MovieChat Forums > Funny People (2009) Discussion > Lasted About an Hour too Long

Lasted About an Hour too Long


Seriously, there was a lot of good things about this movie, but two and a half hours worth? I seriously found myself at one point wishing Adam Sandler's charecter would die, just so this movie would end already!

~~~~~~~~~~Say "what" again. Say "what" again! I dare you! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

reply

So true! Around the part where Adam Sandler discovers he's NOT gonna die, I said to myself: Oh great! Happy ending!
But then I was shocked to see it was only the MIDDLE of the movie!!
The heck?
Anything that followed was so boring and useless, that I lost the will to go on watching.

reply

I completely agree. Whoever wrote this movie forgot something called a plot, a story or an arc.

This movie was really awful by the end, despite the first hour being really great, which was very surprising to me because I'd always thought that Apatow is way overrated and his movies actually sort of, well, yes, they stink. And, the ironic part is that by the end, I'd come to the same conclusion again.

Granted, I'm aware of the nepotism that reigns in Hollywood (as well as the US of A), but I don't understand how Apatow was ever green-lighted to make this movies or, frankly, any of his movies, unless one considers that they were made as propaganda to further dumb down Americans. And, please don't deny that all of Hollywood today is run, not by Jews, but by corporations who have a specific intent in every movie they make. That's why I was so shocked the first time I watched a DVD and the studios denying that the commentary was the view of the studios, which means that the views in the movies were?


P.S. This is an old diatribe, but what's the obsession with penises?

reply

I totally agree. At some point I just could not believe that it still has so much remaining time to go.

reply

I didn't like the movie, it took forever to get to the point. I never figured out the point. Even rich pricks need friends. Wow. Can I have my 3 hours back?

reply

Most movies can be summarised in a few key words and sentances, so? It was a good story and it was also very funny, that was the main point. As you haven't mentioned it, I'm suspicious that you and others here even watched it at all. Or some people have some sort of serious sense of humour malfunction.

"How long was I in the army? Five foot eleven." - Spike Milligan

reply

I'm a fan of Judd Apatow's work (going back to the superb Freaks & Geeks) but this is a common flaw in all of his movies; they are all just too damn long for their own good!

reply

this was definitely about 40 minutes too long. the long episode at the house of his ex girlfriend could have been shorter and would have made it much better.

i still gave this movie 8 because i enjoyed the first hour and a half so much. really really good comedy and real characters.

"gentlemen make your lives extraordinary"

reply

The internet gives you people short attention spans. The longer a movie is the more you get a feel for it's characters. That's why books are always better than movies. The story needs to be as long as it is to tell the story the story teller wanted to tell. When you want to read a book do you settle for the synopsis or do you read the whole novel? It sucks that Hollywood constantly tries to force the easy bake movie instructions on us all the time. If the story takes 45 minutes fine, if it takes 3 hours and 45 minutes even better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi5PFI3rMTQ

reply

^If there weren't so many cock jokes and prolonged ad-libs throughout the movie I would agree with you.

reply

yeaaah, because a crappy 4 hour film is always better than a crappy 2 hour film, because we are blessed to sit through more crap. makes total sense.

good example:

buttton button, short story - takes 20 minutes to read - awesome
button button, twilight zone episode - takes 30 minutes to watch - still awesome
the button - film based on the short story - over 90 minutes - added nothing of intrest to the short story - abysmal

reply

Yup, far too long.

reply

I agree on it being 30-40 mins too long. I loved the movie, but around that pointed I was getting ready for it to end.

reply

I had to sit in front of my tv 4 times in order the complete this ordeal of a movie! This movie can be said to be many things I suppose but it is definitely not a laugh riot.

Jim: Look at my hand.
Bart: Steady as a rock.
Jim: Yeah, but I shoot with this one.

reply

Long movies are great when they have a worthwhile story to tell, this movie didn't. As soon as they went to stay with his ex the movie hit a brick wall and never recovered. The comedy world along with the relationships the first half built up were pretty much completely tossed aside in favor of a horribly cliched try to win back the ex segment. He should have cut the ex gf part to a small sub-plot, and ended the film after 100 or so minutes with either Sandler dying (which still wouldnt work all that well because no other character has an arc) or living as a changed man.

A solid movie exists in Funny People but it devolved into a complete mess after the solid first two acts. Very few movies have dropped the ball as badly as this did in going from a pretty good dramedy to a horrible rom-com. Also, it came across as a lame reason for Judd to once again cast his wife and kids and show them off to the world. This was especially lame considering they were essentially playing the same roles as the ones in Knocked Up. In a way that alone takes me out if the movie.

reply

2 hrs too long.



Oh, and remember, next Friday is Hawaiian shirt day.

reply

[deleted]

As for length, I think a movie should only last as long as it needs to. Some of my favorites include the Lord of the Rings trilogy, The Godfather 1&2, and Lawrence of Arabia. Movies like that are meant to be as long as they are. This movie on the other hand was longer than it needed to be. It's been a couple of years since I watched last watched this movie, but I remember liking the beginning when it explored Adam Sandler's character while he dealt with his illness. As soon as he got better I lost interest in the movie. Leslie Mann is a dull actress and I could have done with less of her scenes.

I can see why someone who liked the characters would have enjoyed this movie's length, as moviemaniac pointed out. For me the characters were ok, but not interesting enough to spend 2 and a half hours with.

In some ways America's attention span has decreased due to the rapid paced editing and flashy images that are so commonplace, but at the same time many blockbuster movies are surprisingly long. Inception was about the same length as this movie, but most people I know loved it. The Dark Knight was long too, but was the biggest movie of the year. I also know many teenagers who loved The Departed, which is about the same length as this film and the others I mentioned. It all depends on how engaging the film is.




My DVDs

http://www.imdb.com/list/HO8r9yJirPA/

reply

Yeah, I came into this movie NOT knowing how long it was. I enjoyed the joke about Jewish people not liking to be on lists (talking about JDate).

Then later when this movie kept on going ON and ON I asked my friend, "What is this movie as long as Shindler's List? ROFL, for Pete's sake!"

Way too long, should've been called The Neverending Story!

reply

I agree, this movie was way too damn long but still good.

reply

Yes it is a long movie by usual Hollywood standards, but I absolutely loved this movie, so the more the better!

reply

The first half was good, the second half was crap so I agree with OP it should have been an hour shorter

reply