more by MaryAnn

unfunded potato salad | by maryann johanson

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
Amazon author
tumblr
Pinterest
RSS

I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell (review)

Smell the Glove

Here’s the thing about Tucker Max: He’s a child. A toddler. A three-year-old screaming, “Poopie, poopie, POOPIE!” at the top of his lungs in the middle of the supermarket in the hopes of getting a reaction out of his embarrassed mother. You know how three-year-olds are — they learn a word is naughty because the first time they use it, the adults gasp, and so now that word is good for getting a reaction out of adults who are otherwise ignoring him.
The best reaction to such behavior is this: Nothing. Ignore him. If you react, you only reinforce the bad behavior, and the child learns that temper tantrums and acting out are good for making himself the center of attention. Ignore him, and he’ll quickly learn to behave himself. Someday he may even be a respectable, reasonable grownup.

The other possibility with Max is that he is a sociopath, someone with no conscience and no empathy. But unless and until he starts torturing kittens, the best thing is simply to pay him no heed whatsoever.

Not that that’s hard with I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell, written by Tucker Max and Nils Parker, based on Max’s bestselling book of the same name [Amazon U.S.] [Amazon U.K.], and directed by Bob Gosse. It’s sorta adorable, actually, that Max thinks he deserves to go to hell for screaming, “Poopie, poopie, POOPIE!” at the top of his lungs in the middle of the supermarket. Has he seen the news lately? He’s small potatoes — way small. And anyway, if he honestly believes that even the women he “likes” are nothing but bitches, tramps, whores, sluts, and “cum dumpsters” — I bet he thought that one was clever — and the ones he doesn’t are sexless, prudish witches, well, he’s gonna end up in his own hell on Earth. If he really is happy — as all indications in this tediously uncharming movie point toward — to bed, in an endless succession, only women with such low opinions of themselves that they’d willingly become dumpsters for his cum, he’s going to end up a sad, lonely, pathetic husk of a man someday. If he isn’t one already.

Perhaps sadder, however, is that he’s merely a poseur, making up all this shit while insisting it’s based on his own real life. I think this is indeed the case, and yet, can he really think this will impress anyone worth impressing? Man, that would be truly pitiable.

There’s a pretense of story to Beer, about how Tucker (Matt Czuchry [Gilmore Girls], who appears to believe that an insufferably smug and neverending grin is endearing) drags his “friends” Dan (Geoff Stults: The Break-Up) and Drew (Jesse Bradford: W., Flags of Our Fathers) to a legendary strip club a few hours drive away because it’s a place where a dude can totally touch the strippers’ tits (because, you know, the girls love having some creep’s grimy hands all over them). It’s all in honor of Dan’s impending marriage to Kristy (Keri Lynn Pratt: Fat Albert) — this is meant to be a sort of bachelor party. Imagine a sliding scale that saw the middling-interesting, sporadically funny, not-as-daring-as-it-thinks-it-is The Hangover written by William Shakespeare and brought to the screen by the love child of David Lean and Martin Scorsese; on such a scale, Beer would be still be mere drunken scribblings on toilet paper that had already been put to its intended purpose.

But we’re not even on that scale, of course. This is a terrible movie in all respects. It’s thoroughly reprehensible, embodying as it does either Max’s genuine disdain for women or his belief that pretending to be a misogynist pig is simply good for business, and yet it does not even have the courage of these meager convictions, ending in a finale that defangs its protagonist, at least as far as the unoriginal sexism of a frat boy can be considered fangish. (Really, Max? You love women even though you treat them as less than human? You think you’re the first to posit such nonsense? And jokes about rape? You’re really gonna have to try much harder than this is you want to be seen as “dangerous” and “outrageous.”) It’s full of people impossible to like: even Tucker’s friends hate him, so why do they hang around with him? If Kristy can honestly say to Dan, “When have you ever chosen me over Tucker?” — and this does seem to be an accurate assessment of their triangle — why the hell would she marry him?

It’s all poorly performed by a bunch of terrible “actors” from TV and direct-to-DVD frat-boy flicks — with the possible exception of Bradford, who has at least appeared in some decent movies, but who is, if he isn’t careful, in danger of hearing himself called a low-rent Ron Livingston. But it’s mostly notable, and not in a good way, for its defensiveness, as if its entire purpose was to “prove” that Max isn’t the asshole he’s made a fortune off insisting he is.

