Opiniones de usuarios

Watch english version and then you see how its a dirrect copy but not as good.

Death At A Funeral is easily one of the funniest films I've seen in months. Those looking for something hilarious should definitely see it. It's a simple film; just a series of events and misunderstandings at a funeral. All these lead to real chaos, however. The physical and even the spoken humour is well executed. The whole cast deliver solid performances. The script is surprisingly good for a film like this. Add to this a fitting ending, and you've got one satisfying comedy. There's some gross humour, but unlike recent gross-out comedies the stuff here actually works and doesn't feel unpleasant. In addition, most gags contribute to later events in the story. Death At A Funeral is a solid Hollywood product with a star cast that manages to make every star worthwhile. It doesn't break any new ground, but it's truly hilarious.

This film is about the funeral of a family man. the funeral turns out to be very eventful with many surprises.

"Death at a Funeral" is almost the same as the British original, be it the title or the plot. The British one was really funny, I remember myself laughing very hard when I watched it. This remake, is mildly funny, but it is just in a different league. It uses cheap humour to make people laugh, and it lacks the witty dialog of the original. Moreover, characters are less sympathetic and more annoying in this remake. Despite a few funny moments, I would stay "Death at a Funeral" is an uninspired remake of a great comedy.

Maybe filmmakers will bear in mind that remaking such a recent film in the same language with the same plot is not such a good idea, as it will inevitably draw comparisons between the original and the remake.

A family reunion at a father's funeral is going to turn very nasty as everyone holds a secret who's unveiling will leave deep marks on the others.

It's a comedy which besides having a good idea and being very funny provides nothing else than a big disappointment. You see, everything has its limits and when you break them (especially as often as this movie does) you end up with a cavalcade of awkward, stupid and unnecessary situations. It starts very promising and funny but that's about it, degenerating rapidly into scenes and characters which shouldn't have been there, all ending up as exaggerated as it can be. I really was expecting more but hey, there's always a better movie waiting to be seen.

I think peoples expectations blocks them from enjoying. It's funny.

This lacks all the wonderful English sense of irony. That version was laugh out loud funny. This version doesn't work,

Reading other reviews it's clear many people diddn't think it needed to be made a remake of the original, which I haven't watched.

I chuckled more times than i thought i would before watching the movie. I think Martin Lawrence, James Marsden and Columbus Short's characters were particular engaging do to the actors performances although mainly in the first half, as some of the jokes got abit cringy later in the movie.

I think Tracy Morgan's character had alot of potensial, but his scenes ended up predictable, over the top and not funny.

Despite having double the budget and some pretty big Hollywood stars the 2010 release adds nothing whatsoever, and in fact is in many ways inferior.

Not only are there some very lacklustre performances in particular from Chris Rock and Martin Lawrence as the two sons of the deceased, but the camera work in some sections is truly awful with the decision to use "handheld" or steadicam photography resulting in the picture shaking so badly in some sections that it is almost hard to watch.

Despite all this many of the best moments of the original are copied perfectly and work just as well as they did the first time around meaning that there are several good laughs to be had, but when you've got the choice of watching this or the original there's really no contest.

Distinctly average.

I am truly astonished at the average rating this film is getting on this site. This is not a great movie but it is a good movie with some genuine laughs. I enjoyed this far more than Date Night, which was also good and had a few laughs. I think Hollywood needs some lessons on comic timing and the such. Truthfully, this could have been a far better movie but when it works it works very well. Neil Labute demonstrates that he is a very competent director. The film is well paced, and the acting is from good to very good. It does not turn into a blacksploitation comedy at any time. So, OK it is not a masterpiece but it is worthy of a far higher rating than it is getting here.

Oh, that's right - no talent, thoughts, or creativity left in the world, evidently. And only three years after the original MUCH BETTER film. Next time just file for unemployment if you're that desperate for money. The original is excellent and fruit far too high for the likes of those involved in this wreck.

