I don’t know if 2010 is allowed, but Get Him To The Greek would probably have to be up there. Russell Brand and P. Diddy together on screen at last!
Seltzerberg’s entire filmography. If you’ve seen Date Movie, you’ve seen Epic Movie, Meet the Spartans, Disaster Movie, etc, because they’re all the same thing with a different set of clothes on, as it were.
I wouldn’t call these horribly aged though, they’ve always been shit.
And they’re all so fucking stupid.
Epic Movie had a couple of good jokes in it but I walked out of the theater during Date Movie when the Pimp My Ride joke came up. They didn’t even try to make that movie funny.
For obvious reasons I never saw the remaining films.
My son is 15 and he saw a few of them and laughed his ass off. So I really can’t get behind that whole heartedly.
Not a film per se but I nominate How I Met Your Mother. Barney is a funny and great guy, but he’s also a misogynist and a creep
Ted’s a bigger creep. I hadn’t noticed until I heard a woman say it. Thought about it and she was right.
At least Barney is self-aware of the fact that he’s a creep. Ted thinks he’s a nice guy
I think White Chicks is overall still a good movie, but Terry Crews’ character date raping the one guy so hard he ends up in a wheel chair was a bit too far.
One of my favorite teen movies was 16 Candles, which I loved as a kid, and looked forward to showing my son, when he got old enough.
The day came, and he watched it without cracking a smile. When it ended, he asked, “What did you think was funny? The underage binge drinking, the wanton destruction of a beautiful house, the Asian racism, or maybe it was the statutory rape? What exactly is funny about this movie?”
He ruins everything.
Wait, you mean to tell me that 16 Candles was supposed to be a comedy!?
Teenage me absolutely did not pick up on that tidbit when I saw it in the early 2000s. I just saw it as yet another crappy romance film from the 80s. I was so bored that I can’t actually recall a single memorable scene from the film.
Hate to break it to you, dude, but the movie was very much a product of its time. Anyone younger than Gen X isn’t going to “get” the film. As a Millennial, I surely don’t.
I guess I’ve only seen that movie once and it was about 30 or 40 years ago, I don’t remember a beautiful house being destroyed? I don’t remember any statutory rape? I guess it was just considered a normal sex scene back then? Either way I don’t remember that part either.
Remember the big party that was the centerpiece of the film? And the older guys were discussing having sex with the younger girls, one of them even saying “She’s a child!” But the older guy went after her anyway.
It was trashed during the party I think
OH GOD I just remembered Meet The Spartans exists.
To be fair this one didn’t age badly. It was already shit at release
In a so shit its funny way, or its just shit way?
It’s Friedberg and Seltzer at their worst, and that’s saying something.
I actually liked the experience. No, not the movie, that was terrible LOL. But I remember watching it with my friends in highschool and we were the only ones in the theater aside from some other group, so we were quipping our own funnier jokes back and forth with these strangers making each other laugh lol.
I watched Waiting not too long ago, for the first time since it came out probably, and they use some of the classic early 'oughts terms that we don’t use anymore. Often.
There is no competition: Idiocracy, because it isn’t funny anymore when you are in it yourself.
When I first saw it, it was a comedy. Now it’s a horror movie.
It was funny when it wasn’t real.
I’d rather be in Idiocracy.
at least President Camacho knew they were doomed and was trying to fix it. Dickhead Trump is trying to speed-run our demise.
I know, sipping butter and watching Ow my Balls sounds better than working your life away. I can even be an airline pilot.
It’s also pro eugenicist anti-poor nonsense.
The opening scene has no mention of genetics. Just that stupid people raise stupid children. Yes, in real life, a child can break free of bad parentage, but it’s rare and outside the scope of an 84 minute movie. In real life, the stupid people would be way, way more mean spirited, but that would make for a bad comedy.
It’s a fair criticism but imo it’s not too hard to write off that bit of absurd narrated exposition at the beginning and instead think of it as being about anti-intellectualism and broken institutions, since the rest of the movie seems like more of a satire of those things, and the plot doesn’t really land on eugenics as a solution to its problems.
Mike Judge made a statement about it in an interview:
We live in polarized times, which means that for every ‘Idiocracy is a documentary!’ take that goes around, there’s also a critique that argues that Idiocracy is a celebration of eugenics. Have you thought about that interpretation of it?
Well, yeah. I mean I’ve actually read that a couple of times. But to me, I thought the opening made it very clear that whatever side you take, nature and nurture are both covered in that. That guy is clearly not a good father. I mean, there’s a kid with a motorcycle in the front yard, and no one’s paying attention to this. He’s just irresponsibly knocking up different woman, and proud of it. It’s not like he’s a good, upstanding role model for the kid. So I think it’s pretty clear here that, whichever one it is, [nature or nurture], there’s some combination of both. I obviously don’t believe in eugenics. I think you could look at it both ways—you have this couple that’s trying to be so responsible that they end up never having kids. Then there’s another couple who just irresponsibly keeps having them and not raising them right. So, you know, if the other couple adopted the other kids. I’m sure they would probably be better off.
Yeah the eugenics take always seemed a weird one. No implications that the family reproducing like rabbits shouldn’t have any children, just that maybe it would be good if they had a reasonable amount of kids responsibly. Also the couple that never had kids despite wanting kids shouldn’t have been so cautious as to miss out.
Well I can kind of understand it, because it pins the cause of a problem of declining population level intelligence on who is having children, which is a controversial idea to say the least.
The movie presented a problem within the human experience.
Eugenics is the fascist answer to the question of existence. Always will be.
Aren’t the wealthy in Idiocracy also, well, idiots?
I thought the thing was everyone was an idiot
Yeah, but it is because the rich people in modern times didn’t have kids while poor people were, even having significant resources given to them to allow them to survive and reproduce.
I don’t know if they were portrayed as “rich”, but just a couple that was very careful and considered about everything. A clean and organized and empty house being a consequence of that. While trying to fit children in “properly” they never found the time.
Certainly the two preserved people were not rich.
Also, I don’t think the message was that “poor people” should not reproduce " as your eugenics claim asserts, think the takeaway would be that folks should find some happy medium, the people let planning and anxiety get too in the way of having the children they wanted, and the other example needed at least some more responsible sensibilities.
We live in a society. We depend on each other to keep that society functional.
We resent the effort it takes to maintain life, because that prevemts time being spent on the less.mundane stuff.
Humanity built rules and morals to keep us on track, but nature doesnt loose - it reroutes the river. Controlled breeding looses out to hornyness. And Entropy eventually topples the sand castles of humanity. Like giant avalanches of garbage.
The non-producing couple were portrayed as being yuppies, which would be upper middle class. This is conveyed in how they dressed, their home, and how they spoke. It isn’t the wealthy elite, but the professional class below them. This contrasts with the poor group living in a trailer park during a time when trailer park trash was a common expression.
And I don’t think that “poor people shouldn’t procreate” was the message of the movie. However, the movie has a thesis from those first few minutes, intended or not, that making life safer and easier for everyone to predominantly lead to the dumb uncultured masses taking over well built systems until they degrade to the point where they don’t work any more.
The thing is, the movie itself is fine. It is self contained satire that never tries to pass itself off as more than an absurd joke. It’s that everyone is citing it as prophetic or relevant that’s the issue. Ironically, the people that can only process real events through their favorite fiction aren’t nearly as smart as they think they are.
XKCD 603 has never been more relevant than this
Idiocracy is not at all positive about selective human breeding.
I tried watching it after hearing about it here a few times… I was shocked at how it’s basically just a comedy for rich white conservatives. If anything its message is supportive of fascism; the whole premise is that poor people are stupid and rich people are smart, and humanity 500 years in the future has gotten stupider because the rich people failed to control the poors and got “great replaced” by stupid poor people…
why anyone on Lemmy thinks it’s good is beyond me
Though it showed the people who were not having kids, as middle class, and it showed the people having kids, as poor, it wasn’t a point in the story that the rich got replaced, only the smart people.
Wealth was never a point or even a subtle representation in the movie. It was certainly a movie written by a rich white man though, and can definitely be critiqued as having those biases.
Judge has shown time and again that he is very against institutional controls and concentrated power in general. All the “pro fascism” stuff you’re taking about are your own ideas for “solutions” to the problem Idiocracy poses.
I don’t see how it favors rich, white, or conservatives.
The smart people are not explicitly described as rich. The couple in the intro just are overly cautious and miss out on kids. Certainly the two people preserved from the past are by no means rich.
I also don’t see conservative values as somehow aligned.
I didn’t see any racial split.
There was no implications that anyone should have “controlled” anyone. To the extent there was a message, it was that some people are overly cautious and should love a little, and other people might could use a bit more self restraint and raise children responsibily.
Yeah some of the memes are funny but the themes of the movie are pretty regressive :(
Austin Powers.
It was hilarious back then but now, I can’t help but cringe through almost every scene.
If you’re cringing at Austin I think it’s doing its job. Austin is supposed to be a “poorly aged” character in a, for the time, modern setting.
There are a few (maybe more than a few) times where the “modern” world is out of date though.
I actually think this is one that stands the test of time.
Yeah i just rewatched it a few weeks ago and was pleasantly surprised at how well it stood up.
The Dr Evil/ Scott relationship stands the test of time.
The other day I wanted to watch a fun animated movie, and found that I’d never seen a Teenage Ninja Mutant Turtles movie that came out in 2007. Downloaded, put it on… and immediately greeted by the weinstien logo… then they had not one but TWO different Asian actors doing lines in the “broken Chinese accent.” Kinda ruined the whole movie for me.
Shallow Hal is a pretty good contender
Isn’t the ultimate message of the movie wholesome though? I’ve never actually seen it.
The basic message is supposed to be but loses intent because of the fact it’s all fat jokes
Dear god. Never seen that, watched the trailer just now and can’t imagine that ever being funny.
I watched it when it came out, and I remember it being pretty meh, with very few (if any) laugh-out-loud moments, or even audible chuckles.
I can’t stand Jack Black, never found him funny.
Big “theatre kid” energy.
Eurotrip - the whole dvd.
I clicked through rewatching some of it and it’s generically raunchy, like it was trying to outcompete the American Pie movie for sex references and topless women.
Edit: It can be very depressing in winter.
here’s a fun fact - unlike most films of the time, it doesn’t celebrate sexual assault as acceptable!
It also is surprisingly not bi-phobic - both Fiona’s MMF threesome and Jenny’s European crush’s bisexuality are not treated as aberrations against nature, etc.
“Stay Black Bert” is a problem though.
Fair point.
Mi scussi guy, everybody at the beach, the hooligans, and literally the entirety of Cooper’s character seems like a way bigger deal than stay black bert lmao.
I rewatched not long ago and would argue it remains one of the best raunchy teen comedies, not like that’s a high bar but I was still laughing through it.
The Mi Scussi guy is the best part of the film, and honestly I feel like that scene is even more relevant today then it was back then. Perverts should be mocked and ridiculed like they are in this film even moreso today!
I wasn’t actually saying those scenes were wrong, I was pointing out how dumb the other commenter’s complaint about “stay black bert” was…which they then kinda proved on their own by making a racist joke in their next comment lol.
Mi Scusi guy is also the Straight To Jail guy from parks and recreation, which I would NOT have realized without looking at his IMDB page.
I mean, the guys at the beach are being mocked for being perverts who women correctly avoid.
The hooligans . . . . I agree it’s not good to let people think being English is acceptable, but they are taking the piss out of Italians, so it’s a hard call . . .
Bruh what…you complain about “stay black bert” then make that joke.
Hard disagree
I don’t remember it being that bad and Scotty Doesn’t Know is a banger. Miscuzi!
Damon looked like he had a blast.
mi scusi
Yeah I don’t get the love of it. Parts of it are ok, but there is a lot of cringe.
It is an interesting question. Most comedy ages poorly, often not because it’s bad, but because the jokes are built on common assumptions of the era, and some of those are kinda shit.
George Carlin
Well, I guess you did say most
Main exception being physical comedy. Some of those old silent films are hilarious, and just as funny now as when they came out 😂
Not having a language barrier, or anchor for that matter, makes a significant difference.
Like Mr Bean. I think the gags about cutting through photos of the royal family only get funnier with age.
or universal situations
City Lights is a great example of this but it is ALSO a great example of the opposite of this, specifically with all the jokes where drunk driving is the punchline
I rewatched Napoleon Dynamite last week and it holds up well IMO. So, not that.
The thing is it was a refreshing change when it came out. I thought it was the funniest movie I’d seen in years, bought the DVD when it came out thinking it was still great then when I tried watching it again a year later and it completely lost it’s luster. It’s like Juno, that one movie was great for a change of pace in an otherwise stale genre
IDK, I didn’t really buy into the hype of either film at the time so when I eventually saw them on DVD, I was disappointed of course. Individual scenes in Napoleon Dynamite were entertaining on their own merits and highly quotable, but the film barely had a cohesive plot and felt more like a series of comedy sketches stringed together rather than a proper movie.
Juno was terrible thanks to the dialog alone. IDK who wrote that script (and don’t care to look it up), but it was some of the most unrealistic dialog I’ve ever heard in a piece of media. Everyone talks like robots and always has the perfect quirky comeback anytime anyone says something. The only person in that film who spoke like a human being was Michael Cera, but every scene with him in it was insufferable because he’s Michael Cera.
Diablo Cody was the writer of Juno, and I only know it because she became a hot commodity after the breakout success of Juno. And she had a middling hit with Jennifer’s Body but hasn’t done anything of note since.
Meanwhile whomever did Napoleon Dynamite was getting offers left and right, and his followup Nacho Libre was a dud because they were banking on the same success of ND but starring Jack Black. Jon Heder got a bunch of offers, including that skating movie with Will Ferrell but I think he kinda just fizzled out
Some movies only hit on the first watch. Once you know the gags, twists or ending its just “Yeah Ok.”
I hadn’t seen it until this year; it held up well, but the peak for me was the jumpcuts while they talk about Pedro’s bike
Bow to your Sensei!
Nothing left for me to do but dance.
Having forgotten pretty much everything about Ace Ventura: Pet Detective I tried to watch it with my nephews and immediately had to turn it off lol
Pet Detective aged like milk. When Nature Calls is still classic.
It’s in the bone!
There’s a reason that the sequel got replayed on tv more then the original. At least, I remember being replayed.
It’s dumb slapstick comedy, then and now. OP’s tastes changed.
I disagree. The core of the film is very much anti-trans with characters on screen becoming physically ill at the notion of transgenderism. It is very much the sort of script that would be discarded with great alacrity these days.
Many of the one-off jokes in the film are slapstick of a decidedly Jim Carry nature for sure, but the sequel does it better with less punching down and more giggling with rather than at.
Three darts is too much…
And now… A YAK! YaaaaaAAAK. YAAAaaaaAAK. YAAK!
Bumblebee Tuna. Bumblebee Tuna! (Your balls are showing.) Bumblebee Tuna!
It was shit when it came out
Yeah, this did not age wellwhere the bad guy is intra conversion trans.
Not a good look now.,
That was 1994 (question is about the 2000s)
Are you gonna go back & correct the people who named 80’s movies too?
difficult to give a shit
Immediately?
Is there anything bad about it until the very end when he gets the clue about the chief?
Also, there still are people like that. It’s just unfortunate that it’s the main character.
The other thing about it now is they cut the scene in every version of the film that establishes Ace is using his “powers” for good: when he pretends to be a trainer of dolphins to head off the reporters. Without that scene, he’s just an asshole the whole film.
Ace Ventura: Heinz Getwellvet. I am trainer of dolphins. You want to talk to de dolphin, you talk to me.
Reporter #1: What happened to the regular trainer?
Ace Ventura: Vat happened to him? Vat happened to me? Seven years I am wit Siegfried.
[he holds up only four fingers]
Ace Ventura: Ve are making de dolphins disappear, und den Roy is coming wit ze tiger und ze shtuffing in de pants und den I’m gone.
Reporter #2: [skeptically] Where is Snowflake?
Ace Ventura: Why do you care about Snowflake? Do you know him? Does he call you at home?
[shouts]
Ace Ventura: Do you have a dorsal fin? To train ze dolphin you must zink like ze dolphin! You must be getting inside ze dolphin’s head. I am saying to Snowflake, “Akay!.. Akay Akay Akay?” und he is saying “AKay Akay!” und he is up on ze tail “Eeeeeeeeee!” und you can quote him!
[Ace spits]
Laces out!