And that’s really feeble, as if the moment someone called him on his bullshit, he tried to backpeddle on it — like that three-year-old screaming in the supermarket suddenly apologizing for his inappropriate behavior. This is not a phrase I use lightly, but: What a dick.

MPAA: rated R for nudity, strong sexual content including graphic dialogue throughout, language and some crude material

viewed at a private screening with an audience of critics

official site | IMDb | trailer
more reviews: Movie Review Query Engine
  • Emily

    Every time I see a trailer for this movie, I feel like chucking something at the tv.

    “Good” to know that urge wasn’t without basis.

  • jay

    I love this review. Great job! Made me laugh.

  • Mike

    This kind of thing seems to be a trend. I haven’t seen the movie, but your description reminds me of the short-lived “Starved” http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0462140/ and the British T.V. show “How Not To Live Your Life” http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1270367/ Both of these T.V. shows star author/creators who seem to think that dickishness is adorable for it’s own sake.

  • stryker1121

    This guy loves his bad press… his website trumpets outraged blurbs from critics slamming him as a sexist, low-rent scumbag, and his movie as utterly reprehensible and awful. Truly, the best thing for the world is to pretend Max does not exist. Works for me.

  • Joe K.

    Sorry, but I saw this movie at a screening and I liked it. I wasn’t a Tucker Max fan (actually, I’d never heard of him) but I didn’t find the movie to be sexist in the least. In fact, the two female protagonists are the smartest, most likeable characters in the movie. My only complaint is that much of the movie is poorly lit. It will be interesting to see if the haters (most of whom haven’t seen the movie) succeed in painting this film as sexist trash. It’s really much more than that. (And really, if you can give a greenlight to THE TIME TRAVELER’S WIFE and FUNNY PEOPLE but a yellow light to the outstanding ADVENTURELAND, your taste as a reviewer is suspect. Good luck with your blogging career.)

  • Lisa

    ^Listen do you smell something?

    at least it existed for that review lol

  • JT

    Excellent, scathing review. Tucker Max is scum.

  • Alex

    Isn’t this a movie review site? Why is most of your review a personal attack on Tucker Max as opposed to a critique discussing the art he created on its own merits?

  • Michael

    “…your taste as a reviewer is suspect.”

    Yeah. ‘Cause taste doesn’t, like, vary or anything. ;)

  • Curtis

    …discussing the art he created on its own merits?

    …art?

  • Ian

    Because art exists in a vacuum, am I right? Really, MaryAnn–how dare you try to pretend that someone is responsible for what he creates?

  • david

    First off I’m a fan of tuckermax. I recently read his book and thought it was hilarious, and I think the book is better than the movie. The movie seemed too rushed, granted it had witty and memorable lines but some of the portrayels seemed forced. But the friends I brought along loved the movie.

    I love how half your review wasn’t about the movie, but instead about your own views towards tucker and his fame.

    Also did you even watch the movie? Tucker’s friends don’t hate him till towards the end, and that was Dan because he discovered Tucker lied about the reason for the bachelor trip. Also the two lead actresses in the movie were strong intelligent women.

    Jesus christ I hate your review with a passion. Your review of this movie is “just like a little child that screams Poopie, poopie, POOPIE!”

    -No foundations what so ever.

  • MaryAnn

    it had witty … lines

    We have different ideas as to what constitutes wit, sir.

  • Accounting Ninja

    Gee, what a SURPRISE. All Tucker’s knob-gobbing trolls are rushing here to say “Boo-urns” to Mary Ann.

  • JoshB

    @Ninja:

    Kinda fun isn’t it? Tucker Max may be a self-congratulating wanker, but these clowns? They’re worshipful, needy followers of a self-congratulating wanker. They can’t bear the thought of someone being unimpressed with Tucker Max, because then how much less impressive are they for being his chuckleheaded minions?

  • http://partypelican.com Beer Pong

    The book was great. I’m excited to see the movie

  • random

    So wait, you’re telling people to ignore him by writing a blog about him? (though to be fair, you did ignore the movie so you’re only half a hypocrite)

    Good work! You take life way too seriously.

