag, is such a rich mine was not tapped, not even skimmed. All cultures are funny, especially gays they're ripe, even ridiculous in parts. Where were the references to Brokeback Mountain (a film needing a good spoofing if e'er there was one) the Birdcag-esquire situations? Even 'In and Out'...at least steal some decent gay jokes.
It is a sad reflection of the LBGT community that they are so trod upon that the best they can hope for is;
"in its own disarming way, it's a call for equality and respect."(GLAAD) ...REALLY? Hey, I'm glad these people don't represent me...so in its own way Benny Hill was a plea for understanding in a world of a masculine oppression? right?
You can make a big deal of the 'yellowing-up' Chinese character played by Schneider, with 'me so solly' etc, but it's not worth your time, society has moved on and this is barely post-ironic, just pathetic.
More disturbing is the underlying homophobia throughout the film. There is no heart, no empathy, all the jokes are cruel and lame and will do nobody any favors. Except Sandler who will win an MTV award for comedic performance, get $25,000,000 at the least and sit smugly in his mansion knowing that every race, sexuality and religion save his own has been rightly put in its place.
So is this just harmless entertainment? or a disgusting endorsement of every cruel playground stereotype...you decide. Personally I don't like to be preached to about acceptance by a movie so utterly homophobic that it's almost certinaly just over compensating for something...not that there's anything wrong with that.