Genres

Visitors Review

Ty Burr 2012-05-25 03:32:04

Any good will the movie generates is grated right back off by Black, whose obnoxiousness has lost whatever charm it once possessed.

collipal-1 2012-05-24 12:59:09

Year One is not bad, but it could have been better

Year One is the most recent film from the very irregular directorHarold Ramis...and with the word "irregular", I am not talking abouthis bowel movements.Or maybe I am, because I do not find any otherdescription for pieces of crap like Analyze That or Club Paradise.Buton the other hand, Ramis has also directed some excellent comedies,like Groundhog Day or National Lampoon's Vacation.Which one of thosetwo extremes does Year One belong to? The answer: neither of them; itis on an intermediate point of his career.Year One is a very strange combination of sophisticated post-modernhumor, theological reflexions and jokes about urine, flatulence andexcrement.For every funny observation made by Michael Cera's character,we have a coarse scene of irritating cleanings which do not tear asingle smile; and for every humorous rudeness made by Jack Black'scharacter, we have the appearance of a famous comedian on anunnecessary and forced cameo.In summary, the screenplay has good andbad elements on the same degree, and its inconsistency and mercurialtone damages the film.I am a fan of Cera's and Black's, but I have some doubts about theirreal talent.In other words, I do not consider them to be good actors,but I think they do perfectly the few things they know how to do.And Ialso know they have many haters who are already bored of theirroutines.So, big part of the entertainment the spectators will be ableto extract from this movie will be based on their tolerance to Cera andBlack.I think the comedy is the most subjective genre, and the mainreason Year One kept me moderately entertained is because of those twoactors.However, if the stars had been Adam Sandler and Martin Lawrence,I would have found the film less enjoyable.Ramis' direction is routine and impersonal.And besides, I think thescreenplay should have been more subversive.But maybe, the fear to theboycott or the violent reactions from the biggest Catholic fans madeco-screenwriters Ramis, Gene Stupnitsky and Lee Eisenberg to dilute thecontroversy from the screenplay a little bit.I understand that, but Istill think the film could have been a bit more acid.However, in spite of all its fails, I think Year One deserves a slightrecommendation, but with the previously made warning about the personaltaste.Personally, I found Year One to be moderately entertaining andwith funny moments, but I found the whole experience to be mediocre andeasily forgettable.

Josh Modell 2012-05-18 13:18:34

It's a potentially funny, tricky premise, and in the hands of someone as talented and slightly skewed as writer-director Harold Ramis and a pair of writers from The Office, it should have worked.

Sam Bathe 2012-05-17 13:38:16

Only big fans of Cera and Black need catch this film, and even then, it's far from a must-see.

TheLittleSongbird 2012-05-16 12:24:55

Unfunny on the whole, but it does look good

I will start with the good things about Year One. It does look good,the costume and set design actually look as though that some care hasgone into them, while the music is at least okay and it was kind of funspotting the biblical references. However, the story is very repetitiveand predictable for my tastes, and there is a weak script and hit andmiss sight gags. The direction is lacking too, the pacing is too quickso there's little breathing space and I wasn't taken with the two leadseither. Jack Black's performance is lacking a lot in subtlety becausehe is on autopilot for a vast majority of the movie, so it is left toMichael Cera to deliver the laughs. Unfortunately Cera doesn't manageit, he underplays a little too much and doesn't know what to do withwhat he's got. Overall, disappointing, it did start off alrightactually but the fun isn't stretched over to make a decent enough film.3/10 Bethany Cox

Rich Cline 2012-05-16 01:30:10

The filmmakers and cast find a few great laughs in this flimsy premise, but the whole film is so underdeveloped that it hardly seems to be up there on screen at all.

Kevin McCarthy 2012-05-11 03:49:18

Year One contains a few jokes that work but what is really bothersome is that Cera and Black play the exact same roles they always play.

