Tag Archives: seth rogen

‘Sausage Party’ as Funny as it is Thought-Provoking

Leave a reply

Sausage_PartyFor an animated movie about swearing hot dogs, this thing has a surprising amount of intelligence.

 

“Sausage Party” is a (very) R-rated animated film about food who believe humans are gods sent to save them, but begin to realize what actually happens to them once they are taken out of the supermarket. It stars an ensemble voice cast, including Seth Rogen, Kristen Wiig, Jonah Hill, Michael Cera, Nick Kroll, Edward Norton and Salma Hayek, among a half dozen others. Greg Tiernan and Conrad Vernon, best known for their work on other raunchy comedies like “Thomas the Tank Engine” and “Shrek 2,” respectively, direct.

 

I was excited for this, because I love Seth Rogen but also the premise of this film is brilliant and the red band trailer may be the funniest trailer of all-time, no hyperbole. And while “Sausage Party” is never laugh-out-loud hilarious, it is a very funny, consistently entertaining and surprisingly thought-provoking piece of adult cinema.

 

One of the great things about the film is it pokes fun of every race, religion and creed, so that way no one can call foul. The entire premise of the film is that the food’s installed beliefs in gods and a “great beyond” is a sham and all who believe in it without proof are fools, however it will then flip the script and insult those who question it just because that is the easier thing to do. There’s plenty of jokes about Middle Easterns not getting along and how foolish those feuds are, as well as more racist jokes than PC people will care to count. There are also some brilliant food puns and references, like a Hitler-esque character wanting to destroy the juice (get it?).

 

Even when the film isn’t making you laugh you are still entertained, as the all-star cast keeps things going at a light, breezy pace, even if at times things do begin to feel a bit repetitive and aimless.

 

And that’s one thing that does hold “Sausage Party” back from being great, is that after a while a hot dog saying the c-word or a bun making jokes about her buns gets old, and as much as I love food puns (or any kind of pun), Nick Kroll’s talking douche makes so many they begin to become forced (which is the point, but awareness doesn’t excuse it). Speaking of Kroll, his Jersey Shore bro voice gets annoying after a while, and his revenge plot is inserted into the plot purely to get it to a theatrical runtime.

 

I really had a good time with “Sausage Party.” I never had a riotous laugh out loud moment, but I had a lot of well-earned chuckles, and the film does make you think about how our own world works. Much like “Popstar” (which I please implore you to see) the film is very stupid and irrelevant yet very intelligent and self-aware all at the same time, and it is a great way to end the summer.

 

Critics Rating: 7/10

Sony

Sony

‘Neighbors 2’ a Rare Comedy Sequel That Works

Leave a reply

Neighbors_2_Sorority_RisingIs that a unicorn? No? Just a comedy sequel that is as good as the original? Huh. Well, they’re both magical and rare. [cough] I apologize for that lame intro. Onto the review.

 

“Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising” is the sequel to the 2014 hit “Neighbors,” which is Seth Rogen’s highest grossing film to date. When a sorority led by Chloë Grace Moretz moves in next door, Rogen and his wife (Rose Byrne) must enlist the help of former frat leader Teddy (Zac Efron) in order to make sure their house sells. Nicholas Stoller returns to direct.

 

I enjoyed the original “Neighbors” a fair amount on my first viewing and very much on my second. It just has a fun watchability about it, even if it isn’t Rogen’s best comedy. When they announced a sequel was in the works I wasn’t surprised but I was worried; there really wasn’t much more they could seemingly do with these characters, plus the trailers made the sequel out to look like an exact replica of the first film. But after seeing the movie, I can tell you: I was right, it is literally the same movie. But for all the best reasons.

 

Everything that worked about the original is once more a strength here. Zac Efron again shows that his true calling is comedy (he saved “Dirty Grandpa” from being a disaster) as he reprises the role of clueless but lovable frat-head Teddy. Teddy isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed but he means well, and Efron plays his character with the right blend of simple, vulnerable and charming. I have always been a supporter of him (not a fan, but…) so as long as he keeps accepting that he is the dumb hot jock, I think Efron will be ok.

 

The guy I am a fan of is Seth Rogen and he is his normal Seth Rogen self, that meaning he makes pot jokes, pokes fun at how fat he is and says the f-word a lot. He and Rose Byrne (as charming and bae-able as ever) have good chemistry and you do buy their relationship as stressed parents.

 

The film is for the most part paced well thanks to sharp editing by Zene Baker and colorful cinematography by Brandon Trost (Rogen’s normal duo). Director Nicholas Stoller knows how long scenes should last to not have them overstay their welcome, which keeps things moving along at a nice pace (the film is only 92 minutes long).

 

The film makes a few good points about the hypocrisy of men and frats vs women and sororities, like how it is actually against sorority rules to host a party (which is crazy and definitely not OK), and for this the film is to be commended. However it then begins to really shove “women can do anything men can do and probably better!” down the audiences throat (not in an aggressive way, but almost every scene tries to offer commentary) and it got tedious for me be the end.

