Funny People - Review Thread

[iv3rdawG]

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/853/funnypeopleposterj.jpg

Funny People is easily Apatow's saddest and most serious film but if you like his other movies you'll probably like this as well. It's not as heavy on the laughs as the Knocked Up and The 40-Year Old Virgin but they're still there. Adam Sandler is the star of the film and is near perfect in it. The stand up scenes throughout the film work so well. And such a great supporting cast too. Both Hill and Schwartzman are hilarious as Rogen's roommates and the cameos are probably the best in any movie I've seen, namely the Norm MacDonald, Eminem and Ray Romano ones. Also, Eric Bana is really great too. Aziz Ansari is only in the film for a couple of scenes but he steals the show in the scenes he's in. It's my favorite film of the year so far and I think if you haven't enjoyed Apatow's films that much this might be the one that will change your mind about him.

9.5/10

[Doomsday]

I had zero desire to see this until you mentioned the first cameo. Depending on his screentime, I just might take a peek by paying for something else then going to see this. Maybe.

[Dracula]

This might be the first major Apatow flick I don't bother with. These trailers have not been making me laugh, at all.

[MasterChief117]

Wow, I love how everyone is so turned off by this film and I think this looks like his best one yet(maybe next to The 40 Year Old Virgin). It looks like a lot of good writing with some jokes, the drama part looks interesting to me.

[Tornado]

I'll definitely see this. I do think some films under the Apatow banner are terrible, but the ones he has directed himself (40 Year Old Virgin and Knocked Up) have been pretty enjoyable.

[iv3rdawG]

I had zero desire to see this until you mentioned the first cameo. Depending on his screentime, I just might take a peek by paying for something else then going to see this. Maybe.

He's in it for about 15 seconds. But still, it's Norm. Eminem probably has the longest cameo.

[Justin]

Pretty excited to see this, actually. Glad you enjoyed it, iv3rdawg.

[J1gS4w]

He's in it for about 15 seconds. But still, it's Norm. Eminem probably has the longest cameo.

Hey I got a question. Could you tell me everything about eminems cameo. Like what happens etc? Lol

[iv3rdawG]

He pretty much just talks to Adam for a couple of minutes. It's funnier if you see it in the film to be honest. Especially with everyone who's surrounding them. You'll like it though. Something completely different.

[SnoBorderZero]

Possibly seeing this tonight. I'm tired of these lackluster comedies that Apatow has slapped his name on, all of them have been either mediocre or bad since Superbad so I'm looking forward to Apatow getting things back on track. Hopefully that is.

[J1gS4w]

So this movie comes out on the 31st?

[donny]

Wait, so does Adam die?

[iv3rdawG]

No, but just the outcome of some of the stuff in the end of the film for some characters can be viewed as quite sad. As in who gets with who, etc. Just in tone and subject matter throughout the film it's a much sadder movie than his others.

[malwathera]

So many people and comedy movie fans have waited on this movie Funny People (2009) and also now It was on coming soon this movie will be released on 31st I think and till then I have seen this movie trailer of movie and it was so fascinating to see how these guys making hilarious jokes from no where out of the blocks.

source

http://blog.*******************.com/in-theaters/funny-people-movie-2009-a-comedian-stand-up-against-death

[saveus1011]

This might be the first major Apatow flick I don't bother with. These trailers have not been making me laugh, at all.

The film likely won't either.

[Daniel]

Is this movie really two and a half hours long? Did it feel long or drag at all?

[saveus1011]

Is this movie really two and a half hours long? Did it feel long or drag at all?

Close to it, and yes it drags. Badly.

[Daniel]

Well damn ... I'm planning on seeing it and the Collector tomorrow back-to-back.

[Silent Yoda]

It's easily Apatow's most ambitious film yet, and with all ambitious films, there is a risk that the audience won't respond to it. He packs in a little too much, so it's a bit unwieldy, but if you're at all interested in the subject matter (stand-up comedy, in particular), you should be able to go along for the ride. I loved it, and can't wait to see it again.

Knocked Up is still Apatow's best overall film, but Funny People should at the very least become a cult success in hardcore comedy circles. It's very honest about the dark side of success and stand-up comedians in general. It's the next evolutionary step for Apatow as a director. It's his most personal movie to date, delivering much more dramatic weight than you would expect from the filmmaker who made stars out of Steve Carell and Seth Rogen.

Don't go in expecting more of the same. This is not an outrageous buddy comedy. It's a movie about pain, personal growth, missed opportunities and so many other universal topics. Wow. We have a thought-provoking, emotionally resonant Adam Sandler movie on our hands. Is the world ready?

I really hope so.

[saveus1011]

My full review: http://www.atomicpopcorn.net/atomic-team-review-funny-people/

Enjoy. I wanted to love it.

[saveus1011]

Well damn ... I'm planning on seeing it and the Collector tomorrow back-to-back.

You're better off with THE HURT LOCKER instead of this for that double feature.

[Silent Yoda]

You're better off with THE HURT LOCKER instead of this for that double feature.Yes. If you haven't seen The Hurt Locker or (500) Days of Summer yet, go see those instead. If you've already seen those movies, I recommend you give Funny People a chance. It's not for everyone, but some of you will love it. I did.

[Daniel]

dp

[Daniel]

Hey I got a question. Could you tell me everything about eminems cameo. Like what happens etc? Lol

Ray Romano is talking to Ira [Seth Rogen] about seeing Eminem and George [Adam Sandler] talking to one another. The movie had a re-occurring joke about how annoying it is to celebrities for fans to take photos on their cell phones. Ray Romano takes out his cell phone and takes a photo of Eminem as he is chastising George for getting better and making a decision to make another movie. The monologue is funny because it's really Eminem describing his own career and comeback. He sees Ray Romano (but doesn't know who Ray Romano is) taking their photo and starts telling him to go **** himself, basically. Then Ira turns to Ray and says "I thought everyone loved you."

