22 Jump Street

Turn down for what?

The day of sequels was cut a bit short in the movies department; I only saw one of them. I'm waiting to watch How to Train Your Dragon 2, until I an see it with the girlfriend in July. But at least I was able to see 22 Jump Street.

 

Whoever said sequels can't be better than the original needs to watch this movie. But then again, if you didn't like the first one, you are most likely not going to like this one. But I don't know many people that didn't like the first one.

I take back almost everything I said about how good A Million Ways to Die in the West was. I'd still give it a 7.5, or whatever my score was (I'm too lazy to check), but God, when a good comedy comes out like this one, you realize just how sub-par other comedies are. I will say that this was a lot more "adult" than it's predecessor, 21 Jump Street. If that means anything. There were more obscenities, more sex, and much more violence.

The plot is fairly simple to explain, and nearly identical to the first film, as exemplified (fairly on the nose) by Nick Offerman's character early in the film.

It's actually a bit of a statement about Hollywood's constant remakes and sequels. But it's directly referential to this film itself, basically stating that we will be getting, for the most part, the same movie again. But this time, in college!

 Speaking from experience, everyone in college looks like babies - myself included.

This sort of self referential humor, along with a vast quantity of pop culture references are strewn across the film, and with great effect. My favorite of which would be the "red herring" joke. As the only writer amongst my friends I was the only one that understood the joke, and I'm pretty sure I was the only one in the theater that laughed at it, which is a bit upsetting. None the less, it was my favorite of the self referential jokes.

Ice Cube's role is larger this go around, and he is directly involved in two of the funniest scene's in the film, as well as the climax. Whereas in the first one, he was in the movie for all but ten minutes. He's a very welcome addition, providing a balance between Hill's and Tatum's overly comedic characters, as well as creating tension with one of the few twists I did not see coming. Which in all honesty, I should have. 

Like the first one, the "gay couple" jokes are strong in the narrative, but they aren't off putting. At least not to me, and in all honesty, I don't know why anyone should see them as insulting or off putting. In no way does the film make fun of homosexuality, or the idea of it, if anything the film embraces it. Above all else it's just an extreme portrayal of the "bromance" archetype.

I only bring this up, because I have seen some, negative backlash about that aspect of the film's humor. Perhaps it's because I'm not homosexual that I see no issue with the jokes, or maybe it's just because I see them as jokes and don't take them seriously, but I have no issue with this movies extreme "bromance" relationship. The worst it gets is the scene in the therapist's office, and that simply was a case of the therapist confusing them for a homosexual couple. Nothing more, nothing less - but of course their wording didn't help the situation either.

 

I don't enjoy spoiling movies for people that haven't seen them before, so I try to keep my wording as vague as possible. But with comedies it's harder because you sort of have to give the exposition for a joke, to explain the joke and what is going on. Minor spoilers are not exactly avoidable with comedies. Especially when I throw .GIF's into these reviews.

All in all, the movie was fantastic. It is by far, one of the best comedies I have seen in years, I was laughing consistently throughout, a few times, too much.The pre-credits sequence was hysterical, though it leaves the potential future of the franchise in question. Also, for those who have seen the trailers, do not expect every joke in the trailer to be in the movie, because a few of them, are not there.

22 Jump Street gets a 9.5/10.

I'll be back around the 27th with a review for Transformers: Age of Extinction in which I will probably spew hatred of it for it's dirt explosions. 

 

I just get a vast amount of enjoyment from the explosion coming from the dirt behind Grimlock's head.

Hopefully the Dinobots can speak English and transform out of their dinosaur form. The toys at least suggest they can. Until then, have a video:

Something Cool.

A Million Ways to Die in the West

A bit late on this entry, I know - but forgive me, I'm working on other stuff such as getting an apartment and my license and a car, as well as furnishing said apartment. Not to mention, trying to keep up with the shows I watch in the process. So as you can imagine I've been a bit busy. Hell, I still haven't started getting into Mad Men or any of the HBO shows now on Amazon Prime that I claimed I would have been flying through by this point. Call me lazy, but I just haven't gotten around to any of them.

 

I should probably start by saying that I enjoyed this a lot, and I mean a lot, more than most. It's currently sitting at 33% on Rotten Tomatoes, with an average rating of 4.8/10. Admittedly a little less than Ted. Though only slightly. Perhaps I'm just an idiot that likes Seth McFarlane and his comedy style, I mean I do still enjoy watching Family Guy and American Dad, I never really liked The Cleveland Show, though not many really did.

The humor this go around was a lot more obscene than in Ted, or rather, just more in your face about it. I'd be lying though if I told you I could remember a single line of dialogue that wasn't in the trailer. I'd also be lying if I said, as other critics have claimed, that the best jokes are in the trailer. I was one of the people that had seen the trailer for this several times and still found me laughing at the jokes I had already heard. So perhaps, I was just the right audience for this movie.

I should probably get this out of the way now, because a lot of people seem to be claiming that this was trying to be Blazing Saddles. Like this moron. Perhaps "moron" is a strong word, because he actually has a job, but then again, so do most people. There's literally nothing in this film that resembles the mastery of self-referential comedy that is Blazing Saddles. This isn't even self referential. Sure, "Mila Kunis" is the Native American word for "fine" in the film, but that was simply a joke, and nothing more. Comparing this to Blazing Saddles is like comparing apples to oranges, and I mean that literally. They're both comedies that take place during the 1800's in the West. Just like apples and oranges are fruit. However apples are not oranges, they have a different texture, taste, and they don't need to be peeled (well oranges don't technically need to be peeled, but it's highly recommended). A Million Ways is not Blazing Saddles, it's tailor made for McFarlane's audience, and not trying to be a commentary on comedy and how films are made, Seth McFarlane is not Mel Brooks, nor do I think he is even trying to be. The only similarity between them is that they are Western Comedies, that's it, that's as close as they get to each other.