MaryAnn Johanson 2012-05-10 15:45:44

[S]et[s] back the noble causes of blasphemy, rational thinking, and humanism about a century... doesn't even have the nerve to be profane...

brwindsor 2012-05-09 11:48:28

Not worth it

The trailer was funnier than the movie. I was somewhat looking forwardto seeing this film, and was greatly disappointed when it turned out tobe completely awful. There were some funny moments, but they wereswallowed up by the sheer stupidity of the rest. I seriously doubt thatfans of Black or Cera will be pleased with this film.I was lucky enough to see this movie at a free pre-screening. Thatmakes me pretty happy, because I would have been distraught if I had topay $7.50 to sit through this mess. The plot was very contrived, andthe historical humour fizzled out after the first twenty minutes. Therest of the movie relied on a myriad of sexual innuendos that wereoverused and abused. Overall, the movie became very unenjoyable andalthough there were a few laughs hidden in there, they could not makeup for the rest.

aprince539 2012-05-09 01:36:55

Absolutely Awful- May be worst movie EVER

Saw this last night. I normally like Jack Black a lot. This is whatit's like to see a very good actor struggling with a disaster. I seeall movies at screenings for free, but the studio owes me the money Ispent on gas getting there! The time you spend seeing it will be ablack hole in your life. Jack eats poo in this movie, this movie ISthat poo! It's not funny, not offensive, though the poor Michael Cera,normally very good with decent material,is put through terribleactions, trying for humor. The writing is terrible, they are trying tocomment on religion but it's a mess. It all comes down to the director.Some one is to blame . This is worse than Ishtar! Here's hoping theycan be better next time.

Robbie Collin 2012-05-07 07:00:51

There's no reason to see Year One, at all. Consign this cack to the history books. Pronto.

GoneWithTheTwins 2012-05-07 02:58:21

Year One Movie Review from The Massie Twins

It's supposed to be funny when Jack Black takes a taste from a pile ofanimal droppings. It's supposed to be humorous when Black and MichaelCera argue over religion, women, and the varying perspectives ofcircumcision. And it's supposed to be hilarious when the mismatched duoengages in a slow-speed ox-cart chase, holy sanctity violation, andmassive biblical interference. Well, it is. But when you realize whatyou're laughing at, you'll likely fear for the decline in your level ofmaturity and the subsequent and proportionately diminishing brain cellcount inherent with viewing this degree of absurdity.Both Zed (Jack Black) and Oh (Michael Cera) are completely inept attheir respective roles as hunters and gatherers in their smallprehistoric woodland village. Cast out from their tribe after Zed eatsfruit from a forbidden tree, the two wander the land in search of theends of the earth - but instead they begin disrupting the lives ofseveral biblical figures and wind up on an adventurous rescue missionthat will take them into the decadent city of Sodom (an ancient LasVegas).It's not that we'd necessarily expect more from veteran comedywriter/director Harold Ramis, but Year One almost entirely resorts toimmature, gross-out humor. Nearly every gag attempts to top theprevious one with jokes that push the limits of sexual deviance andgood taste - and the PG-13 rating that it landed after being editeddown from an R. Jack Black and Michael Cera are definitely up to thechallenge of dueling for the crown of crudity, but it's almost as ifwe're witnessing two hours of improvisation. They may be dressed inhistorical garb and thrust into 10,000 BC sets, but they're still justJack Black and Michael Cera, and the wit and dialogue reeks of thetypical shticks that unavoidably appear in every one of their films.It may go slightly beyond the blueprints for a formulaic parody movie,but it has all the same symptoms. The recruiting of recognizable cameoroles is amusing, but the rest is a pointless plot that introduces andresolves conflict with little attention to believability, historicaland political incorrectness, boner and fart jokes, constant remarksabout genitals (including a particularly lengthy comment on sheepballs), constant sexually suggestive actions (without actually showingnudity) and the literal eating of crap. There's a place for harmlessbut empty, filthy drivel like Year One - a comedy that can be enjoyedfor it's refusal to rise above repetitive, lewd material - but it mustbe taken in moderation... along with circumcisions, wine and spongecake.- The Massie Twins