I don't even remember Norm McDonald's cameo. It was brief and forgettable.

[MasterChief117]

Okay it's official that I've given up all hope in Entertainment Weekly's ratings...



Transformers 2 - B
Funny People - C-
The Ugly Truth - C+




I mean, what the hell is this?

[Daniel]

Okay it's official that I've given up all hope in Entertainment Weekly's ratings...

Transformers 2 - B
Funny People - C-
The Ugly Truth - C+

I mean, what the hell is this?

You are absolutely right, Transformers 2 NEVER should have gotten that high of a rating.

[Daniel]

Where to start ... I guess with the pre-viewing mindset I had. I was sure I was going to like this movie. I had no reservations what it was going to be like going into it, and I was pretty sure I had this movie pegged. Well, I was right, it was everything I thought it would be, but I still felt disappointed.

I do have to say that Adam Sandler's acting was quite good, and this might be my favorite role that Seth Rogen has done thusfar. He always plays the idiot regular guy who acts real cocky and perverse. In this movie he still had some perverse material, but the cockiness was gone. He seemed a lot more humble and much more down-to-earth.

My first problem with the movie was inescapable. Adam Sandler basically played Adam Sandler in this film. I am not talking about Adam Sandler playing the typecast character we are used to seeing in films, but the actual actor behind the funny mask. They slapped a fictional name [George] on him, and then basically presented a movie that showed what life would be like for Adam Sandler were he to find out he was dying. The difference is that "Funny People" makes George single and focuses on what he lacks in his life even though he has all the money and public attention in the world.

Seth Rogen plays Ira, a struggling stand-up comic who lives with his fellow stand-up comic Leo [played by Jonah Hill] and actor Mark [played by Jason Schwartzman]. Leo is actually gaining momentum as a comic and uses creative ways to get his name recognized, while Mark is the star of a crappy television show, but still manages to pull in $25,000 paychecks regardless of the failure of the show. Ira is the odd man out, struggling to find his place as he works at Otto's deli in a grocery store in order to pay the bills. He life changes when mega, A-list celebrity George asks him to be his personal assistant and take care of him and write jokes for him while he is dying.

George and Ira form an authentic and genuine friendship in which Ira keeps George's head above water and keeps him from completely degenerating into a dark person. When George is faced with his mortality, he realizes how shoddy his life really is and starts to make changes in his relationships.

I have to say that Ira and George's relationship is the strong point of this film. The humor in this movie is a lot more subtle and contingent upon continuity than you would expect, being a Judd Apatow movie. Still I laughed a lot, even at a very tasteless joke told by Adam Sandler when he attempts to poke fun as his own Jewish heritage. I saw the humor as a bonus as I fully expected this to be more of a drama, but it brought the laughs.

Still, the entire time I was watching the movie I felt like I was watching a biopic on Adam Sandler's life. It worked and wasn't a huge problem, but it was a bit of a detractor.

The bigger and escapable problem was the third act. The first two-thirds of the movie take us around L.A.'s comedy club scene, a Myspace party with Tom, Ira's home, George's home, the doctor's office, and then a few other places. The relationships are all well-played, the humor is, again, subtle but laughable [unless you don't like stand-up comedy, then you will probably not enjoy much of this film], and the story is very entertaining. Then, a major turning point hits when George finds out he is cured, and goes to Northern California with Ira to visit his ex-fiancee, Laura, played by Leslie Mann.

Laura is "the one that got away," which the movie seems to need to remind the audience of several times, probably because she is in the film briefly near the beginning, and then doesn't show up again until the third act (this is a long time because the movie clocks in at about 2 hours and 30 minutes.) Until Laura's appearance, I was absolutely adoring this film and thinking of how high a rating I was going to give it on the boards. Unfortunately, Leslie Mann and Eric Bana show up, and we're subjected to a good 45 minutes of boring scenes within Laura's home involving a bunch of people that have had nothing to do with the entire movie up until this third act. The whole pace of the movie changed, and I suddenly felt like I was watching a different movie altogether. "Funny People" was suddenly trying to sell itself as a film about George and Laura's relationship when, in fact, the entire first 2/3 of the movie were about George and Ira's relationship. I could have handled the juxtaposition of the two relationships had they woven it better and done a better job editing it, but it just came across like two unequal, unbalanced parts slopped together. It was like like Jud Apatow was giving the audience 4 pounds of meat and a 2 inch bun, but trying to get you to just enjoy the bun and forget the meat.

I suppose this was meant to be Jud Apatow's opus, but it only succeeded in telling all of America that Jud needs to stick with what he knows and does because he can't do this serious drama thing. He just can't. The material and the relationships are too heavy and were handled poorly.

As for the cameos, they were gold, but they were all lumped in together into one small portion of the film. And that was the overall problem with the film is that it felt too compartmentalized and moved in a "Ok, let's do point A, now on to point B, ok shift to point C" manner much more than in a fluid manner. The first two-thirds of the movie were fine, great even. Why did Apatow decide to throw out all the characters, pacing, and humor that were making the film work? Why did he suddenly and completely change the set, the mood, and the people in the film just to give the audience and George some closure on an issue that wasn't really an issue the entire majority of the film? Sure, George always has the Laura thing hanging in the back of his mind, but that isn't as apparent to the audience as Apatow needed to make it in order to have the third act of the film really work.