 

Also there are small things that require you to suspend belief of reality. When it’s an exploding airbag I can do that but when someone breaks into another person’s home and then openly brags about it and sells the stolen item, and then the owner doesn’t go to the police simply because it would end the movie, that makes you take a step back.

 

“Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising” isn’t necessarily a great comedy but it is a great comedy sequel, in that much like “22 Jump Street” it is fully aware it has no reason at all for even existing and never tries to one-up its predecessor (unlike the sequels to: “The Hangover,” “Horrible Bosses” or “Zoolander”). Is it side-splitting funny? No, but I had a smile on my face for a majority of the runtime and so long as familiarity and genital jokes don’t bother you, you should do yourself a favor and check out Zac Efron’s abs—er, sorry, I mean, this movie.

 

Critics Rating: 7/10

Variety

Variety

‘Steve Jobs’ Near-Perfectly Acted and Written Biopic

SteveJobsposterIt’s going to be awkward when Michael Fassbender wins the Oscar for Best Actor over Leonardo DiCaprio for a role that DiCaprio turned down…

“Steve Jobs” is a biopic based on the man of the same name. Fassbender plays the titular Apple co-founder, while Seth Rogen portrays Steve Wozniak, Kate Winslet plays Joanna Hoffman, and Jeff Daniels portrays John Sculley, the former CEO of Apple. Based off a script by Aaron Sorkin and directed by Danny Boyle, the film follows Jobs in the hours leading up to the three biggest product launches of his career in 1984, 1988 and 1999.

I have been anticipating this movie for a very long time. I am absolutely in love with Aaron Sorkin’s brand of fast-paced dialogue and long monologues, and this film is a showcase for his craft. I also enjoy Seth Rogen, so even though he isn’t smoking weed and getting into hijinks with James Franco, he was a joy to watch, and he gives the most genuine performance of his career. However the real star of the film is Fassbender who while bearing very little physical resemblance to his real-life counterpart, embodies the brilliant, calculating and at times frustrating nature of the late-great Jobs.

The film is broken up into three main acts, each taking place in the hour leading up to an important product unveiling: the Macintosh in 1984, the NeXT box in 1988, and the iMac in 1998. Each one of these time periods is shot on different types of film (16mm, 35mm and digital), so each has a different look and feel. Overall, I really liked these approaches, and thought it was a very unique way of approaching a biopic.

The writing in the film is nothing short of excellent, if not perfect. Like I said, I may be a bit biased because I love me some Sorkin (“The Social Network” is the best written film of all-time, fun fact), but his ability to have characters we should hate become likable and sympathetic. Plus his trademark rapid-fire, almost irrelevant conversations that are often side-splittingly funny, all make Steve Jobs, a man who neglects the acknowledgment of his daughter and makes the lives of all his co-workers a living hell, a man that we want to see succeed.

The acting in the film is all spot on as well, and that is likely a byproduct of the script. Like I said, Rogen is shockingly effective and emotional as the under-appreciated Wozniak, Winslet is quietly great as Jobs’ long-time confidant Joanna, and there is great fun in Michael Stuhlbarg’s abused engineer, Andy Hertzfeld. But much like the title of the film, the stage belongs to Fassbender, who is a tornado of energy and emotion. He is condescending, unreasonable and probably not a very good guy, but he continues to win us over with wise-cracks and breaking things down so that just maybe we can try and see the world how he does.

Director Danny Boyle, like Fassbender, does a great job keeping the energy going, especially for the first two thirds of the film. When Jobs is building Apple up and the trying to tear it down, it is near perfect filmmaking. It’s the third act, the final 30 minutes or so, that the film starts to get winded. It is probably just by comparison, but it felt like the stakes were never as high, and all the real conflict had already been dealt with. The third act, much like most any film, is where we get resolutions and closure with many characters, and I just wanted to go back to the days when Jobs was telling his engineers that if they didn’t fix a problem he would go out on stage and publically name them responsible.

The first act of “Steve Jobs” is fantastic, the second is great, and the third is good, which all in all combines to a pretty great end product. It is hands-down one of the best films of the year, and the writing, directing and acting will all likely win the film some shiny trophies come award season.

Critics Rating: 8/10

Variety

Variety

Chuckles, Butts and America in ‘The Interview’

The_Interview_2014_posterNothing says Christmas like Seth Rogen and James Franco trying to kill an Asian dictator.

“The Interview” is the second film to be directed by Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg, with a script by the duo and Dan Sterling. In case you have been as secluded from the outside world as a citizen of North Korea for the past seven months, the film follows an American talk show host and his producer (James Franco and Rogen) who are recruited to assassinate North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un (Randall Park).

Comedy is at its best when it takes risk. And making a film about killing the real-life leader of a country is certainly a risky move by Rogen and Goldberg. And is “The Interview” worth all the extra attention and scrutiny that it has received the past few months? No, not at all. But it is still a pretty funny movie.