  • Dylan

    I wonder if Armond White will love this one, too.

  • Chris

    Yes, Mary Ann takes life too seriously by doing her job. GOOD BURN

  • Ferox

    Indeed, MAJ, good luck with your blogging career! I hope this thing takes off!

    You got the same breed of troll when you reviewed Expelled, if I remember right. People are pretty committed to fighting for the conservative cause, and I’d bet a lot of the people who consider themselves Tucker Max fans don’t even consider themselves conservative.

    They just think rape is funny.

  • stephanie b

    Matt Czuchry [Gilmore Girls], who appears to believe that an insufferably smug and neverending grin is endearing

    And that is an excellent summation of why I never liked his character on Gilmore Girls either.

  • http://na John

    Sign……I really hoped for better, but who was I kidding. Your still coming out of that crazy generation of feminist who demand equality and special treatment at the same time. The real world thinks adults should be responsible for their own actions.

    No one deserves respect. Not women and not men. Not anyone of a particular age. Just becuase a movie makes a dumb joke about individual woman doesn’t mean it somehow hate’s them all.

    Lots of men have made light of women as a whole in jest and vise versa. That’s the nature of anyone who’s happiness is generally tied up in the feelings of the opposite sex.

    What really concerns me, what realy disturbs me, is the apparent power of someone wrapped that tight. The audacity of people so desperate to be offended. Those people who thing the world revolves around their feelings. I’d like to give you all a sincere go fuck yourselves.

  • Der Bruno Stroszek

    And once again, some dick on the internet mistakes “I don’t like this movie” for “I’d like to ban this movie and make even the thinking of such thoughts forbidden”. The fake world-weary tone, the delusional belief that his enemies are extremely powerful and he’s just so hard-done-by… You’re right that no-one automatically ‘deserves’ respect, John, but no-one ‘deserves’ to be thought of as funny, or to have their movie automatically given a good review either.

    Aside from anything else, don’t all the Tucker Max fans complaining that MaryAnn “needs to get over herself” and “lighten up” sound really humourless, bitter and uptight? This is some weird new hypocrisy that I seem to be noticing all over the place these days; anyone who’s upset about racism, misogyny, homophobia etc is a vicious, censorious, stuck-up crybaby, but anyone who’s upset about someone criticising Tucker Max or Family Guy or something… well, that’s important stuff! Why won’t the world take them seriously? They are surely the most oppressed class of people in America today and we must treat their pitiful mewling with the gravitas it deserves.

  • Grinebiter

    Good one, Bruno. I’ve noticed this in real-space interactions too. “Lighten up” can often mean “No, you don’t get to object to that offensive thing I just said or did to you. I get to stomp on your toes and you get to take it. Now smile for the camera.”

    Trouble is, some people do take any offence that isn’t nailed down, as John says, and some people should lighten up. Perhaps one and the same person can be justly and unjustly asked to lighten up in one and the same day, so general rules are hard to make. I get the feeling that John is actually shooting at people offstage, for I have met people whom I would consider deserving targets of his comments, but elsewhere; and yet at the same time I do not at all like the sound of this Tucker Max person. And if they only serve beer in Hell then I don’t want to go there :-)

  • Accounting Ninja
    “Lighten up” can often mean “No, you don’t get to object to that offensive thing I just said or did to you. I get to stomp on your toes and you get to take it. Now smile for the camera.”

    Which is so often what women hear when we dare call something sexist. As a teen girl, “Lighten up” was all I heard from my father, brother and other male relatives when I complained about the sexism in movies. since I was a teen, I could not eloquently express why something bothered me, it just did.

    This is some weird new hypocrisy that I seem to be noticing all over the place these days; anyone who’s upset about racism, misogyny, homophobia etc is a vicious, censorious, stuck-up crybaby, but anyone who’s upset about someone criticising Tucker Max or Family Guy or something… well, that’s important stuff!

