The Boyfriend: Pourquoi lui?

Despite what other people wrote I thought it was fun and hilarious. My daughter talked me into watching it...I was not disappointed 🙂

The trailer for a movie can really get the viewer excited for a movie, or it can completely turn the viewer off. Why Him? unfortunate does not just have a trailer that falls into the later category, but is one of the worst trailers I can remember seeing. Not only did I not want to see the movie after seeing countless commercials for it, I actively wanted to hate it, if not just for that rock throwing gag that feels like the first thing cut out of Meet The Parents. Why Him? is not a comedic classic by any stretch, but the trailer really does a bad job of really conveying what the movie is really about, but honestly I don't even really think the movie knows what it wants to be.

Why Him? starts off pretty well. Young collage student falls for an eccentric tech billionaire, who through the course of the movie makes some questionable choices regarding his actions around her family over a holiday weekend. The trailer would have you thinking you were in for a grand competition between James Franco and Bryan Cranston, but the movie makes efforts to prove that is not what is going on here. As the movie goes on it become more and more difficult to ignore what feels like a last minute addition of a Christmas setting by the studio to draw some of the holiday crowd, or the incredibly over the top use of dirty language. That is one of the worst advents in comedy movies over the last 25 or so years. Constant use of bad words do not make movies funnier and kids cursing does not count as good comedy.

Why Him also suffers from the problem of not knowing what it is exactly about. About halfway through the movie, almost every character has proved them to be self centered or downright dis likable in some way shape or form, and they run into the problem where none of the easily predictable outcomes is really a good ending for the characters. This turns the ending into a mess where none of the emotional beats are even close to being well executed or satisfying.

Other than the two lead roles, none of the characters get much to do. They seem to be missing for whole chunks of the movie and then brought back to help make a bad gag work and then we head back to the two leads. James Franco is actually pretty good here for about as much as he could do. His character is unlikable when he needs to be and can steal your heart in the next scene. To be fair this is basically the same role Franco has been doing for the last 3 years, but if it ain't broke don't fix it. Bryan Cranston is a funny dude, his role as Dr. Tim Whatley on Seinfeld is a beautifully subtle comedy role and then he really knocked it out of the park as the Dad in Malcolm in the Middle. He does not get to use any of the real comedic talent he has accrued in his career, rather being stuck to being the incredibly straight guy who for some reason has a "crotch chop" as his signature bowling move.

Why Him? was not as bad as I expected, and while I understand that this is not the best way to talk a movie up, but really it's not that bad. I can't in good conscious recommend it, but I am sure there are people out there who like it and I can understand why. There is actually a decent foundation for an interesting comedy movie here, and I don't know what exactly happened along the way but Why Him? stinks of studio tampering and cuts. Not to mention the movie is way too long, at 1 hour and 51 minutes you are probably better off just leaving 20 minutes early and making up an incredibly generic movie ending, because trust me it will probably be better than what was actually filmed.

My question is simply this, why would Brian Cranston, the fine actor that he is, appear in this farce. The premise is silly and the story line is boring at best. This movie makes Cranston's character out to be an idiot just because he doesn't agree with everything the fiancé does. Besides, no Father would honestly agree to approve a marriage of his daughter to this guy. A waste of 2 hours

Why him? I tell you why, because I can't think of any other actor who can transform this this cinematic excrement into a gourmet dish. There is a matteroffactness in his character that lives somewhere between Rupert Pumpkin and Howard Hughes, the thing is that the life James Franco gives to his character is absolutely real. The film could have turned into a horror thriller, because Franco forces you, in the most entertaining way, to feel slightly off-balance. That alone keeps you glued to it in spite of the moronic lack of ideas. Bryan Cranston, of course, is sheer perfection. Reacting hilariously to the absurdity with infinite generosity - A trait of great actors - I wish them a Billy Wilder next time or a Preston Sturges or...you know. Fearless originals just like Franco and Cranston.

It might be prudent never to judge a book by its cover, but often enough, the author would give you a good idea what you're about to invest your time in. Bryan Cranston and James Franco doing a comedy together was enough to give me the necessary shove to press "Play" on this one.

I like comedies but finding a good one lately has been a challenge. Been disappointed many times with trailers that seem promising only to find out that those scenes are the best the entire movie has to offer. There have also recently been a bunch of comedies relying on the director's or the leads' reputation to carry the film to box office and critical success only to crash and burn upon release. This one is a rare exception. Congratulations to the team for getting it just right! James' Laird was a delicate balance. Annoying yet sweet, sometimes offensive but without being repulsive. Bryan's Ned fits the stereotype yet has been restrained enough to remain relatable. Even the cameo from Gene and Paul, though expected, came out fresh.

If you're looking for a fun movie, give this one a try. Be forewarned though of the liberal use of profanities.