Year One

Is it really a complement if the best thing you can say about a summer comedy is “It was better than Land of the Lost”? That’s pretty much the case with Year One. It’s another buddy comedy set in a very different time and place than what we are used to, with a stupid plot that seems to be trying too hard. At least this movie did it’s best to try and be a comedy the whole time, where there were instances in LotL where I really didn’t know what it was trying to be.

There are a few things in Hollywood that you can always take to the bank: a Holocaust picture will score Oscar nominations no matter what; Christopher Nolan’s casting choices always work, no matter how ridiculous they seem (anyone who says they agreed with Ledger as the Joker when it was announced is a liar); a Michael Bay film will be loaded with explosions; and the Apatow gang makes great R-rated films, but garbage PG-13 ones. It’s the last one that concerns us. This film is PG-13, but it feels like it was made for kindergartners (well, really dirty minded kindergartners, at least). Now, I know there’s some smart-ass out there saying “But Year One got an R-rating when it was screened by the MPAA.” To that I say “You’re a jerk, and the intention of the filmmakers was always to make this a PG-13 comedy, which is why they resubmitted to get the lower rating.”

The gang’s R-rated humor is raunchy and dirty, yet amazingly real. When they have to make PG-13 humor, they get confused. It’s still raunchy and dirty, but more silly and stupid, in order to get a PG-13. There’s still a lot of dick and fart jokes in Year One, but they’re toned down. All of the movies big comedic set pieces (ie the various Biblical situations the characters come upon) fall flat. I’m not a Biblical scholar by any means (I went to church for a wedding once), but I know enough to understand the references, so no one can use that excuse for why they weren’t funny. They weren’t funny because there was no humor in the situation. The plan seemed to be “Look, it’s Paul Rudd and David Cross as Cain and Abel. Isn’t that funny?” No, it isn’t, because you don’t give them any jokes. These are two great comedic actors, so you have to really mail it in to make them unfunny, but Harold Ramis accomplished it. Give them funny material and they can role with it.

Jack Black and Michael Cera (mainly the latter) are the only two reasons this film doesn’t go completely laughless. Both of them are doing their usual routines the entire film, which gets repetitive and is one of the reasons why the movie doesn’t flow, but it is also the only source of laughter. Black is loud, obnoxious, and very, very fat. Cera has mastered his deadpan delivery of comedic lines. Like I said with LotL, the two of them are too funny to be held laughless for 100 minutes. If either of these actor’s brand of humor is not your taste, than you won’t find this movie funny. Well, if you’re over the age of 13 and haven’t been lobotomised, you won’t find it funny either.

The movie might have been manageable if the supporting cast had delivered any time of comedy at all, which is surprising, since there was a lot of talent attached to this project. I’m not going to address each one of them individually, but none of them were funny. No, not Christopher Mintz-Plasse (McLovin) or Hank Azaria or Vinnie Jones or the aforementioned David Cross. The only supporting actor who did their job was Olivia Wilde, who stood there and looked attractive, although the idea of her playing a virgin is absurd. With no help from the cast, the only thing left for the movie is physical humor, which is unbelievably silly. There’s puking, peeing, farting, body hair, testicles, and an almost male on male rape scene. This scenes might elicit a reaction, but that reaction isn’t laughter. (Although I will admit that I laughed at both the extended fart scene and the scene in which Cera pees on his one face.)

Ramis is a great comedic director, and deserves the benefit of the doubt. I usually blame it on one the writers when I know that the director can actually direct. Only problem with that is Ramis also wrote it. Okay, so a swing and a miss for Ramis. Every director has that movie that just completely misses. Nolan has Insomnia. Fincher has Alien 3. These misses aren’t always as bad as this one is, and it might not be on their hands as this one is on Ramis’, but who cares? I don’t like this movie at all, and I won’t recommend anyone go see it, but I don’t hate it. Ramis tried to make something different than all the other comedies we’ve seen recently, and it failed. I’m glad that there are still a few people out there in Hollywood who are still attempting to come up with new ideas. As movie-goers, we have to sit through these attempts, whether they are good or bad, and sadly, this one was a real stinker.