Not Cool

I don't know who shane dawson is i just hate his film i don't care about his you tube channel this film is painful unfunny unlikeable character's gross out humor makes fun of people with disability's this is how you don't do a movie shane should have just the donated that budget money.

I'm surprised to see such high ratings for this movie. But when I read the reviews from people who gave the movie 9 and 10 stars, it became obvious that they were big fans of Dawson who were more interested in propping up the film rather than review it.

. SO to get a non-fan review To me, the movie was one of the worst I have seen in a long time. Was there a plot? The movie seemed to drag on, with a couple of funny scenes throughout--a couple.

I was most offended and turned off by Shane's treatment of ethnic minorities / people of color in the film: The African-American homeless man (and two other cartoonish Black characters) was INSULTING, not funny; the stereotype of the Latina woman was insulting, not funny--unless you're a bigot; the stereotype of the Indian character was insulting, not funny. The thing that made it even worse for me was that the movie would have played the same had these characters not been played as their negative stereotypes.

It was almost like 2 movies: the beginning was very silly; the middle was simply silly; and the ending was not bad.I will say, however, that the female lead character has talent and was the best part of the film. As for the lead male characters, I had a hard time believing that either of them was into women. Whether or not they are in real life is not the issue, but it made their relationships with the female characters feel forced. Maybe it was their poor acting.

Nothing has ever made me more uncomfortable than this movie.

Well... it was in focus. The sound was clear, it was well lit, and the camera didn't shake. Sadly, that pretty much is all that the filmmakers got right with this painfully unfunny attempt at a comedy.

I should make it clear that I have no problem with "gross out" humor and, in fact, I think there should be no limits and nothing is distasteful... if it's done right. I am not offended by vomit jokes, sex jokes, or any other kind of crude jokes... so long as they are actually funny. Directors, from Mel Brooks to the Zucker and Farrelly brothers to Seth MacFarlane and countless other have proved that filthy scatological gross jokes can work when they're done right.

But director Shane Dawson seems to think that just putting something that seems shocking or offensive on film is enough to be funny. It seems as if he felt that all he had to do was come up with an outrageous set up scene and the jokes would write themselves... but they don't. For example, I'm sure he thought it would be funny to have a key scene set in a public bathroom with the characters communicating through a glory hole. Perhaps with some sharp dialog or with a performance that wasn't cartoonishly over the top and grating, it might have worked. Instead, since, like so many scenes in this film, it relies solely on the set up and provides no punchline, this scene falls flat. This kind of painfully unfunny attempt at comedy makes films like "Meet the Spartans" look like comic masterpieces by comparison.

The best analogy I can give is to say a comedian can make a funny fart joke that will make an audience laugh... while an immature child thinks the act of farting itself is funny enough. This film was directed by an immature child.

The lack of actual humor and the paint-by the-numbers storyline could be overlooked, and the film could just serve as a mild distraction for ninety minutes, if it were not for the horrible performances of the two male leads. Director Shane Dawson miscast himself as the male lead and also cast his equally untalented androgynous friend Drew Monson as the other male lead, their two stories somehow overlapping. Remembering your lines and hitting your mark is NOT all there is to acting. That Shane Dawson spends many scenes opposite Cherami Leigh, a young woman who can actually act, only highlights how out of his depths he is. That neither actor is able to demonstrate that they are actually interested in any of the women their characters are supposed to be obsessed with is the least of their performance problems.

I'm sure there are plenty of 12-year-old children who may giggle at some of these scenes, provided this is the first R-rated comedy they've ever seen. But for the rest of us... we won't be offended by the vulgarity as it's nothing new... we'll just be offended that this many people put so much money and effort into making something so completely unfunny.

Ugh. I wanted this movie to be good. I always want Youtube movies to be good, because I know how hard some people work to do so. I suppose I should begin saying that I am not a fan of Shane Dawson, I can see the appeal (he sure is a looker)but is he funny? Let's get back to the movie. It's awful. I saw this after Hollidaysburg and this one was blown out of the water, hell it wasn't even in the water in the morning. Where the casting and characters of Hollidaysburg worked because of the chemistry and depth the actors were able to bring to the roles. And while it had pacing issues, Not Cool has no pacing. It starts, it ends, I feel dirty for watching it, I get a shower(x9). It doesn't help either that the characters and actors were awful. OK I should amend that. The girl playing Tori is OK and by far the best actor in the movie. Hollidaysburg, while unfunny at times, knew where to draw the line. Something Shane Dawson has never known. And I'm not opposed to shock humor, but goddam! IT has to be funny! Just because you can have a script that says (Mock minority to a theater of laughing fools) doesn't mean you can make a movie. Never since Transformers 3 have I felt like the smartest person in a room. This movie never shuts up either. It's having a moment-oh sorry we have to make fun of gay people again! Don't see this movie, it will only encourage the people who made this.