    In my experience, a lot of these guys are nice enough (Max trolls excluded), but when confronted with truths that are uncomfortable, they discount them by making it the protester’s problem. We’re just too sensitive, see. It’s a classic way to avoid actually listening to women or minorities. Yay, patriarchy. The worst part is most of these guys don’t even know how harmful and infuriating this is. They never get told to shut up on a regular basis. They never get their opinions challenged, except by people they can easily discount as “just not getting it” because they are women, or they “see racism everywhere”.

  • Grinebiter

    It’s not always a gender/racial/whatever politics issue, but can exist in a contextless pure form, what I would call “the predator’s messing with the head of the prey”. Example: my friends think me witty enough, but according to a certain female relative I “had absolutely no sense of humour”. How to resolve the antimony? Well, perhaps I didn’t laugh at her sallies because she was being malicious rather than funny. If I had reacted thus to everyone who teased me, that would be one thing, and I would deserve the label, but I don’t, and in fact I am no mean practitioner of self-mockery. But we can all sense the difference between a tease and a put-down intended to make us lose a zero-sum game, don’t you think?

  • JoshB

    Sign……I really hoped for better, but who was I kidding.

    Insincere disappointment. What a revealing way to start your post.

    Your still coming out of that crazy generation of feminist who demand equality and special treatment at the same time.

    This is an empty statement. There’s nothing in MaryAnn’s review that justifies this sentence, although I’d be amused to watch you try.

    The real world thinks adults should be responsible for their own actions.

    This on the other hand actually is demanding special treatment. Tucker Max wrote those stories, he is responsible for this movie, and now he has to deal with the unfortunately minor consequences of his cosmic assholery. You are the one demanding special treatment by saying that he is above internet criticism. Moron.

    No one deserves respect. Not women and not men. Not anyone of a particular age. Just becuase a movie makes a dumb joke about individual woman doesn’t mean it somehow hate’s them all.

    All human beings deserve dignity. Even whores, sluts, prostitutes, cumdumpsters, or whatever other charming nickname Tucker Max uses for his lady friends. In fact, if there is anyone who doesn’t deserve this respect it’s people like Tucker Max who thrive on the humiliation and degradation of others.

    Lots of men have made light of women as a whole in jest and vise versa. That’s the nature of anyone who’s happiness is generally tied up in the feelings of the opposite sex.

    He “made light” of them? Is that what you think he did to the overweight girl who he forced naked out of his window in the middle of the night so his friends wouldn’t see her and ridicule him?

    What really concerns me, what realy disturbs me, is the apparent power of someone wrapped that tight.

    Oh…My…Fucking…God. Woe is you. I’m just brokenhearted, thinking of you staring with forlorn stoicism out of your window. Why can’t you be allowed to think of women as masturbation aids without having those crazy feminists send you on a guilt trip for it?

    God I want to give you a wedgie.

    The audacity of people so desperate to be offended. Those people who thing the world revolves around their feelings.

    HA! Projecting much?

    I’d like to give you all a sincere go fuck yourselves.

    Yeah, I bet you would. That’s pretty much your speed when it comes to clever insults.

    Are you done humiliating yourself in public yet?

  • MaryAnn

    What a sec. Are there people out there who think I’m offended by this movie?

    And here I was trying to insult Tucker Max by saying that he’s not worthy of dignifying with the time of day, never mind by acting as if he’s said anything new or original or worth getting bothered about.

  • Steven

    The first half of the “review” is just her talking about how much she hates Tucker Max. Isn’t this was supposed to be a review of the movie?

    “The best reaction to such behavior is this: Nothing. Ignore him. If you react, you only reinforce the bad behavior, and the child learns that temper tantrums and acting out are good for making himself the center of attention. Ignore him, and he’ll quickly learn to behave himself. Someday he may even be a respectable, reasonable grownup.”

    So she’s telling us to ignore him, and to not react…while she’s writing a scathing, hate-filled review of his behavior and his movie?

  • AJP

    Hate-filled? Seriously? Your threshhold for calling something “hate” seems really low.

    And your argument simply doesn’t stand up. From what I can tell, the movie is loosely based on Tucker’s autobiographical book. In other words, he is the movie. Commenting upon his obnoxious personality in this context seems entirely appropriate.

    By the way, it isn’t “hate-filled” to point out that a potty-mouthed douchebag is in fact a potty-mouthed douchebag.

  • MaSch

    So she’s telling us to ignore him, and to not react…while she’s

    Up to this point, Steven has got some kind of point; MaryAnn had a caption contest, a trailer break, a review and a “question of the day” concerning that guy. That’s quite a lot of coverage of a subject one has deemed worthy of being ignored.

    But yeah, the point gets lost when he calls MaryAnn’s review “hate-filled” or “scathing”. He obviously hasn’t read too many of MaryAnn’s reviews, she was quite soft on this movie here. Probably because it was too inept to really offend her, other than, say, Antichrist.

  • MaryAnn

    Yeah: *Antichrist* is ridiculously offensive, but at least it has the courage to follow through on its own concept. *Beer* isn’t and doesn’t.

  • Mel

    Well, MaryAnn is a movie reviewer. Which means she reviews movies she doesn’t like sometimes. Even movie she thinks aren’t worth acknowledging. Kind of like how you might think some paperwork for your job is pointless, but you have to do it anyway.

    I, however, as a reader of movie reviews, intend to ignore this one and not waste my money (although I would probably have managed to find warning elsewhere).

  • bigdumbgod

    Fratdick humor never changes.
    It just predictably comes into vogue in the form of stupid movies that pop up in the midst of political climates that feature the likes of Tea Party klans, birthers, secessionists and other scared freaks feeling their historic hegemony (and intellect) a bit challenged. But not all can keep up this idiocy forever – the groupthink eventually gives way to either a somewhat more responsible, thoughtful way of living and thinking, or it ends up in Matt living in a van down by the river, baking bad speed in the tub. Blogging.
    But hey, there’s always another Tucker somewhere around the corner.

  • MaryAnn

    MaryAnn had a caption contest, a trailer break, a review and a “question of the day” concerning that guy. That’s quite a lot of coverage of a subject one has deemed worthy of being ignored.

    Two of the four — the caption contest and the trailer break — came before I saw the film, and though I suspected I wasn’t going to like it, I couldn’t have predicted that my reaction would be that the ignoring it was the best response to the film.

    Still: I cannot ignore movies, even the ones that might deserve to be ignored. It’s my job to pay attention to them — that’s the point of being a critic. But I don’t see that there’s any contradiction or hypocrisy in telling anyone else to ignore a movie, particularly those whose jobs do not require them to see as many films as possible, and certainly those films that may be reflecting the overall zeitgeist in some way, as a film based on a New York Times bestselling book could be said to do.

    The above may contain more complex concepts and longer sentences than the average Tucker Max fan can process, but that’s not my fault.

  • MaSch

    Okay, I retract the trailer break and the caption contest (I thought the caption contest came after you saw the movie, but obviously I was mistaken). And I am glad that you watch movies you tell others to stay away from.

    Still: Telling people to ignore that guy and then inviting them to discuss whether he is the next Tyler Perry *is* kind of an oxymoron, at least at first sight.

  • CB

    Oh man, great review, and even better unintentionally hilarious comments.

    Can’t you just feel the need to be seen as both an edgy rebellious free-thinker who doesn’t care what anyone thinks, yet at the same time as a victim repressed by the weight of “politically correct” opinion?

    Oh yeah, you can really tell how offended and “hate-filled” the squares are when they compare your edginess to a kid in a store shouting “Poopie!” You think “poopie!” is offensive and edgy? The whole point is the kid isn’t being offensive, they’re just being annoying. An adult doing the same thing in the name of challenging societal norms would just be annoying and banal. But you interpret the eye-rolling as offense and hate because that’s what you wanted to see, faux outrage notwithstanding.

    Yet the truth is that if you’re feeling oppressed by the “power” of a movie reviewer on the internet saying your favorite movie sucks, then guess what? You were never much of a free-thinker to begin with.

    Which makes that post a hilarious reflection of MaryAnn’s take on a movie which seems to want to say “Oooh, I’m an unrepentant misogynist… only not really“: Completely gutless.

    So, so funny. You know there are movies with guts who actually pull off bad taste with panache and without undermining themselves at every step. Very Bad Things springs to mind.