I was going to love this, and for the first 2/3 of the movie I really did. But, it fell apart and became a soupy mess, though I would still maintain that "Funny People" was mostly enjoyable, and worth watching again with people on DVD perhaps.

6/10. Slightly better than average.

[ellasijom]

Have you ever like enjoying comedy movies it was some of the good hobbies a man can have and I am one of them yesterday I have seen this movie Funny People (2009) (http://blog.*******************.com/in-theaters/watch-funny-people-online) and I was really interested of this movie because it does shows a fine life story of a man who have make the people laugh and when he was nearing his death as the doctors says he began to face the life in new way free movies (http://www.*******************.com) we have seen it and recognizable movie it was


source

http://www.*******************.com

[saveus1011]

Daniel, you and I had pretty much the same thoughts on the film. Laura and George's relationship needed to be sprinkled throughout the first two acts so that way when we get to the third, we've got her built in our minds.

I really wanted to love this film, but I just couldn't in the end. In fact, this might be my biggest disappointment of the year.

[MasterChief117]

Wow, the fact that you disclude Transformers from that post makes me want to say screw you, but I like you too much for that. lol

[Daniel]

Daniel, you and I had pretty much the same thoughts on the film. Laura and George's relationship needed to be sprinkled throughout the first two acts so that way when we get to the third, we've got her built in our minds.

I really wanted to love this film, but I just couldn't in the end. In fact, this might be my biggest disappointment of the year.

Me too. I actually think Jud Apatow's humor is over-the-top for me when it comes to the perversion, and I walk into his movies preparing to be agitated, but I usually end up enjoying his movies in the end anyway. I thought this would be refreshing and a nice change in tone for his films, but it made me realize that he really needs to be a one-trick pony and stick with what he is good at. Had anyone other than Adam Sandler [whom I truly believe to be a very capable and versatile actor given the likes of "Punch Drunk Love"] been in the starring role, this film might have been unbearable.

And yeah, I felt George/Laura was a very abrupt intrusion into the film and their relationship upset the whole flow of the film. It was quite disappointing because the movie really did drag like you said it did at that point. I was literally thinking "GEORGE, JUST LEAVE THE DAMN HOUSE ALREADY" for a good 30 minutes.

45 minutes of this movie could have been removed and the story re-worked a little to make this a much better film.

There were a lot of great scenes, though. The cameos in George's home, the cameos in the bar, going to the doctor's office, all the standup scenes, the Thanksgiving meal, any scene with Daisy [I wish they had fleshed her and Ira out a lot more], any scenes with Scwartzman and Jonah Hill, and anytime Ira was at George's house were all superb.

[saveus1011]

Me too. I actually think Jud Apatow's humor is over-the-top for me when it comes to the perversion, and I walk into his movies preparing to be agitated, but I usually end up enjoying his movies in the end anyway. I thought this would be refreshing and a nice change in tone for his films, but it made me realize that he really needs to be a one-trick pony and stick with what he is good at. Had anyone other than Adam Sandler [whom I truly believe to be a very capable and versatile actor given the likes of "Punch Drunk Love"] been in the starring role, this film might have been unbearable.

And yeah, I felt George/Laura was a very abrupt intrusion into the film and their relationship upset the whole flow of the film. It was quite disappointing because the movie really did drag like you said it did at that point. I was literally thinking "GEORGE, JUST LEAVE THE DAMN HOUSE ALREADY" for a good 30 minutes.

45 minutes of this movie could have been removed and the story re-worked a little to make this a much better film.

There were a lot of great scenes, though. The cameos in George's home, the cameos in the bar, going to the doctor's office, all the standup scenes, the Thanksgiving meal, any scene with Daisy [I wish they had fleshed her and Ira out a lot more], any scenes with Scwartzman and Jonah Hill, and anytime Ira was at George's house were all superb.

It would have been, and that's what pains me. Sandler is giving an earnest performance here and this could have been an excellent, if not perfect "reflection" for him. Dick jokes aside, Apatow was doing a lot of good before he undid it just as quickly.

George and Laura...the only person who I felt had a natural reaction was Ira. Laura is basically "oh one minute I'm with you, the next I'm with Eric Bana." I also didn't buy that George would be that kind of an ******* about Laura's kid singing CATS when we're already starting to see him change. Maybe Apatow wanted to show that George really hadn't changed, but if so then what's the point of going ot NorCal in the first place? It's also not helped that Laura is upset George doesn't cry. I mean really, you're gonna get mad because someone who HAS NEVER SEEN YOUR ****ING KID doesn't cry? Also, you've spent the entire movie building to the fact that Rogen and Sandler will carry the film so why are you going to push Seth to the side just to showcase your wife?

I agree that all those scenes were great, but they all happen within or close to the first hour. UGH it bothers me how much potential this film had.

[halo7]

Funny People

What I Liked:

- A big step forward for Apatow as a filmmaker. Here we have something much more honest and personal than his previous films and while some people will cry "Get back to the jokes, clown" others will recognize his growth as a writer/director.

- A lot of people are mislabeling what is clearly a layered film as "unfocused". Here we have a meditation on the death of a celebrity that turns into an honest portrayal of what growing up really means. All of this is backed up by a behind the scenes look into the world of stand-up comedy. All of these things tend to flow together very well and if you are willing to look at the film as more than just a standard modern comedy where everything is supposed to be neat and have a big happy ending then you will realize what Apatow was going for.

- The performances are great. Adam Sandler is Oscar worthy and Seth Rogen breaks out of any dumb stoner stereotype that people have placed him in. Jonah Hill and Jason Schwartzman turn in very funny supporting roles but never rise above being (ironically enough) comic relief. Leslie Mann is indeed Judd Apatow's wife but she also happens to be a very good actress and this is her best role in quite some time. Her character has some extreme flaws but it is easier to feel sympathetic for her rather than in a movie like Knocked Up. She presents a realistic performance here and is obviously very dedicated to the role. She is not just fooling around on the set of her husband's movie like some seem to imply.

- The film, though not strictly a comedy, breaks a lot of stupid rules of the modern comedy genre. It doesn't assault you with constant jokes or long improvised riffs, it has a pretty somber tone for something marketed to the mainstream, and it treats revelation and romance in a realistic manner. The film is an attack on the stupid notion that movies have that after you go through a life changing experience and start to turn things around, a bunch of magical happy **** will happen to you and the credits will roll. There is something oddly refreshing seeing things just coming to a messy and somewhat unsatisfying end.

- The cameos are all well done and really funny.

What I Didn't Like:

- The film was a little long. It didn't really bother me because it felt like nearly everything in the second half was essential to the plot and everything in the first half was entertaining enough to be left in but a lot of people are whining that it "drags". So even though I disagree, I will point out I am in the minority.

- There were some really funny characters I wanted to see more of. Mainly more RZA and Aziz Ansari.

- I didn't find the soundtrack as engaging as it was in Knocked Up. It certainly wasn't bad but nothing too notable either.

Overall:
This is the film that will set apart the Apatow brand from Apatow the filmmaker. Some people have already began to jump ship on the guy but as a fan I am super excited to see his next project. Funny People didn't make me laugh nearly as much as Knocked Up, Superbad, or even Observe and Report but I will be damned if it wasn't better and more poignant than those films will ever come close to being. Congratulations Judd.

9.8/10

[daveanator]

what a horrible movie. The whole bit at the house was the most pointless thing i have ever seen. It made no sense. It didn't even move the story along just stupid useless filler.

[Justin]

Seeing this today.

[Neverending]

Great movie. Teenage boys will hate it because it's an adult movie as opposed to Apatow's previous teen-friendly movies. I find it amusing that film snob, Dracula is not interested since this is his cup of tea.

[Dhamon22]

Funny People

What I Liked:

- A big step forward for Apatow as a filmmaker. Here we have something much more honest and personal than his previous films and while some people will cry "Get back to the jokes, clown" others will recognize his growth as a writer/director.

- A lot of people are mislabeling what is clearly a layered film as "unfocused". Here we have a meditation on the death of a celebrity that turns into an honest portrayal of what growing up really means. All of this is backed up by a behind the scenes look into the world of stand-up comedy. All of these things tend to flow together very well and if you are willing to look at the film as more than just a standard modern comedy where everything is supposed to be neat and have a big happy ending then you will realize what Apatow was going for.

- The performances are great. Adam Sandler is Oscar worthy and Seth Rogen breaks out of any dumb stoner stereotype that people have placed him in. Jonah Hill and Jason Schwartzman turn in very funny supporting roles but never rise above being (ironically enough) comic relief. Leslie Mann is indeed Judd Apatow's wife but she also happens to be a very good actress and this is her best role in quite some time. Her character has some extreme flaws but it is easier to feel sympathetic for her rather than in a movie like Knocked Up. She presents a realistic performance here and is obviously very dedicated to the role. She is not just fooling around on the set of her husband's movie like some seem to imply.

- The film, though not strictly a comedy, breaks a lot of stupid rules of the modern comedy genre. It doesn't assault you with constant jokes or long improvised riffs, it has a pretty somber tone for something marketed to the mainstream, and it treats revelation and romance in a realistic manner. The film is an attack on the stupid notion that movies have that after you go through a life changing experience and start to turn things around, a bunch of magical happy **** will happen to you and the credits will roll. There is something oddly refreshing seeing things just coming to a messy and somewhat unsatisfying end.

- The cameos are all well done and really funny.

What I Didn't Like:

- The film was a little long. It didn't really bother me because it felt like nearly everything in the second half was essential to the plot and everything in the first half was entertaining enough to be left in but a lot of people are whining that it "drags". So even though I disagree, I will point out I am in the minority.

- There were some really funny characters I wanted to see more of. Mainly more RZA and Aziz Ansari.

- I didn't find the soundtrack as engaging as it was in Knocked Up. It certainly wasn't bad but nothing too notable either.

Overall:
This is the film that will set apart the Apatow brand from Apatow the filmmaker. Some people have already began to jump ship on the guy but as a fan I am super excited to see his next project. Funny People didn't make me laugh nearly as much as Knocked Up, Superbad, or even Observe and Report but I will be damned if it wasn't better and more poignant than those films will ever come close to being. Congratulations Judd.

9.8/10

This.

I loved this movie.

9.5/10

[Justin]

Thought it was pretty good. The 2nd act dragged a little, but the 3rd act really brought everything together nicely, I thought. Seth Rogen was hilarious and brought life to many of the scenes. Sandler hurt the film slightly. I'm not sure I bought a lot of his performance, but there were some moments where I felt for him.

There isn't much else to say; pretty average film, really.

Rating: C

[RedVader 2004]

Considering Sandler and Rogen never worked together before not as far as i know they had a pretty good scenes together. My problem was didn't seem like a Sandler movie too me. I may be weird but liked his other comedies more. Except for Mr Deeds and Anger Management. Those were his worst ones. This was an ok movie and Rogen looks a whole lot better here as an actor then his stoner type movies. He may not be such a bad Green Hornet after all.

B-

[Doomsday]

So you're complaining that it's not a typical Adam Sandler movie?:confused:

[Drizzt240]

People are saying this film is on a more serious and dramatic tone than his more previous efforts.

If it's more like Knocked Up than 40 Year-Old version I'm game.

