Karrit
Sloane Ranger
Posts: 2,299
Mar 15, 2005 14:32:04 GMT -4
|
Post by Karrit on Aug 27, 2005 15:08:19 GMT -4
Based on the feedback I read here, I DRUG Mr. Karrit to see this today. I could tell from the look on his face, he really didn't have any interest, but very sweetly went along anyway.
We loved it. I think the title is unfortunate because it implies that is just a raunchy boob fest and that might turn off a lot of women, and a lot of box office. Hopefully word of mouth will work for it.
I always thought Paul Rudd was cute, but "sigh" I totally get the crushing that is going in his thread.
I should go post this in the Dear Hollywood thread, but this is a perfect example of the kind of movie they should be focusing on making if they want people to come to movies. Great script with interesting characters. Good actors, but not HUGE NAMES. No special effects, and the budget was $26 mil. It has made almost $40 mil. I wouldn't be surprised if this has legs like "My Big Fat Greek Wedding." It sure deserves them.
|
|
|
Post by Oxynia on Aug 27, 2005 21:34:34 GMT -4
After reading this board, I have to drag Mr. Oxynia to see this immediately. We both love Steve Carrell on the Daily Show and he could carry a film.
FWIW, I was at my hairdresser's this morning and she told me that the chest waxing scene was real...Carrell wanted to give an authentic reaction, so that waxing was the real deal. It must have hurt but good since his hair wasn't trimmed down and they waxed big chunks at a time. I think he talked about this on one of the late-night talk shows this week.
|
|
tommytimp
Guest
Nov 28, 2024 6:55:18 GMT -4
|
Post by tommytimp on Aug 27, 2005 23:12:55 GMT -4
Yeah. I heard that story about 290 times last week. It looked painful indeed.
I just saw it. Some truly funny moments (my favorite: "Ampartido del futbol...") but it didn't qite add up. Maybe all the great reviews raised my expectations a little. But it was good.
|
|
giamaria
Guest
Nov 28, 2024 6:55:18 GMT -4
|
Post by giamaria on Aug 28, 2005 17:36:43 GMT -4
I was kind of disappointed by this. It seems that if you saw the previews and commercials you pretty much already saw all the good jokes, and most of the rest seemed to fall flat. There wasn't much laughter in the theater I was in.
I didn't like Anchorman the first time I saw that in the theater either, and I ended up loving it after watching it at home on cable, so maybe this one is like that too. But this movie has more of a sweetness and cuteness to it than Anchorman, which started to annoy me halfway through.
|
|
baseballgirl
Guest
Nov 28, 2024 6:55:18 GMT -4
|
Post by baseballgirl on Aug 28, 2005 19:50:13 GMT -4
Wow, giamaria, I had almost the opposite reaction. I saw snippets of the chest waxing scene about twenty times before going in, and was anticipating feeling like I'd already seen it, but I absolutely howled to the point of tears.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 28, 2024 6:55:18 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2005 0:00:50 GMT -4
I, too, was afraid that all of the best bits would have been in the preview (especially the "AHHHHH! Kelly Clarkson!!!!" chest waxing) but I was wrong. I laughed like a drain during the waxing (especially the reactions from the guys in the room) and almost died when he was [trying to put the condom on and having zero success].
I liked the sweetness that was in the movie. I thought it was well earned - it didn't seem tacked on to make the movie marketable or palatable to women - and added a lot to the movie. Although I know not everyone agrees with that assessment - a friend really thought the romantic aspect slowed down the pacing and made a great movie merely good. I think I would have enjoyed a movie about a 40-year-old virgin trying to score and being put in funny/painful situations as a result, but I loved a movie about a 40-year-old virgin trying to score and finding true love as a result (along with painful situations - whee!).
|
|
razzy
Guest
Nov 28, 2024 6:55:18 GMT -4
|
Post by razzy on Aug 31, 2005 10:34:35 GMT -4
my review was pretty much in line with ThursdayNext. Carrell's portrayal of the Virgin as a sweet guy who just lost his confidence -- not some awful troll that needs a make over - is what helped make the movie palatable.
What made the movie great were the developed secondary characters, smart writing and fairly surprising plot twists. Oh, and it was hilarious.
I love the way Paul Rudd throws himself into every comedy bit he does. He never holds back. Why doesn't he work more often?
|
|
goggle
Guest
Nov 28, 2024 6:55:18 GMT -4
|
Post by goggle on Sept 3, 2005 18:13:27 GMT -4
The positive feedback made me decide to see this movie on Monday. Is this okay viewing for a first date, or should I watch it at a later time?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 28, 2024 6:55:18 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2005 19:12:31 GMT -4
I think it is a date movie, but I wouldn't take someone who might be made uncomfortable by sexual situations or raunchy humor. The thing is, the movie is actually pretty character driven, imo, and that takes a lot of the potential offensiveness out of the cruder jokes. I would say that if you would watch something like There's Something About Mary or American Pie (40 YOV is much better than those two, imo) with your date, you'll be fine watching The 40 Year Old Virgin.
|
|
marywebgirl
Guest
Nov 28, 2024 6:55:18 GMT -4
|
Post by marywebgirl on Sept 19, 2005 12:03:14 GMT -4
I'm thinking this movie has legs that would rival Naomi Campbell. I finally saw it on Saturday night, and while the theater wasn't enormous it was pretty much full.
|
|