Young Critic 1/20/2015 This film brings me to an incredibly delicate subject: race. I will try and treat it with proper care so that no disrespect is dealt. Top Five is the film that Chris Rock has been waiting to do his whole life, there were no studio filters and this causes for some trouble.
Top Five is almost an autobiography of Chris Rock, more so than Birdman was of Michael Keaton. Top Five is the future that Chris Rock wants, he doesn't want to be considered as "the funny guy," he wants to move on to be a dramatic and respected actor. The film thus follows the fictional Andre Allen (Chris Rock) who is followed around by The New York Times reporter Chelsea Brown (Rosario Dawson) for 24 hours. The cast includes multiple cameos, which although impressive, are completely mishandled.
Chris Rock is a funny guy, he is a great stand-up comedian, but when it comes to film he has been shunned to supporting roles (witness his small role in Grown Ups and Grown Ups 2). So Rock decided to strike out on his own, but as he wrote and directed Top Five we saw that although he is creative, he doesn't have what it takes. To start out the cameos where extremely mishandled. To have stars like Kevin Hart, Tracey Morgan, Cedric the Entertainer, Whoopi Goldberg, Adam Sandler, Jerry Seinfeld, and DMX you have to know when to inject them. It seemed to Rock as if the moment a star confirmed they would be cast is the next extra on the list. The actors and their roles weren't matching up. Kevin Hart, one of the greatest comedians of today, was extremely misused and given less than two minutes on screen; and putting Whoopi Goldberg in a strip club? Are you out of your mind! It was almost insulting to the stars that were appearing. And as for the acting it was absolutely catastrophic: Chris Rock was very disappointing, but the rest of his cast were all mild 2 minute interjections. The only exception was Rosario Dawson who was the only actress, besides Rock, that appeared in more than one scene. There wasn't much to compare. Even so, the actors themselves were mumbling the few lines they had so that half of the script is lost in the actors' mouths.
Then there is the matter of the whole story. The backbone of the story is good: a star seeking truth within himself, the troubles with drugs, overarching egos, etc. The actual dialogue and direction of the story however was so messy that Rock resorted to sex jokes for 80% of the film. There was such an excess of sexual references and unfunny scenes that made you uncomfortable and were completely unnecessary. John Cleese, the famous Monty Python member, once said, "The reason why I stray from making of sex jokes is that the only reason people laugh is because they feel uncomfortable." There is no actual humor in an orgasm. Meg Ryan's famous scene in When Harry Met Sally was funny not because she was pretending to have an orgasm, but rather because of the subsequent smart line afterwards "I'll have what she's having." Rock's humor was solely focused on the first part of that famous scene.
The other 20% of jokes are a little more controversial to speak about, which is why I ask you to read the following keeping in mind that this is solely cinematic criticism and nothing else. The rest of the non-sexual jokes were solely directed and enclosed to one ethnic group. Now I'm not saying that I didn't laugh during the whole film, there were two or three gags, but most of the intended jokes I didn't get because they were in reference to a cultural viewpoint I didn't possess. What I'm trying to say is, not that a mostly African- American audience only understood this film, but rather that it almost purposely shunned other ethnic groups from such "inside jokes." Now at first this doesn't seem to be wrong in any way, Chris Rock could do whatever he wants, it's his film after all. But the cinematic problem here is the whole point of cinema.
A movie theatre is a place where you can sit with dozens of other strangers and where appearance, race, belief, socio-economic status, and even intelligence, doesn't matter. In movies the magic is that a bunch of strangers can share a journey and laugh, cry, and be scared together. Chris Rock almost viciously broke this whole purpose by enclosing his film into a small audience.