    Thanks MaryAnn, for doing your job and drawing my attention to what I shouldn’t waste my time paying attention to. Oh and for (unintentionally, I’m sure) drawing out the hilarious responses. :)

  • http://toniokruger.blogspot.com Tonio Kruger

    Fratdick humor never changes.
    It just predictably comes into vogue in the form of stupid movies that pop up in the midst of political climates that feature the likes of Tea Party klans, birthers, secessionists and other scared freaks feeling their historic hegemony (and intellect) a bit challenged.

    Which, of course, explains the success of Animal House and other frathouse comedies during the Carter Administration and the success of shock jock Howard Stern during the Clinton Administration.

    Why not simply acknowledge that stuff like this never really goes out of style with some people?

    Apparently it’s not just the poor that we’ll always have with us…

  • http://toniokruger.blogspot.com Tonio Kruger

    All human beings deserve dignity. Even whores, sluts, prostitutes, cumdumpsters, or whatever other charming nickname Tucker Max uses for his lady friends. In fact, if there is anyone who doesn’t deserve this respect it’s people like Tucker Max who thrive on the humiliation and degradation of others.

    So glad JoshB wrote this.

  • Anonymous

    I understand your anger and all that, but why are you stereotyping frat guys as womanizers?

    Tucker wasn’t in a fraternity, I’m pretty sure. Are you assuming he is because he acts like a womanizer in the stories?

  • tomservo

    Thanks to this site, I’ve been introduced to two people I’ve never heard of before that I can now count on as truly hateful; first it was Armond White, now it’s Tucker Max. Out of curiousity, I visited Mr. Max’s site and found it unbelievable how poorly written and unfunny it was. You can get away w/ a great deal of racy, controversial, and cutting edge material, but, here’s the key, it has to be funny. Christ, Max’s writing makes the Penthouse Forum look like Jonathen Swift. Even most frat boys aren’t that thick headed, and that’s saying a lot.

  • amanohyo

    Huh? Who wrote anything about frat guys being womanizers? I think people are referring to the stereotypical sexist humor that inevitably appears whenever guys in a fraternity gather in groups of three or more (even when they’re gaming or watching sports). Sure, it’s a stereotype, but I’ve been to frat houses all over the country in almost every type of college and university imaginable (even religious universities) and have yet to encounter an exception to the rule (I’m sure some exist though, is it different in other countries?).

    The social pressure to act like a sexist dick seems to vary directly with the number of college aged men that are gathered together (maybe they’re afraid that if they don’t start objectifying women immediately that people might *gasp* think they’re gay, or even worse… that they’re feminists). Or it could be that they’ve been socialized to believe that one of the few acceptable ways to bond with other men is to talk about boobs. Whatever the reason, fratboys in groups seem to reliably spout stupid sexist/homophobic humor, sometimes even while performing community service at the local hospital, school, church, temple, or mosque.

  • Paul

    Oh, frat boys can be a lot worse than dirty mouthed. They represent 3% of the college population but commit 17% of the violent crime, rivaled only by male jocks (1% and 33% respectively).

  • damdude

    i think its just interesting to see this behaviour thats so common today in my generation being dealt with on the big screen…I relate to tucker max because because i know assholes like him and I occaisionally find myself acting like that.
    Not saying its good, but its definetely interesting.

  • Grinebiter

    @Amanohyo: to the best of my knowledge fraternity (and sorority) houses don’t exist anywhere else. Certainly not in the UK, where students live in college rooms (especially Oxbridge), in halls of residence (dorms), or find their own “digs” or lodgings. In the European country where I live, the latter two options alone; dorms are all mixed; and most students who share houses prefer mixed-sex (which is where guys learn housework). I’m not saying that when you get three guys together, you won’t necessarily get boob jokes (and the equivalent for whatever women like to joke about), but it’s not, so to speak, organised, institutionalised, hallowed and intensified by a fraternity system.