jmorales22 2012-05-05 19:36:52

Not sure why people didn't like it

If you're looking for a review from a pseudo movie critic, lookelsewhere. This is just a review from a movie fan stating his opinionon a website. I won't give you the names of actors, and what rolesthey've been in, or who directed this, because that stuff is on theinfo page you just saw, and that kind of redundancy doesn't make anyonesome kind of movie critic, despite what so many reviewers think ofthemselves.I'm not a Jack Black fan but this movie is funny regardless. I'm notsure if a lot of people just find biblical satire offensive or ifpeople are taking the movie too seriously and picking apart itsaccuracy, but whatever the case there were tons of characters in thismovie that had me cracking up, and that even included Jack Black attimes.As I expect from just about any comedy these days, there are things Ican do without, such as the eating poop and peeing on one's self whichhave been mentioned ad nauseum here. I used to detest those but nowjust have come to accept that those things will get into these kinds ofcomedies so they can reach the part of the audience that finds itfunny. It might have made me rate it higher had those been left out,but I still had a lot of laughs from the biblical satire. I loved thecharacters of Abraham, Cain and Abel, and the witch doctor guy at thebeginning.Overall it's an entertaining way to spend your time. Heck I'd watch itagain....

Marc Savlov 2012-05-05 06:53:15

What's even more depressing than the never-ending stream of sub-sixth-grade toilet humor is the sad fact that Year One is helmed and co-produced by two of the best laughmeisters in the business.

Cocacolaguy912-2 2012-04-28 02:09:47

This movie was atrocious, and I love Judd Apatow produced comedies.

It is incorrect to assume that just because Apatow's name is attachedin some shape or manner to a movie means the movie is going to be good.And I didn't really think that. Besides, he wasn't the director or thewriter...who was? Oh right, this guy named Harold Ramis who made abunch of good movies back in the 80s. And with a cast consisting of thehilarious Jack Black, the dead-pan Michael Cera, and other great"Apatow" actors, this film must be good.Which may be why I was so, so disappointed. I don't even know where tostart. It just sucked, to put it bluntly. The funniest part wasactually when someone was farting. Writing a good PG-13 comedy takesskill because you are limited as far as language and situations go.Unfortunately the writing here is so immature it is painful. A fat mangetting oil rubbed on his belly isn't too funny after twelve, and thisis coming from a guy who, again, thought the farting was the funniestpart.The movie is awkward and even painful. I left the theater and tried toget my money back only to be told it was too late for that. Bottomline, avoid in theater, avoid on DVD, avoid on TV. It isn't worth forfree, it is a waste of time, it is terrible.

blueberrylake 2012-04-27 11:05:43

What I expected.

If you like juvenile humor, and find Jack Black funny, then this movieworks. Most people won't like it, but if you liked a movie like TheLove Guru last year, this will appeal to you. Nothing too clever, butfunny.Basically, Jack Black and Michael Cera play their usual characters,just in loincloths. Jack can't hunt or gather, but he eats from thetree of knowledge, and both are banished into the world. David Crossplays Cain, who is the first person they meet, and actually playssomeone closer to his stand up act than Tobias (David and Michael wouldhave worked together on Arrested Development, but David shows that hecan actually play another character).They go from one biblical setting to another, making fun (mainly) ofthe old testament, and eventually wind up in Sodom, with Cain, and therequisite love interests....I think where this movie falls down is it seems a bit like a long skit.The chemistry between Jack Black and Michael Cera I thought wasn'tgreat, but the plot/character development was really just secondary togetting in some jokes. Obviously, the jokes won't be to everyones taste(hence the rankings of 0), and will be to others (thus the rankings of10).Again, although this may very well win a Razzie this year, I liked it,and if you like stupid humor, this movie has lots of it.

James Berardinelli 2012-04-25 02:29:30

An inexplicably unfunny comedy made by two people who have proven they can do much better: director/co-writer Harold Ramis and co-producer Judd Apatow.

Alonso Duralde 2012-04-24 14:47:33

[Harold] Ramis and co-writers Gene Stupnitsky and Lee Eisenberg mostly avoid the easy anachronism jokes, to their credit, but instead they wind up plumbing the depths of poop, fart, urine, foreskin and gay-panic humor.

Owen Gleiberman 2012-04-20 21:26:27

Platt, more than anyone, is the soul of the movie, because he makes even the most
 primitive perversity sound...well, civilized.

Stella Papamichael 2012-04-20 11:54:38

Perhaps it shouldn't come as a surprise that a comedy about a couple of cavemen trades in primitive humour, still it's tough to imagine even the most monkey-brained of filmgoers getting a kick out of Year One.