But what really struck me was how heavily praised this film was, by both critics and audiences. Not only that but in the Toronto Film Festival it was bought for the highest price out of any of the other films. The high expectations, the disastrous directing, and the terribly crafted script made me want to brainwash myself after seeing this film. Hell, even the music was the exact same song over and over again. I'm very, very, very disappointed Chris Rock, to the point that I recommend you don't direct again. He better thank Rosario Dawson and the Birdman-like plot for raising this film below a complete failure. D-
Top Five is almost an autobiography of Chris Rock, more so than Birdman was of Michael Keaton. Top Five is the future that Chris Rock wants, he doesn't want to be considered as "the funny guy," he wants to move on to be a dramatic and respected actor. The film thus follows the fictional Andre Allen (Chris Rock) who is followed around by The New York Times reporter Chelsea Brown (Rosario Dawson) for 24 hours. The cast includes multiple cameos, which although impressive, are completely mishandled.
Chris Rock is a funny guy, he is a great stand-up comedian, but when it comes to film he has been shunned to supporting roles (witness his small role in Grown Ups and Grown Ups 2). So Rock decided to strike out on his own, but as he wrote and directed Top Five we saw that although he is creative, he doesn't have what it takes. To start out the cameos where extremely mishandled. To have stars like Kevin Hart, Tracey Morgan, Cedric the Entertainer, Whoopi Goldberg, Adam Sandler, Jerry Seinfeld, and DMX you have to know when to inject them. It seemed to Rock as if the moment a star confirmed they would be cast is the next extra on the list. The actors and their roles weren't matching up. Kevin Hart, one of the greatest comedians of today, was extremely misused and given less than two minutes on screen; and putting Whoopi Goldberg in a strip club? Are you out of your mind! It was almost insulting to the stars that were appearing. And as for the acting it was absolutely catastrophic: Chris Rock was very disappointing, but the rest of his cast were all mild 2 minute interjections. The only exception was Rosario Dawson who was the only actress, besides Rock, that appeared in more than one scene. There wasn't much to compare. Even so, the actors themselves were mumbling the few lines they had so that half of the script is lost in the actors' mouths.
Then there is the matter of the whole story. The backbone of the story is good: a star seeking truth within himself, the troubles with drugs, overarching egos, etc. The actual dialogue and direction of the story however was so messy that Rock resorted to sex jokes for 80% of the film. There was such an excess of sexual references and unfunny scenes that made you uncomfortable and were completely unnecessary. John Cleese, the famous Monty Python member, once said, "The reason why I stray from making of sex jokes is that the only reason people laugh is because they feel uncomfortable." There is no actual humor in an orgasm. Meg Ryan's famous scene in When Harry Met Sally was funny not because she was pretending to have an orgasm, but rather because of the subsequent smart line afterwards "I'll have what she's having." Rock's humor was solely focused on the first part of that famous scene.
The other 20% of jokes are a little more controversial to speak about, which is why I ask you to read the following keeping in mind that this is solely cinematic criticism and nothing else. The rest of the non-sexual jokes were solely directed and enclosed to one ethnic group. Now I'm not saying that I didn't laugh during the whole film, there were two or three gags, but most of the intended jokes I didn't get because they were in reference to a cultural viewpoint I didn't possess. What I'm trying to say is, not that a mostly African- American audience only understood this film, but rather that it almost purposely shunned other ethnic groups from such "inside jokes." Now at first this doesn't seem to be wrong in any way, Chris Rock could do whatever he wants, it's his film after all. But the cinematic problem here is the whole point of cinema.
A movie theatre is a place where you can sit with dozens of other strangers and where appearance, race, belief, socio-economic status, and even intelligence, doesn't matter. In movies the magic is that a bunch of strangers can share a journey and laugh, cry, and be scared together. Chris Rock almost viciously broke this whole purpose by enclosing his film into a small audience.
But what really struck me was how heavily praised this film was, by both critics and audiences. Not only that but in the Toronto Film Festival it was bought for the highest price out of any of the other films. The high expectations, the disastrous directing, and the terribly crafted script made me want to brainwash myself after seeing this film. Hell, even the music was the exact same song over and over again. I'm very, very, very disappointed Chris Rock, to the point that I recommend you don't direct again. He better thank Rosario Dawson and the Birdman-like plot for raising this film below a complete failure. D-