I just picked 30 years old because by then you should be mature enough to know what is funny and if it has humor and/or just childish non-policital correctness to it. Just wondering.
What an absurd statement. What makes something which is funny to someone under some arbitrary age, in this case 30, somehow doesn't count as being legitimately funny? It's valid to ask if anyone old liked this movie, but to insinuate that a young person's sense of humour is in some way fundamentally invalid because it's not your cup of tea is ridiculous. Humour is completely subjective and just because you don't find something funny doesn't mean it isn't.
I'm 34 and I thought this movie was funny, though not as good as his previous films, but I attribute that more to the scripted nature of the movie. I allowed myself to laugh at often obvious or unecessarily crude jokes not because they were high comedy, but just because they were funny. Maybe I should just go read the New Yorker and gaffa at the humourous jokes in it's pages instead. I'd surely feel better about myself.
I feel bad for you if you feel that growing up means that you're not able to find funny things funny.
reply
share