I find Knocked Up and Super Bad to be his best films.

[SnoBorderZero]

Judd Apatow is definitely a breath of fresh air for the comedy genre, bringing not only genuinely funny laughs but interesting characters and a compelling story to go along with it. His produced affairs aren't so strong, falling more into the typical lackluster comedies with a bunch of okay jokes that have nothing to do with its non-existent plot (Forgetting Sarah Marshall). So "Funny People" looked to surely be Apatow's crown jewel since it contained by far his most compelling plot yet complete with more star power than ever with Adam Sandler, and it couldn't have been more disappointing.

Adam Sandler is an interesting case. I wouldn't say his acting abilities are on par with Jim Carrey, but his career choices are similar in that he is a solid actor who constantly bogs himself down with terrible movies. Sandler though displayed his talent in Paul Thomas Anderson's "Punch-Drunk Love", and some of that comes through here. He reflects on his life, glumly performs stand-up, and finally finds a friend in Seth Rogen. The first part of the movie is great, it contains a great balance of very funny jokes with introducing the plot. Even Seth Rogen who is usually unfunny and painfully one-dimensional does a decent job here, even though as the film moves on he becomes less and less needed as if Apatow forgot he was there.

Basically once you learn that Sandler isn't going to die the movie absolutely falls flat. Things become a total, dragged out mess. Why was this movie over 2 hours long? It takes far too long for the plot with his ex-girlfriend (Leslie Mann) to kick in and by that time we don't care. We haven't spent any time with these characters, and the characters we were spending time with in the beginning (Jonah Hill's character, Daisy) become afterthoughts. So then what was the point of taking so much time with them in the beginning? The movie is funny, yes, but after the beginning the funny is scattered throughout its painfully dragging running time with at times becomes so sappy and stupid you can't wait for it all to be over.

Apatow has once again delivered a funny film, but needed to cut his film by at least a half hour and do a rewrite of his actual plot. Unnecessarily long, bland plot-wise, nothing leads to anything, Seth Rogen is an afterthought in the 2nd half, and everything gets less interesting as it goes. Also, the cameos were pretty stupid, especially Eminem's. His part was so stupid, completely opposite of the current plot period. At least it had its funny moments.

6/10

[Daniel]

SnoBoarder, our reviews are almost identical and I had the same problems as you. Apatow could have taken the movie in several directions and given us a good story once the revelation in your spoiler took place, but he went the worst way he could have. Rogen's character almost became "Oh yeah, you're still here, I need to do something with you ... ummm ... ok ok, uhhhhhh .... ok, I guess do this." Even Jonah Hill's character has his closure take place on the tv when Sandler and Rogen are at the ex's house. I was wanting the movie to give us more of that, get us out of the house. It was almost like Apatow was dangling a carrot in our faces and saying "nah nah, remember the great characters you were interacting with for the first hour and 45 minutes? Well here is a screenshot of them doing something interesting and funny, but you're stuck in this stupid house with these stupid kids, this stupid ex, her stupid husband, and some stupid story about the marriage of two people you don't give a damn about."

I applaud Apatow for doing something different, the first 2/3 of the movie shows he is very capable to do something more mature than he is used to, but the last 1/3 of the movie also shows us that he can't really handle something so heavy-handed without some writer friends to help him out. People applaud him for doing something different, but he needs to be applauded for doing something different well. And he didn't.

[SnoBorderZero]

Yeah and really one of the biggest problems with the family scenes are not only that they're not funny, but they push away the characters in the film who are and leave us with dull characters and plotlines. The whole time I was thinking how long the movie had been going on for and we hadn't even gotten to Leslie Mann yet. And when they get there, they're platooned there. The last half was really pretty difficult to sit through. I'm sure the movie was a blast for Sandler, Apatow, and the others to make/be in, but how many sappy music montages do we need? Why does no ones character change in the movie? You'd think in a movie as long as this that at least some sort of character development would etch its way out of the running time. I feel like he made all the right decisions plot-wise with "Knocked Up" and all the wrong ones here.

[halo7]

Weird. Most of the people I was with thought the second half worked better and was funnier than the first half. Also, why do characters have to change for a movie to be good?

[Daniel]

I dunno, halo. I checked out a lot of reviews online and the last portion of the movie being weird seems to be a resounding gong amongst most critics.

[halo7]

I know but general reactions from my personal friends and family has differed is all I am saying. I think the humor becomes more subtle in the second half and works better as a companion to the dramatic situation they are stuck in as opposed to the first half where the humor and the drama clash with each other (not saying this in a negative way just saying the first half is structured differently). The plot takes full force in the second half pretty much. People say they need to cut a half hour from the film but what they don't realize that most stuff would be cut from the first hour that everyone is praising so much. People call the second half boring because the laughs slow down and plot and realism begin to set in but I see it as what truly makes this film special. Years from now when the jokes about Wii Fit and Myspace begin to fade, the compelling, realistic, and human aspects of the plot will live on.

[SnoBorderZero]

The 2nd half isn't getting dogged on because it wasn't funny, it's getting bashed because it simply sucked. It took way too long to get to it, there is no reason why Leslie Mann had to come into play an hour and half into the movie, that's absurd. There's really very little to like in the 2nd half. She says she's going to be with him, is all for it, and then in a second is like "oh no I change my mind". None of it worked, and none of it really mattered. Are they the focal point of the plot? Because for an hour and a half they aren't even in the movie. And why is Seth Rogen left with nothing to do but put an "I don't like this" face on for the rest of the movie? It's an uneven movie with a great first half because of its balance, not laughs alone. We do get great laughs, but the characters are much more interesting because their lives are changing and it surrounds both Sandler and Rogen. The 2nd half contains characters that aren't nearly as interesting or dynamic and completely removes Rogen from the plot.

And they easily could have cut the movie by at least a half hour. Did we have 3 sappy montages in 1 movie?

[halo7]

Those things are the focal point of the plot. Not everything has to turn out happy, not everyone has to change or make perfect decisions without changing their minds. You complain about sappy montages (all of which are in that perfect first half you keep talking about) but ask yourself how sappy things would have been had they gotten together and somehow maintained a perfect life even though George is still at heart unchanged by his disease? I think you misread what the movie was really about and it frustrates you.

[SnoBorderZero]

Those things are the focal point of the plot. Not everything has to turn out happy, not everyone has to change or make perfect decisions without changing their minds. You complain about sappy montages (all of which are in that perfect first half you keep talking about) but ask yourself how sappy things would have been had they gotten together and somehow maintained a perfect life even though George is still at heart unchanged by his disease? I think you misread what the movie was really about and it frustrates you.

Where did I say that I wanted it to end happy?

And I misread the movie? I'm pretty sure I got it all, it's just not very good. I think the fact that not everyone likes this mediocre movie frustrates you.

[halo7]

I have enough faith in my own taste to not really care what other people think about movies I like. Even then, enough people share my opinion to at least prove I am not crazy for really liking it or seeing something you don't in it.

[SnoBorderZero]

I didn't say anything about your taste, I was talking about the movie. I could care less what you think about the movie, it doesn't matter to me, I never said anything about you liking it.

[unity768]

Who would of thought that the creator of a short lived TV comedy called "Freaks and Geeks" would turn out to be the king of modern comedy. Judd Apatow has now written and directed three films; "The 40 Year Old Virgin," "Knocked Up," and now "Funny People." Apatow's debut film has an almost ridiculous premise, but the witty script and wonderful performances made it very authentic and was able to set the film apart from other mediocre efforts within the comedic realm. I probably laughed more during his second effort in "Knocked Up." The latter, however, lacked realistic chemistry between its two leads and would eventually pale in comparison to another Apatow produced comedy called "Superbad," which came out a little later that year. I think the most intriguing aspect regarding my anticipation preceding "Funny People" was its lead Adam Sandler. For me, Sandler (who was at one time roommates with Apatow) hasn't been in a good comedy since Paul Thomas Anderson's "Punch-Drunk Love." It's hard to look objectively at films like "Happy Gilmore" or "Big Daddy" because I sort of grew up with them. Nonetheless, Sandler's recent efforts (more so this decade) have looked extremely lackluster and borderline unbearable. "Funny People" ends his losing streak. While Apatow's latest effort is occasionally brilliant, it dog paddles into the confines of dullness after its first 90 minutes.

Apatow has broken this project into three distinctive acts. George Simmons (Sandler) is a very successful comedian. He's seen taking photos with various fans and signing autographs. Eventually he makes his way over to the doctors office and finds out he has a very rare blood disorder. His doctor says it's untreatable with conventional medicines so he puts him on experimental drugs, which have an 8% success rate. This first act can be called the "breaking down act." George is depressed and alone. He seems to have alienated the people who loved him the most and resembles no casual activity with steady friends. Meanwhile, Ira (Rogen) is an aspiring comedian who works at a deli to make "ends meat." He resides in an apartment with Leo (Hill) and Mark (Schwartzman), the latter being moderately successful on a hilariously awful TV sitcom called "Yo Teach!" One night at the club where Ira and Leo perform, George shows up. His routine is dark and receives little to no laughs. Ira follows and while his act isn't much better, he gets pockets of success when making fun of George and his unconventional performance.

After yelling at Ira in the parking lot, George called Ira to offer him a once-in-a-lifetime deal; to write comedic lines for him and eventually become his "secretary." Ira accepts with open arms and the two begin an unlikely friendship. When the films main focal point is on the relationship between George and Ira, it's probably the best film I've seen all year thus far. While George tries to become a better person, coping with a disease who he has only told his new buddy Ira about, Ira is progressively learning how to improve his stand-up and endlessly trying to convince George to open up to the people who love him. Apatow was risky diving into this premise. It has "Sappy" and "Depressing" written all over it. However, he gives us endless comedic moments to counteract the sentimental segments, and this in effect gave "Funny People" a sublime balance in terms of comedy and drama. Apatow relies on his script and intriguing characters to carry the comedic load, and the payoff is absolutely sensational and hillarious. Unknown actress Aubrey Plaza is perfect as a seemingly monotone hot geeky comedian who Ira and Mark continually fight over. Everybody I aforementioned is really, really, really funny- an endless amount of entertainment.

Moreover, the second act revolves around the resolution of George's illness, and can be appropriately titled the "building up act." It invests a heavy amount of time with Laura (Leslie Mann, Apatow's wife) and the rekindling of her relationship with George. Much of this act takes place in Laura's house. She has two adorable little daughters (same kids from "Knocked Up") who bicker and banter at each other to no end. This is where the comedy begins to fade and the melodrama takes center stage. Apatow's transition and execution seems to be flawed. He makes this part of the film so different from what had preceded it that it often feels like your watching a different movie. The performances from Leslie Mann and her husband Eric Bana are solid, but their characters are not as layered or involving as George and Ira. I progressively found myself uninterested in anything regarding George and Laura because I really don't know what they had before George alienated her. How am I suppose to care for the main course when I wasn't offered much of an appetizer? Perhaps this act isn't nearly as bad as I make it sound to be, but comparing the quality of the film's first act to its second act taints "Funny People" with unevenness and ruggedness.

But the performances are stellar. Adam Sandler is terrific as George, but oddly enough resembling himself. I got the feeling that Sandler was basically told to pretend like he had just found out he was dieing. It's an unconventional role for him, often taking parts that involve him acting like a complete immature buffoon, although he does that sometimes here but more effectively of course. There are a couple of scenes that demand him to be angry and depressed, and I felt a certain authenticity and rawness I haven't seen from him in quite some time (with the exception of the solid drama "Reign Over Me."). Seth Rogen redeems himself from "Observe and Report" and begins to finally show signs of playing a character we haven't seen him play before. Although he is basically the same loser he was in "Knocked Up" and "Pineapple Express," he brings a mature mentality to the character. Maybe the weight loss helped? I'm not sure. Jonah Hill and Jason Schwartzman are terrific, providing much of the comedy that resides in Apatow's "breaking down act."

The third act, which I will call the "leveling off act" pretty much does what it intends on doing. Nothing audacious or ambitious occurs like Apatow exhibited in the first act, and not much bogs the film down or grinds it in unbearable melodrama like the second act accomplished. It simply ends on a note that reaches back to what the first act was trying to impose; the delightful dynamic between George and Ira. This review may sound like a mixed bag but I can proudly recommend this to a wide audience. There are numerous cameos by famous stars that will make audiences laugh out loud. Meanwhile, Apatow has validly applied an autobiographical feel to this film. Look for amusing fake movie titles (they're suppose to suck) and an often cited teacher-student relationship between George and Ira. Although I wanted to go back and only watch the first 90 minutes of Apatow's most mature film after it was over, "Funny People," on the whole, is worth a look.

Stars (out of four): ***

[Justin]

Schwartzman was pretty hilarious.

"Word".

[sockin]

I thought it was alright, but I don't think it's as bad as a lot of other people have been saying. The only problem I had was that the third act falls terribly flat and feels like a completely different movie.

[ReservoirJedi]

This movie was not too funny for me, neither enjoyable. It had moments of greatness but I just felt that it had a bad direction, aside from the great first hour it lacked many things. I laughed more at Oberserve and report than this. Too many jokes that flatlined.

Schwartzman was very hilarious though.

"Word". Out of the whole movie this was thing that made me laugh the most ( and eminem was 2nd) which isnt saying much.

I like sandler, rogen, hill, and the others but this movie did not make me go "wow that was incredible I wanna watch it again". It left me shaking my head thinking what coulda been..

5.5/10

[Tornado]

Finally seeing this in about a half hour.

[Tornado]

The 2nd half isn't getting dogged on because it wasn't funny, it's getting bashed because it simply sucked. It took way too long to get to it, there is no reason why Leslie Mann had to come into play an hour and half into the movie, that's absurd. There's really very little to like in the 2nd half. She says she's going to be with him, is all for it, and then in a second is like "oh no I change my mind". None of it worked, and none of it really mattered. Are they the focal point of the plot? Because for an hour and a half they aren't even in the movie. And why is Seth Rogen left with nothing to do but put an "I don't like this" face on for the rest of the movie? It's an uneven movie with a great first half because of its balance, not laughs alone. We do get great laughs, but the characters are much more interesting because their lives are changing and it surrounds both Sandler and Rogen. The 2nd half contains characters that aren't nearly as interesting or dynamic and completely removes Rogen from the plot.

And they easily could have cut the movie by at least a half hour. Did we have 3 sappy montages in 1 movie?

It's funny, I read this post when you made it (before I saw it) and thought, "Ah, I disagree with SnoBorder so much, why would this time be any different?" But honestly, I agree with most of this. As someone else in this thread said, I think this has been the biggest disappointment of the year for me. I didn't walk in with really high expectations as I'd read a lot of the professional reviews and comments from people here, but I still expected it to be better than it ended up being.

[sshuttari]

I liked it for different reasons... I didn't care about the jokes as much as the story and characters and where the movie was headed.

I'm getting sick of these Apatow production films about perverted jokes who can curse the most. It had it moments in the beginning but after "Super Bad" I had enough... I figured this is the same type of film and I was pleasantly surprised by how different the path from previous films was and I ended up enjoying it much more just for those reasons.


9/10

2nd favorite Apatow film behind "40 year Old Virgin".

[krushgroove19]

i really loved this movie. the second time through it, it almost seemed to go by too fast. i can see why people don't really like the last third, but it didn't seem out of place to me.

9.5/10

[Dracula]

Funny People(8/12/2009)
I think at this point Judd Apatow is a guy who really doesn’t need an introduction. I’m a big fan of the movies he’s directed (The 40 Year Old Virgin and Knocked Up) and even the first string efforts he’s merely produced (Superbad, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and Pineapple Express). As one of the biggest Apatow apologists around it was a little painful to admit that the trailer to his newest film, Funny People, didn’t seem funny to me at all. I’ve never been one to dismiss a movie over a trailer, but if the jokes in that trailer were the best the movie had to offer the movie seemed to have all the makings for two and a half hours of painful viewing. I was particularly afraid to see the movie simply because I didn’t want to bear witness to the fall of God’s gift to comedy, Judd Apatow. Eventually though, when facing a very long boring day, I decided that I needed to see a movie to fill my time and I was a lot more willing to roll the dice on a not so well received Apatow project than on some crap like G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra. So, reluctantly, I decided to give this a chance.

The movie primarily involves George Simmons (Adam Sandler), a famous comedic actor who’s just been diagnosed with a rare form of leukemia. He’s been told that, eventually, this disease will probably kill him; a revelation that results in a lot of soul searching. He eventually decides to leave the bad, sell-out movies he’s been making in order to return to his stand-up roots. In doing so he encounters a young aspiring comedian named Ira Wright (Seth Rogen) and decides to hire him as an assistant/joke writer. Because Ira is currently living in a hovel with two other young comics (Jonah Hill and Jason Schwarzman), he’s eager to take the job. A reluctant friendship forms between George and Ira, which proves to be beneficial for both of them. But increasingly, George starts thinking about his ex-girlfriend Laura (Leslie Mann), who’s now married to a successful salesman named Clarke (Eric Bana).

I think the key to enjoying Funny People is to go in with the right expectations, and in this department I benefited from waiting a week and a half to see it. The movie is not without chuckle inducing moments and clever lines, but if you go into this movie expecting it to be a laugh riot like The 40 Year Old Virgin or Superbad, you will leave very disappointed. Still, part of the appeal of Apatow’s films has been that they tend to be genuinely compelling for reasons beyond their laugh-per-minute quotient, and this film is not an exception. The movie I’d most readily compare it to is Kevin Smith’s film Chasing Amy, a movie that wasn’t nearly as funny as anything else Smith did but which nonetheless had an interesting story and compelling characters.

The film’s story is likely a very personal one for both Judd Apatow and even more so for star Adam Sandler. We see a lot of George Simmons’ movie work like “Re-Do” (which features Simmons’ face imposed onto a baby) and “Mer-Man” (with Simmons as, you guessed it, a Mer-Man). The movie ruthlessly parodies these kind of juvenile comedies that Sandler and similar comedians like Steve Martin and Eddie Murphy have whored themselves out to long after they needed the money. In spite of all the money these movies make for Sandler’s character, with the specter of death in his midst they seem like a serious waste of life. I can’t help but wonder if Sandler was reading this screenplay while he was on the set of last year’s Bedtime Stories and You Don't Mess with the Zohan. This isn’t the only thing about the George Simmons’ character which pretty closely resembles that of the real Adam Sandler. It must have taken a lot of courage for Sandler to really examine his real life on screen like this and the autobiographical nature of the role brings a lot of authenticity to his performance. Sandler may not be the greatest actor in the world, but he is indisputably the perfect person for this role.

The other side of this story is that of comedians like Seth Rogen’s character who have not yet had the chance to sell out. I don’t know any stand-up comedians and I’ve never been backstage at a comedy club, but I can tell that the portrayal of that lifestyle here is authentic in the same way I can just feel that The Hurt Locker is an authentic portrayal of the military. The comics can certainly be selfish, competitive, and sometimes greedy, but for the most part they are all well meaning people who ultimately just want to follow their dreams. They make fun of each other, but it’s all in good fun, it’s really pretty refreshing just how positive a lot of these people are and in ways that are never corny. This is one of the few movies in recent memory that seeks to have you laughing with the characters instead of at them.

There’s also a third aspect to the movie, that of a love triangle between Adam Sandler’s character, Leslie Mann’s character, and Eric Bana’s character. Unlike the rich comedian/poor comedian stories which tend to overlap and switch off between each other, this one mostly plays out in one burst all the way through the film’s third act and it almost wears out its welcome. Still, I found a lot of truth in these segments and they were also enjoyable in their own way. Leslie Mann works as a believable object of Sandler’s affection and Eric Bana seems a lot more compelling here than he has been in a bunch of the blockbusters he’s been featured in recently.

Is this the Judd Apatow movie I wanted? Not exactly, but I like a lot of what I got. If only this movie had some more belly laughs I could whole heartedly recommend it, but that just isn’t what this is and recommending a comedy without very many laughs is not an easy thing to do. Still I was never bored by the movie; I felt for the characters and wanted them to be happy by the end, that’s a rare thing that should be relished. The movie deals with the kind of questions that successful comedians like Judd Apatow almost certainly ask themselves, and here he chose to explore those questions rather than making the movie that would be the most broadly comedic and I respect that a lot. I’m sure that Apatow is proud of this movie and that he’ll get back to making hilarious work now that he’s gotten this out of his system. If Apatow had delivered any movie other than the one he delivered he would have, in a way, been making the same mistake that George Simmons made when he chose to star in “Mer-Man” rather than follow his dreams.
*** out of Four

[nick22]

lol i gave up on EW ratings a long time ago- they're morons

[moviebuff801]

Saw this on DVD over the weekend, and it's easily one of my favorite movies so far this year.

Whereas I didn't like Apatow's first two directorial efforts, "Funny People" worked for me because it really felt like Apatow has finally matured as a filmmaker. This film, I was surprised to find, worked really well as a human story and drama, with the jokes indeed working, but they aren't the focus here. It's the characters, their emotions and relationships that take center stage here and I found myself completely absorbed in them and truly caring about where the movie was going.

Sandler is terrific in this film, with it possibly being his best performance to date. This movie proves my theory about Adam Sandler: when he's doing his outdated, over-the-top schtick, he's horrendous. But give him real material and a good role to work with, and it's like he's a completely different actor. Rogen is also strong as Ira, mainly because like Apatow, it really feels like he's trying this time around. And all of the supporting actors really shine as well.

I personally liked the last half of the film where George and Ira visit Mann's house. I thought it was a great representation of how George, like Ira said, doesn't learn anything from a near-death experience and is pretty much incapable of changing. Plus, it furthered the notion that it was always about George and Ira, and never about his failed romance with Leslie Mann's character. Personally, if she had dumped her husband for George, it would've taken away from the film.

All in all, "Funny People" is by and far Judd Apatow's best film to date.

****/****

[Duke-Leto]

I was shocked at how good this movie turned out to be. It really had some moments that were above and beyond what Apatow normally does and the actors really shined.

8/10