Parodie de comédie romantique qui se focalise sur un homme, ses sentiments, ses parents et son père.Parodie de comédie romantique qui se focalise sur un homme, ses sentiments, ses parents et son père.Parodie de comédie romantique qui se focalise sur un homme, ses sentiments, ses parents et son père.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 4 victoires et 1 nomination au total
Valery M. Ortiz
- Jell-O
- (as Valery Ortiz)
Charlie Dell
- Justice of the Peace
- (as Charles Dell)
Avis à la une
The fact that this movie was allowed to advance past the "script writing" stage is beyond me.
If I could vote it 0, believe me I would. Watching paint dry would be a more cultural experience.
They actually re-created scenes from existing comedy movies & virtually did them note for note. Can somebody explain the word parody to the film makers???
Some of the acting was quite good, it's just a shame that they had so little to work with to be able to assist with making this pile of junk watchable.
If I could vote it 0, believe me I would. Watching paint dry would be a more cultural experience.
They actually re-created scenes from existing comedy movies & virtually did them note for note. Can somebody explain the word parody to the film makers???
Some of the acting was quite good, it's just a shame that they had so little to work with to be able to assist with making this pile of junk watchable.
Are you short for cash, Alyson? Is that why your beautifal face had to be seen on screen in this joke of a parody movie? I went to this movie with high expectations. I mean very high. I am a sucker for the parody genre. Ever since The Naked Gun films and Airplane!, Wrongfully Accused, Spy Hard, Scary Movie.. I've been a nut for these types of movies. So why was this one so bad? I can't really explain.. I saw all the movies they parodied, and still.. it just wasn't funny. I am absolutely in love with Alyson Hannigan. She's a very beautifal and very talented actress. Eddie Griffin is one of the funniest comedians to grace the silver screen in years. And please, Lil' Jon is in the movie! What's not to like? Well, the fact that basically, a lot of the parodies were just word for word retellings of some of the movies. The dinner scene was an ENTIRE ripoff of the Meet the Parents scene to a t. This movie tries too hard to be funny, and at sometimes its okay (the Pimp My Ride scene comes to mind), but honestly.. it just tries too hard and doesn't go anywhere. I can't say I was disappointed, it was beyond that. If there's a sequel to this atrocious comedy I'll eat my hat.
This won't be a long review, as this movie doesn't warrant much more than a warning not to waste your money on it. I'm not sure how a movie so god-awful can make it to screen, but my faith in the system has been shaken. The film isn't funny, I'm not sure if it tries to be or not, but it's not. It references other movies (Meet the Parents, When Harry met Sally etc.) but doesn't really spoof them. This was the biggest problem I believe, as it doesn't have any semblance of flow or sense. Random scenes pop up, trying to get a laugh by basically reenacting the scene, not exaggerating it or making fun of it. I managed to sit through House of the Dead, but this film actually made me angry it was so unfunny. Please skip it, have one of your friends go see it instead and then ask about it. If they don't knock your teeth out for setting them up to lose money and 90 minutes of their life, then you can go see it yourself.
I'd imagine that the main reason that people are paying to watch this is because it stars Alyson Hannigan. Well, she's in it, and she makes the most of a thoroughly unchallenging role, but unless you're a total completist, that shouldn't be enough of a reason to waste even 80 minutes of your life on this appalling waste of talent.
What the writer/directors seem to have missed is that if you're going to parody or satirise a scene from a decent movie, you actually have to add something. It's not sufficient to just throw a bunch of stolen scenes together in the hope that the conjunction will generate humour by itself. I honestly could not see one - not ONE - original thought or idea or line in the script or direction. That in itself is something of an achievement. The whole thing plays like it was scripted by teenagers, and not teenagers from the top end of the grade curve.
In fact, I have to wonder if this films is deliberately aimed at the lowest common denominator. If so, it missed by several yards to the south.
What the writer/directors seem to have missed is that if you're going to parody or satirise a scene from a decent movie, you actually have to add something. It's not sufficient to just throw a bunch of stolen scenes together in the hope that the conjunction will generate humour by itself. I honestly could not see one - not ONE - original thought or idea or line in the script or direction. That in itself is something of an achievement. The whole thing plays like it was scripted by teenagers, and not teenagers from the top end of the grade curve.
In fact, I have to wonder if this films is deliberately aimed at the lowest common denominator. If so, it missed by several yards to the south.
My friends and I went into this movie expecting something along the lines of a dumb but funny movie like "Scary Movie" or "Not another Teen Movie".
Sad to say, this was the worst movie I've seen since the beginning of 2005. DO NOT see this movie and DO NOT believe the advertisements for this movie as those scenes were the best parts of the film. I admit, I laughed during the Napoleon Dynamite skit, but that was probably the only funny scene in the whole film.
This film is stupid, but not stupid in a funny way. It is stupid in an EXTREMELY boring way. The only (barely) entertaining parts of the movie were in the first 10 minutes. The rest of it was filler as the scriptwriter probably ran out of dumb ideas.
I, along with probably most of the audience, felt like leaving on the spot. This is a bad film with no redeeming features.
Sad to say, this was the worst movie I've seen since the beginning of 2005. DO NOT see this movie and DO NOT believe the advertisements for this movie as those scenes were the best parts of the film. I admit, I laughed during the Napoleon Dynamite skit, but that was probably the only funny scene in the whole film.
This film is stupid, but not stupid in a funny way. It is stupid in an EXTREMELY boring way. The only (barely) entertaining parts of the movie were in the first 10 minutes. The rest of it was filler as the scriptwriter probably ran out of dumb ideas.
I, along with probably most of the audience, felt like leaving on the spot. This is a bad film with no redeeming features.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThis movie was screened for critics before release, which is rare for a Seltzer and Friedberg movie.
- GaffesWhen Julia is doing her "Milkshake" dance, she starts dancing to the taxi driver. In a side shot, the camera is reflected in the side of the taxi.
- Citations
Roz Fockyerdoder: [gives Julia the present after the wedding] It's a vaginal thermometer. It's been in our family for generations.
Linda Jones: It lets you know when your ovulating.
Roz Fockyerdoder: And if you wanna keep it a lucky one, don't ever wash it.
- Versions alternativesThe 85-minute extended, unrated version is only about 2 minutes longer and there are some changes:
- In the scene spoofing The Bachelor, the dialogue introducing Grant is different.
- The scene with the cat on the toilet is longer.
- There is some extra dialogue after the wizard gets kicked in the crotch.
- Grant's last name is "Fockyerdoder" instead of "Funkyerdoder".
- Julia shows Jack two extra cards.
- When Nicky is thinking about the honeymoon, the dialogue is different.
- The scene where Roz & Linda are talking is much more explicit.
- Andy's introduction is longer and more suggestive.
- ConnexionsFeatured in 20 to 1: Adults Only 20 to 01: Sexiest Movie Scenes (2009)
- Bandes originalesBridal Chorus
Written by Richard Wagner
Arranged by James Harpham and John Gale
Courtesy of 5 Alarm Music
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Date Movie
- Lieux de tournage
- Church of the Angels - 1100 Avenue 64, Pasadena, Californie, États-Unis(Exterior shot - Location for Julia and Grant's wedding)
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 20 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 48 548 426 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 19 076 261 $US
- 19 févr. 2006
- Montant brut mondial
- 85 749 034 $US
- Durée1 heure 23 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant