Adivina con quién salgo

I was pretty excited to see this movie because from what I saw it seemed really funny and I like Seann William Scott but I have to say I was sort of disappointed. Granted I went in expecting a funny stupid comedy but, it really wasn't all that funny. It seemed to me like they put all the funny scenes into the trailers and the rest of the movie was just filler. It's like they tried to be a really hilarious comedy but then towards the end they tried to take an emotional turn and by then I was pretty disappointed by the lack of hilarity that I didn't care anymore. And don't get me wrong, I did laugh, but I laughed at all the parts I had already seen in the trailers.

All in all, this movie wasn't a total failure, but I wouldn't bother watching it again.

Susan Sarandon looked fine, in fact great for her character. I thought the movie was funny and just plain entertaining.

I liked the broad humor as well as the occasional slapstick bit. In addition, there was some social/philosophical commentary that went well with the light tone of the movie.

Although the 'Cornival' was a bit corny, that was the point. John, Mr. Woodcock's nemesis, was searching for a connection with his roots and eventually realized that he was more disconnected than he thought, having to change his general outlook and his relationships with the people he most cared about.

Like last year's School for Scoundrels, Woodcock is yet another movie in which Billy Bob Thornton plays a violent dick (no pun intended) and fails to be anywhere near as funny as he should be, thanks to a sloppy, almost laugh-less script. To make matters worse, he's not the only comedian whose considerable talents are wasted on this predictable mess; Ethan Suplee and Seann William Scott, two of the funniest men alive, have nearly nothing to do with their characters. Speaking of predictability, here's a cliché for you: Seen the trailer? Then you've seen the movie. Just about every truly funny part was crammed into the commercials.

I love Bad Santa and all, but it has really done more harm than good seeing as another Thornton-acts-like-a-sociopath-and-gets-away-with-it "comedy" gets released every year. He is an amazing actor and totally wasted on these forgettable carbon copies. I'm not denying that I laughed a couple of times ('cause let's face it, Thornton abusing kids is funny by default) but in the end Woodcock is just a half-baked comedy-drama which is neither hilarious nor touching.

It's interesting to watch this movie for the first time now, 12 years later...

In a lot of ways, this is a very predictable recipe that tries to make a feel-good comedy emerge from sociopath behavior.

And the punch line, bullies, are they bad, or do they help us?

Writing is meh but ok. Actors are well, great actors but only giving an ok performance. Gave a 5 as it sits right there in the middle between good and bad. Would not recommend nor ever watch again, but can't say I hated it and it mostly held my attention.

Most interesting to me as a middle aged white male who lived through the bullies and kind of enjoyed the conflict is the questions raised about the validity of trials and tribulations to allow us to discover and define ourselves.

In the majority of human history, survival itself was enough of a challenge to hold our full attention. In some periods of human history, war served this purpose. In my parents' time, their parents and other adults seemed to be enough of a challenge. And in the 80's and 90's, when I was coming of age, bullies were the thing.

Now that bullying has been come down on so hard, and this type of behavior would clearly get a teacher fired, I can't help but wonder what our delicate little flowers are faced with to challenge and define their sense of self-worth...

What is most funny to me is that this so called comedy is pretty much super offensive by today's PC culture.

Mr. Woodcock is the sort of film that I usually dread going to see, a sort of Meet The Parents rip off in the same vein as recent pictures like Relative Strangers and Guess Who. To be fair this movie betters both of those considerably, mainly due to the talented cast at the directors reach. Seann William Scott is great for the first time since American Pie, in a much more subtle role. I expected many things after seeing this young man back in 1999 and The Dukes of Hazzard and American Wedding weren't among them, so to see him hit the comic notes perfectly again is quite refreshing. Thornton ever since heavy success with Bad Santa back in 2003 has been making a career of playing weirdos (usually mean ones) and as Woodcock he's a solid choice who digs up several strong laughs. Sarandon is a lot more cardboard and ultimately unmemorable in her role, you forget her character at times but I guess thats all the script wanted and shes a pretty good actress to snare for the part. The story is pretty strong and a really good idea for the most part, the whole idea should have nerds everywhere rejoicing and cringing in equal amounts. The comedy does feel slight when taken against the premise but at the same time it's never overly offensive or dumb. The script has ups and downs in terms of gags, but the overall feeling is pleasantly entertaining. I enjoyed this movie and probably would happily suggest you pick it up on DVD when it hits the Summer sales next year or indeed give it a rental on initial release.