I’m a huge Seth Rogen fan and I believe “Pineapple Express” and “This Is the End”, his two previous collaborations with Franco, rank among the greatest comedies of all-time. “The Interview” is not as laugh-out-loud as those two, or Rogen’s other works for that matter, but the screenplay has enough constant chuckles that keep the film flowing when the concept begins to stretch thin.

“The Interview” is essentially a buddy film so chemistry is key, and Franco and Rogen have some of the best in the business. Their give-and-take is second to none and Rogen knows how to deliver his own dialogue.

For some reason, some people hate James Franco. Here he plays a character that is in love with himself and strives to earn other people’s approval. Did Franco use his real-life experiences to tap into his character? I’m not to say, but either way, it’s a fun performance.

The real show stealer is Randall Park, who plays Kim. A huge fanboy of Franco’s show, Park plays Kim as sheepish while at the same time angry. It is a nuanced performance that lends some humanity to Kim and makes the audience question if the assassination is the right thing to do.

The film’s finale is by and far its best part. We get to see the interview with Kim which is entertaining and actually a bit insightful, but also features some fantastic Tarantino-like action sequences. Rogen and Goldberg have some well-staged scenes, partnered with cinematographer Brandon Trost, and the action really comes out of nowhere and grabs your attention.

The film is not perfect. Like I said, the laughs are not as roaring or often as Rogen’s other films, or even as other 2014 comedies including Rogen’s “Neighbors”. There are still plenty of chuckle moments, and a few one-liners that made my sides hurt, but it isn’t crazy.

The film isn’t as much of a biting satire that it could have been, or as much as I think the filmmakers intended. There are a few nuggets of insight and the film almost raises a few points on how America may not actually be any better than North Korea, but then Rogen throws in a butt joke or doesn’t carry the line far enough.

“The Interview” is disappointing in that it isn’t worth getting nuked over, but it still is a fun movie with a few surprises.  Rogen is impossible not to love, Randall Park gives a scene-stealing performance, and the look of the film is engaging. If you don’t run out and see the film will you miss out on a historic event, or lose your right to call yourself an American? No, but like an actual celebrity interview there are enough entertaining and interesting moments to keep your interest if you do.

Critics Rating: 6/10

‘Neighbors’ a Fun Watch

Leave a reply

neighborsImagine the Farrelly Brothers directed “Animal House”. The outcome would be something very similar to “Neighbors”. Directed by “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” director Nicholas Stoller, the film stars Seth Rogen and Rose Byrne as new parents whose life is turned upside down when a fraternity, led by Zac Efron and Dave Franco, moves in next door.

Seth Rogen was placed on Hollywood’s comedy radar when he exploded onto the scene in 2007 with “Knocked Up” and “Superbad”. Since then, he has made films that have been revered as some of the funniest films of the past decade, like “Pineapple Express” and “This Is the End”. It can be argued that he has never made a bad film, and certainly never something as lazy as most Adam Sandler movies. And the fact that “Neighbors” is not one of Rogen’s funniest films, but is still a solid film, says a lot.

In the very first scene of “Neighbors”, you know exactly what kind of movie you’re in store for. The film opens up with Rogen and Byrne awkwardly trying to get intimate in front of their newborn baby (yeah, the movie is set in a world where Seth Rogen can get a girl like Rose Byrne). The film has its share of gross out gags, and fair share of genitalia jokes, but it knows exactly where to end the joke and never overdoes it, like so many wannabe raunchy movies try to do.

The best part of “Neighbors”, a film featuring established comedy stars like Rogen, Christopher Mintz-Plasse and Hannibal Buress, is Zac Efron. For some reason, some people don’t like Efron. They say he’s just a pretty boy or a Disney Kid, or are just plain jealous (I mean, just look at the guy). But Efron may have just found his new niche, because he is perfectly cast as Teddy, the leader of the Delta Psi fraternity. Seamlessly blending cool nice guy with jerk, Efron steals every scene he is in, and possibly part of what makes his role so great is seeing the star of “High School Musical” dropping f-bombs and smoking joints.

What holds “Neighbors” back from the levels of Rogen’s other films is the amount of jokes in the film. While there are a lot of moments with clever gags or funny one-liners, there are sometimes five to ten minute segments where you won’t laugh; either a joke falls flat or there just doesn’t even seem to be one attempted. “Ted” had a similar issue; the film is never boring, it just may not be as funny as it thinks or hopes it is.

Editors don’t get enough credit from the normal filmgoer, so I’ll give Zene Baker, the editor of “Neighbors”, major props. The film is very well paced; its 96 minutes and but never feels rushed, and there are a few fun transition shots.

“Neighbors” isn’t the funniest film Seth Rogen has ever made, but it is still very entertaining. Zac Efron may have broken out of his shell and the rest of the supporting cast each lend something special. The film has its share of heart, too. I guess you could say the film is neat, tight and easy to watch; just like Zac Efron’s torso.

Critics Rating: 7/10