  • Bozo

    Come on you silly girl, so vastly offended by a comedian, it’s comedy, not Shakespeare, low but funny comedy, if you can relax your high pc standards for a moment and join in the spirit of things, and maybe understand dimly at long last that Tucker Max is making fun of exactly your kind of response to reality, exactly your type, in the age old tradition of sending people up by, yes, shocking them, but shocking them ironically, which you failed to get. Tucker Max in fact loves women in case you still haven’t noticed, which is what fuels his comedy, and gives it the ironic flavor, but Alas, you went off half cocked and shot him dead until you emptied your revolver. Its comedic entertainment, silly, not a treatise on how to abuse women, but sending up a few attitudes, as a poster put it, of the “wrapped tight” brigade. Yes it appeals to the post adolescent in all of us, but it doesn’t say hate women, or that Tucker hates women and wants to humiliate them in reality. Otherwise he wouldn’t have the legions of fans who think this is one of the funniest movies of all time, and will make it a cult film, though never to be recommended to those who don’t understand it is comedy and why and not some trainee film for misogynist sadists! Don’t believe they exist and are socially attractive and good humored people? Then check out his segments on the reception the film got on his tour. Rarely has any film elicited such enthusiasm. Don’t get into a political twist about it, it is not appropriate. Dont harm intelligent comedy, it has a hard enough time succeeding in the jammed market these days where Avatar rules.

  • amanohyo

    Rarely has any film elicited such enthusiasm…

    Box office: $1,357,585

    Socially attractive and good humored people represent!!! Seven figures, count em! Y’all just don’t understand the sophisticated ironical satire in this work of comic genius. He’s objectifying women because he loves them and he wants them to loosen up and not be so silly and PC – that way they’re way easier to have sex with… unless they’re fat.

    It’s totally inappropriate for you to get all political about this movie. Yeah, I’m being a huge hypocrite by calling you inappropriate for calling this movie inappropriate, but it’s okay because it’s called irony. I visit Tucker’s website everyday, and he says everyone who watches his movie loves it except uncool socially unattractive losers.

    Tucker Max is a brilliant artist way ahead of his time, and someday hundreds of years from now, awesome, good humored dudes will still be watching this cult classic surrounded by hot babes. I’m a way bigger fan that that Bozo above me. I’ve already been to the comment threads of twenty-seven other negative reviews to tell the author how silly and inappropriate they are, especially the females. Girls never understand misogyny when it’s done ironically in a funny way. What is with them? Why are so uptight when I put my moves on them in the club? It makes me want to drug their drinks, date rape them, and record the whole thing on tape…ironically of course.

  • tomservo

    What does “socially attractive” mean? Ted Bundy? Or maybe Mitt Romney. Take your pick, ladies.

  • http://www.dubhsidhestudios.com bronxbee

    those are my only choices!? nothing for me then, thanks.

  • http://www.recoveringnicegirl.blogspot.com Accounting Ninja

    Wait, tomerservo, are you saying that when “ladies” dare to have standards, we deserve what we get if we, unfortunately, pick a Bundy?

  • tomservo

    Other choices: Sean Hannity, John Mayer, Kayne West, Hugh Hefner, The Situation.

  • http://www.dubhsidhestudios.com bronxbee

    @tomservo… so, i’m still practicing abstinence then. how come i don’t get choices like, oh, i don’t know… keith olbermann, george clooney, colin salmon, antonio banderas…. david tennant…

  • tomservo

    But those guys don’t “love” women the way the Tucker Max’s of the world do. On a more serious note, I have to give credit to the audaciousness of the argument that goes, “if you don’t find Tucker funny you’re an ugly loser.” Nice.

  • Will

    I find it amazing how people tend to judge films thru the narrow prism of their own prejudices and ideologies. This is not the first review to dismiss this movie out of hand simply because it offends feminist sensitivies. This is not a great movie, but not a terrible one either. It deserves a more realistic appraisal. Reviewers also need to take into account the audience for which it was created and how it does on that score. Not every film can be politically correct intellectually profound serious masterpiece. This movie is extreme in its vulgarity and the characters are mostly unlikable, but it is also an examination of a genuine phenomenon in our culture and the acting is well done.

    Apparently the only film of this type that would have satisfied some critics, is if a feminist had been insterted into the movie to brow beaten the main character into a self hating guilt ridden feminist himself.

    As to the behavior of the protagonist, despite the fact that feminists say that this loud mouth cocky frat boy style offends girls, the norm among girls under the age of 25 is to DEMAND AND REWARD this type of behavior, while punishing guys who are more respectful and responsible. Once again the feminists have no clue as to what girls want.