Sunday, August 28, 2005

Let me start this post by saying that I’m really glad that Steve Carell and Judd Apatow are on top with their 40-Year-Old Virgin project. I have always felt that Steve Carell was shortchanged as a comedic actor, and should have been a leading man in film many, many moons ago.

But what I’m about to say may shock you, and provoke you to inundate me with e-mails threatening my life and the lives of my loved ones. I felt that The 40-Year-Old Virgin wasn’t a very good film.

I know that I’m hardly alone in feeling this way. Nick Schager for Slant thinks the movie runs over a half-hour too long. William Arnold of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer is much harsher, telling viewers to “abstain” from the movie. Needless to say, I don’t share his sentiments. But I can and will say this--there are better movies to be found out there now, and not all of them are currently at a theatre near you.

I don’t believe that the box office performance for 40-Year-Old Virgin this weekend (its second week at the top) says anything about the film. It is a bit of a crowd-pleaser, but many are waiting for the DVD. I thought that it was shaping up to be one of the highest-grossing comedies of 2005, but Wedding Crashers and Hitch will be sharing that crown and the 40-Year-Old Virgin will have to settle for the consolation prize of being the critics’ darling. At this point, it looks like 40-Year-Old Virgin will pant and wheeze cross $100 million.

But, I really believe that it will cross that enviable finish line, nevertheless.


<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?