This is another picture I watched with my movie theatre working friend. It's a remake of a Frank Oz-helmed film for Britain that came out just three years ago. This version was directed by Neil LaBute with a cast that included Chris Rock, Martin Lawrence, Tracy Morgan, Luke Wilson, Zoe Saldana, James Marsden, Peter Dinklage (the only one to reprise his role from the previous version), and Danny Glover. Many of the people I just mentioned provided many good laughs, especially Marsden as a drugged wanderer, though there were also some-pardon the pun-dead spots as well. Still, this was quite an entertaining comedy to me that didn't become too unbelievable in the way things happened. Since I hadn't seen Oz' version, however, I can't compare them yet. So on that note, that's a recommendation for Death at a Funeral.

Completely pointless remake

The original British version was perfect.... This remake is appalling

All the other reviews on here are calling this movie boring and useless. I have to disagree I laughed quite a lot as there are some really funny goofy gags in the film. Its not just a black film like others seem to say the white guy who played Oscar was very funny when he took what he thought was Valium and it turned out to be acid. Chris Rock always good, Martin Lawrence was also good and i was pleased to see Danny Glover as ain't seen much of him in recent Years. The only thing i would say is they should have give more thought to Luke Wilson's character as he didn't seem to be there for any real plot line and he is capable of a better performance as seen in OLD SKool.

Just watch it and don't believe everything you hear from critics make your own mind up.

'Unnecessary' is probably the best single word description of Neil LaBute's "Death at a Funeral." I mean, there's really no precedent for the release of a same-language remake a paltry two and a half years after its original, and yet the guest list arrives for this new "Funeral" with almost as fast a turnaround as a Hollywood sequel. Hell, Chris Nolan hibernated on his second "Batman" film longer.

Nevertheless, the reality is that the decidedly Afro-American-friendly version of the dysfunctional family comedy (notable only because it really is the later film's sole distinguishing feature), is now in theaters, leaving anyone who remembers the Frank Oz original to ponder why.

LaBute and star Chris Rock, who also served as a producer on the film, cheekily 'adapt' U.K. writer Dean Craig's screenplay by peppering it with hip-pop pop-culture nods to Usher and R. Kelly, and leaving the rest, in essence, unchanged. On one hand, I appreciate the sentiment in that it doesn't presume to outdo its progenitor, but that's its problem as a standalone piece: it's either identical or inferior in every conceivable way. As such, the majority of its first-time audience will probably appreciate the comedic build-up having not been spoiled on the gags, and that's fine for right now, but it poses a potential dilemma, say, ten years down the road.

When film buffs and historians look back on "Death at a Funeral" (which they honestly have little reason to), the choice between the two versions will be obvious. Plus, they'll have no idea who "Usher" is.

Likewise, even today I'd recommend a rental of the 2007 film over a ticket to its 2010 counterpart, because, well, the original is the original, and for all its faithfulness, the remake actually accentuates what's lost in translation. The pop-culture one-liners clash with the characters on the page, and leave them feeling half-formed and sloppy on the screen—Are we watching Chris Rock do what makes Chris Rock hilarious, or are we seeing him play a repressed, introverted protagonist? The answer, messily, is both.

On that level, there's a creative integrity to the original performances that is impossible in LaBute's version. Martin Lawrence, Danny Glover, Tracey Morgan, Zoe Saldana, Peter Dinklage, Luke Wilson, and others comprise an undeniably talented cast that does an admirable job performing characters that were written as upper-crust Englishmen, but watching Rock sulk his way through the film makes it abundantly clear that they're not being themselves.

There's also the not-so-insignificant matter of LaBute's bland artisanship. In the past, he's been responsible for equally lifeless big-screen adaptations of his own stage plays, and a spectacularly poorly-received remake of "The Wicker Man"—It begs the question, why was he asked and trusted to shepherd this project? There's no single performance in the film that feels particularly informed by his hand, and LaBute fails to bring a single funny idea to the table. In adhering so rigidly to "Funeral" prime, his remake is marked by an absence of directorial and comedic vision.

I have no qualms with anyone who enjoyed "Death at a Funeral" for the first time via the LaBute/Rock version. A lot of what made the British comedy memorable has survived, and even with a jaded precognition of the gags, I mined a couple laughs. However, the fatal flaw of the 2010 adaptation is that the 2007 version exists. It's not like it's antiquated or anything; it's three years old.

Anyone with an open mind can still appreciate the original "Death at a Funeral," and its immediate availability for less than the cost of a night at the movies makes the 2010 remake quintessentially one thing—Unnecessary.

I watched this movie at a military base theater - yes we do get to watch movies. I was greatly surprised. This movie was hilarious! An all-star comedic cast.Although with all of the heavy hitters when it comes to comedy, the characters weren't fully developed to their potential.

James Marsden really steals the show. Normally I'm not a Tracey Morgan or Chris Rock fan, but they were actually funny and not just silly.

Similar story line to the original, but definitely across the pond humor. At times the movie seem to drag a bit and left you wanting to say let's get on with it - but still great comedic scenes. A must see for a good gut-busting laugh.

Recommend passing on this one and watch the original released in 2007. The first version was incredibly funny. This one was barely amusing.

LaBute's Death at a Funeral is indeed in some ways, more effective than the original. I personally think that the more uptight the family (the original, with a British cast), the better, and more jarring the scatological/drug humor and sexual peccadilloes will be, but this version surprised me. It is a much more warmed up version of Oz's film, which helps the film along immensely. After all, this is supposed to be comedic farce, and while Brits are quite good at it, that wasn't evident in the original.

James Marsden turned out to be a stunningly good physical comedian (I really only remember him from the X-Men films but pretty sure I've seen Disturbing Behavior and a couple of other things). He manages to far surpass the creativity and humor of Alan Tudyk in Oz's version (playing the boyfriend of a family member of the deceased). All the cast make solid contributions, though it is a bit disturbing to see Danny Glover playing the thankless role of the old, mean-ass, obscenity-spewing uncle, who torments Tracy Morgan's character.

Peter Dinklage is even better playing the same role of the mysterious funeral attendee with a disturbing secret and Martin Lawrence looks good and his acting is quite good, as the successful younger novelist brother of Chris Rock (in a thoughtful and restrained performance), the older brother who is trying to hold it all together. Lawrence seems to have gotten himself straightened out after his troubles some time back and has also had his shtick pulled back by Director LaBute. While it was somewhat embarrassing for me to be laughing uproariously in a movie theater in which there were only six or seven adults present, laugh I did. Couldn't help myself.

Go and see the recent original film 'Death at a Funeral,' the British version, hilarious. It is a black comedy, which isn't depressing but is light hearted fun of the almost delicious Charles Addams school of macabre humour.

I can only surmise the US film industry thinks US viewers too thick or insular to watch a comedy in the same language with a (nowadays) slightly different accent.

If you aren't as puddle headed as they've assumed, see the original and laugh yourself sick, as I did. PS it so far has got 7. something on IMDb... enough said, you'll be pleased you did. What's more the whole family can enjoy this one without boring anyone at all let alone to death.

I should start off by saying that this is the only version I have seen of this title. It is totally underrated though and I have watched it several times and it never fails to make me laugh out loud! Its silly fun but non stop chaos which makes you feel awkward. Its got a host of stars who all play their part. Theres some good humour in here and its light hearted. Its a comedy I would recommend to anyone and everyone.

Sorry guys, but in this day and age I get my laughs where and when I can, so I'm going to disagree with most reviews. Granted this remake wasn't as good as the original but it still made me laugh out loud and glad to see Peter Dinklage return in his role as the dad's squeeze.

Let me cut it short. There was a refreshing, funny, utterly lovable and enjoyable death - comedy titled Death at a Funeral. It's not even outdated, came out a couple of years ago. This movie tries to live up to the original English comedy, but despite the brilliant actors like Glover and David, it doesn't succeed. It actually made every mistake a remake can make, therefore the original remains brilliant and this one is just a weak copy. Sad, but true. They tried, even tried hard, I admit, but there are things that best remain untouched. Death at a Funeral is one of them. It's a nice try, but will disappear undocumented, unlike the original one that remains a fine example of English black humor.

My recommendation: Watch that one instead.