Logan Logan – Google

Theres a massive irony in that Julia Louis Dreyfuss plays a character that means well, but comes off as highly patronising. Because she perfectly represents what this movie is to society. Patronising. Firstly, no one seems to represent their character well at all here, except JLD. Jonah Hill plays a successful Jewish broker, who also happens to be a foul mouthed, heavily tattooed, hip hop afficiondo. Lauren London plays an Islamic, empowered, costume designer, who randomly begins dating Jonah Hill because he says some hip hop fashion references? Eddie Murphy plays a militant Islamic bigoted father, who constantly drinks, swears, hangs out with gangsters and is also quite wealthy. David Duchovny plays a seemingly pleasant Jew doctor dad, whose racism is okay because he seems completely ignorant while doing it. And Sam Jay plays a lesbian, comedy edged, culture enthusiast, who does nothing the entire time but say everything sucks and it will never get better. The characters basically say and do what they need to make the plot carry on, even though it makes no sense to the character. The best example of this is Jonah Hill meeting his girlfriends parents for the first time. Despite his character having spent nearly his entire life heavily interested and involved in black culture, he immediately breaks down into a ridiculous mess when Eddie Murphys father character is cold to him. Because i'm sure he's never experienced a cold shoulder before while partaking in a culture as an outside for 30 years. Despite both Murphy and JLDs characters being wealthy, mature and respected by their peers, they can't seem to open their mouth around anyone outside of their own identity without coming across as bigoted, ignorant jerks. Amd the Islamic aspect played by Murphys family makes about as much sense as Scarlet Johannson playing the Asian lead in Ghost In The Shell. Seemed like a good idea at the time, but missed the mark entirely. The only good part of the movie was how London and Hill genuinely seemed to be in love and supported each other. They were really cute when they were alone together and it would have been more interesting hearing them maturely break down the issues they faced together then have absurd family members constantly shove it in our face. They're both funny together and could have kept the comedy going without it turning into a facade of stereotypical race jokes by others. I kind of hope they do a 'This is 40' with this movie and do a deep dive into the Hill/London couple after marriage and maybe with a kid on the way. There's a lot to dissect there and it could be done both humourously and maturely by them without idiot family members pushing conflict constantly.

Some of the best comedians and actors of the 21st century started it with a bang in this massive ensemble production that lived up to its hype at release and has aged like a fine wine 14 years later. Stiller and Black were in their prime. Hader and McBride were just getting recognized. Downey Jr was making his come back. Cruise and McConaughey were leading stars who took on memorable supporting roles. And Nolte rounded it out as a veteran of both comedy and action. Even Baruchel went onto leading man status after this. Jackson deserved more from his talent, only ever getting comedic support roles in B grade movies from his more controlled and likeable Tucker-esque comedy stylings. People may talk about movie casts like 'don't look up', but the acting and comedic talent on display here will likely never be repeated again.

As someone who has Lock Stock, Snatch and RocknRolla in their top 10 favourite movies I have to ask... What in gods name happened here? Nearly everything is bad. The editing is atrocious. The casting is possibly the worst I've ever seen in a movie. The cinematography is awful. The sets look like they were made for a tacky red light district. The pacing is completely out of whack. The dialogue is so forced. And the story is both completely muddled and glaringly obvious at the same time. This would have made for a much better book. As a movie it comes across like a gangsters version of a perfume ad. Pretending to be overly artistic to hide the fact that it's a shallow poorly made concept. Guy Ritchie is much better than this. When he has the correct actors his dialogue sounds as good as Tarantinos on the screen. When he has the correct story he creates cult movies that impact for decades. When he has the characters fleshed out beyond shadows they become iconic. Overall, this came across like he wanted to make a gangster Fight Club and put the idea together based off an unimpressive epiphany he had while on the turps one night.

The Bubble is the equivalent of a 1980s McDonald's commercial with middle aged white folk rapping about how hip and cool they are. Judd Apatow isn't hip. He isn't funny. He isn't ironic. He's a nepotistic Hollywood film maker who convinces himself he is on the outside looking in to feel better about the shallow world he chooses to surround himself with. I'm sure his friends patted him on the back for making dumb jokes about each other. The rest of us will continue to look elsewhere for voices that actually resonate with anyone that isn't worth millions of dollars.