I just have to ask why so many are making this insane comparison. It's like they thought Blazing Saddles was the only western based comedy to have existed before this (1, 2, 3, 4 there's also this one comparing it to Django Unchained, which in no way was a comedy, though there is a Jamie Foxx cameo). Sure, it is likely that Blazing Saddles had some influence on the film, but what about Three Amigos, Back to the Future: Part III (There's even a friggin cameo that would suggest that had more of an influence than Blazing Saddles), Or even Maverick or My Name is Nobody. The fact of the matter is that people are seemingly refusing to see that this is simply a western comedy, and thus it will have similarities to other western comedies. Perhaps its the absurd nature of A Million Ways that links it to the extreme nature of Blazing Saddles.

I also feel the need to call out the writers of these reviews for their comments, but I won't and call it their opinion. But when I see a line like, "There’s also a runaway slave shooting gallery, which shows MacFarlane’s willingness to offend," I can't just sit back and let that slide. First of all, when has comedy not been about offending someone? When did comedy become something to where nobody should be offended? I've always lived under the impression that comedy, inherently in it's very nature, will offend someone, and that's partially where the humor comes from. I mean, arguably the best stand up comedian ever was George Carlin, and you can't get much more offensive than him.

Basically pointing out that a comedy is being offensive is pointless. If everyone went to a comedy, let a lone an r-rated comedy expecting to at some point not be offended by what they see, then I'm afraid...

 

Sure, I'll admit that Mcfarlane was perhaps not the best choice to lead this film, plenty of people would have potentially be better fit to play the role, I'll agree there, but that's as far as I'll go. It seems that more and more people take offense to jokes and somehow label that as a bad thing. Your personal inability to take a joke is nobodies fault but your own, and you are in no place to blame the movie for your being offended. You spent the money to go see it, you are entirely at fault. Now you can however blame the movie for not being funny, because if you didn't find it funny then it's just not your type of comedy. That may seem like a double standard, but it isn't, allow me to explain.

In one case you find a joke offensive, in both then, it's safe to assume that the joke would be found to be unfunny. Many people can find the joke unfunny, I found a lot of the jokes not-particularly funny while others around me were laughing or not laughing. If they also take an offense to it, that's a personal problem. You are putting your own personal feelings about what can or cannot be joked about above all else. I've said this, for what seems like a million times now, but nothing is off-hands in comedy. Anything and everything can be joked about, and if we start saying "you can't joke about that" because we don't want to offend someone, then we can't joke about anything in fear of offending the next person. That may seem like a slope that is slippery, but it isn't, it's just stating that if we start trying not to offend people, we'll end up at a point, where we won't be because jokes won't be offensive any more, or there just won't be comedians any more (that may be a bit of a stretch though, and I can conceive of that point falling into that of the slippery slope variety). 

Take for example last night's episode of Louie (a bit off topic, but it's relevant) the episode entitled "Pamela 1." Louie tries to force himself onto Pamela, in an attempt to kiss her or more. He even begins to lift her shirt up, all while she is saying "No," and trying to leave, but he is persistent. It goes no where, aside from an awkward, consented kiss. But when she gets away from him, when he stops trying, she says "This would be rape if you weren't so stupid -- you can't even rape well," while pulling her shirt back down over her stomach. You can either watch the episode for your self, or read this article about it. The writer of the article states at the end, "While Louie the character doesn't see the connections, I suspect that Louis the writer knows them all too well—and we have him to thank for producing an episode of television that manages to reflect lived realities while simultaneously challenging them, and even sneaks in a few great jokes in the process." We have something as offensive as rape, and yet, there are jokes about it. Which is not entirely surprisingly, as Louie has defended the use of rape jokes before stating, "To me, all dialogue is positive. For me, any joke about anything bad is great. Any joke about rape, the Holocaust, the Mets -- any joke about something bad is a positive thing. I've read some blogs during this thing that has enlightened me with things I don't know" (Source).

 

Then there's this from an entirely different episode (full scene).

So basically, offensive things exist in comedy. That's just the way it is, and nothing is off limits. All in all, I enjoyed my time with A Million Ways. I found it enjoyable, and wasn't bored with it, I was laughing enough to keep my interest and occasionally I was laughing uncontrollably. 

The opening cinematography and landscape shots will remind any western fan of the classic westerns that they know. Just keep in mind, this in no way is a classic western. I'm giving A Million Ways to Die in the West a 7.5 out of 10. Despite the comedy hitting strong at points, there were still a lot of jokes that fell flat, and admittedly McFarlane is a rather weak lead here, and it would have done the movie better justice to have cast someone else in the lead. Also, NPH is awesome.

 I doubt that I'll be going to the theaters this weekend for either Edge of Tomorrow or The Fault in Our Stars. I'll likely be waiting until next week and the 13th's release of both How to Train Your Dragon 2 as well as 22 Jump Street. Until next time, here's a video, enjoy: