"I'm not in on the buzz on this film. It's too low-brow to be much fun, and everyone in it--from the main character to passing extras--have one driving force: their genitals. "
I have to say one thing: welcome to the male world and that's just the way it is, I challenge anyone to find a comedy concerning sex that's constantly in a mature nature and is still funny. Also, you went to a movie with the title "40 year old *virgin*" not "40 year old dude" or "40 year old introvert". The film is probably going to be about sex, dear readers, so if you're not ready for some jokes about genitals and putting on a condom the right way the movie may not be for you.
"The inept acting, scripting, pacing, continuity, and direction are as bad as anything I've ever seen. "
I found Steve Carrol's acting along with his friends very believable... and what exactly does 'bad directing' mean? The only directing involved in this movie is in regular dialog and in some beds, so you have face A, then face B, then back to face A again: can you really screw that up? Also, the scripting was great because you have characters delivering rapid-fire dialog, then can change gears to slow seduction scenes, both appropriate for a comedy. I beg you readers to also ignore this horribly common stock criticism.
"The story is disjointed, fragmented and incoherent."
I found the opposite to be true. You start with a guy whose friends find out he is a virgin, so they try to give him advice then set him up with several women. He falls for a compatible lady incidentally, whom he starts a relationship with. Eventually he falls head over heels for said lady, things heat up between them... and so on, the events unfold in that order. Do these events really sound disjointed, or fragmented? Do they make sense, or are they incoherent? C'mon...
"This is a dull, painful and hopelessly dreadful film from nearly every point of view that caters either to adolescents or to the basest elements. How vulgar language, rubber penises, vomit and racist jokes pass for comedy is beyond me."
The content of this movie is immature at times, but it contains genuine feelings over a problem some face. What's wrong with exploiting it in humorous situations ? I've met friends in their 30s and 40s who still found this movie hilarious, so this brand of humor isn't necessarily bound to one age group; why when someone doesn't get a joke make up the idea that teenagers or college-aged students are more gullible and should find it appealing is beyond *me*.
Also, I'm sick of foreigners bashing it because it's "American Comedy". You don't see me complaining about the BBC making some very bizarre comedy that I think only the British or others can completely understand, because that is my loss.
So please, if you haven't already, check out this great movie not avoid it because you can't stand a little immaturity.
I have to say one thing: welcome to the male world and that's just the way it is, I challenge anyone to find a comedy concerning sex that's constantly in a mature nature and is still funny. Also, you went to a movie with the title "40 year old *virgin*" not "40 year old dude" or "40 year old introvert". The film is probably going to be about sex, dear readers, so if you're not ready for some jokes about genitals and putting on a condom the right way the movie may not be for you.
"The inept acting, scripting, pacing, continuity, and direction are as bad as anything I've ever seen. "
I found Steve Carrol's acting along with his friends very believable... and what exactly does 'bad directing' mean? The only directing involved in this movie is in regular dialog and in some beds, so you have face A, then face B, then back to face A again: can you really screw that up? Also, the scripting was great because you have characters delivering rapid-fire dialog, then can change gears to slow seduction scenes, both appropriate for a comedy. I beg you readers to also ignore this horribly common stock criticism.
"The story is disjointed, fragmented and incoherent."
I found the opposite to be true. You start with a guy whose friends find out he is a virgin, so they try to give him advice then set him up with several women. He falls for a compatible lady incidentally, whom he starts a relationship with. Eventually he falls head over heels for said lady, things heat up between them... and so on, the events unfold in that order. Do these events really sound disjointed, or fragmented? Do they make sense, or are they incoherent? C'mon...
"This is a dull, painful and hopelessly dreadful film from nearly every point of view that caters either to adolescents or to the basest elements. How vulgar language, rubber penises, vomit and racist jokes pass for comedy is beyond me."
The content of this movie is immature at times, but it contains genuine feelings over a problem some face. What's wrong with exploiting it in humorous situations ? I've met friends in their 30s and 40s who still found this movie hilarious, so this brand of humor isn't necessarily bound to one age group; why when someone doesn't get a joke make up the idea that teenagers or college-aged students are more gullible and should find it appealing is beyond *me*.
Also, I'm sick of foreigners bashing it because it's "American Comedy". You don't see me complaining about the BBC making some very bizarre comedy that I think only the British or others can completely understand, because that is my loss.
So please, if you haven't already, check out this great movie not avoid it because you can't stand a little immaturity.