Visitors Review

TheHrunting (2012-05-25 13:20)

You might want to be smashed for this one

This is a film where the ludicrous story is in the background with theplayers throwing out banter, odd little quirks and working onfriendship through the thick and thin in the foreground. There's thetwo buddies who've got each other's back, or at least they initiallythought when secrets come out about Chet (Aziz Ansari) confessing tobeing the culprit for Nick's (Jesse Eisenberg) parent's divorce andNick sleeping with Chet's twin sister one time way back. On theopposite corner, Dwayne (Danny McBride) lives at home with hislottery-winning, Marine-spouting dad who belittles him. So he turnsright back around and acts all dominating and self-centered to thetag-along Travis (Nick Swardson) who wants to make an impression, sohe'll do just about anything for his respect.As the title suggests Nick is a "30 Minutes or Less" pizza guy whohates his job. Meanwhile Dwayne despises his dad and from the advice ofa stripper decides to hire a hit-man to take care of his father andcollect his remaining lottery bankroll. He'll need $100 grand of hisown for the hire and decides to get some pizza dude to rob a bank forhim with some convincing of a bomb vest. Yep, the story is prettyridiculous to say the least--despite supposedly mirroring real lifeevents in Pennsylvania--as point A doesn't always smoothly line up topoint B in the film. Dwayne and Travis have an idea--wham!--they have asolution fall into their lap, literally. Nick is presented with adilemma--wham!--he jumps right into it like it was his calling card.Director Ruben Fleischer along with Eisenberg did a great turn aroundfor "Zombieland" and you might except them to have done so here. Exceptthis is either a make it or break it movie, since the scenarios areover-the-top and the dialogue is going for broke with the goofy,juvenile and throwing a parade with low self-esteem--sex, gay, racistjokes that might be funnier on substances but a share of them throwawayotherwise--instead of possibly the witty or setting up punchlines,which makes this more a single shot film than a repeater.It felt like they tried too hard at times for that laugh by sayingwhatever to get a reaction rather than working through a scene. Otherfilms have gotten away and proved to be thoroughly funny gems with asimilar setup, but that's pretty much all this has going for it withnot too many tricks up its sleeves otherwise. It's an attempt at asimple laugh riot by taking a trip to the loony land of the thought tobe implausible. Though it doesn't always fully sculpt that world theytake you to. It feels like you got invited to a gathering, yet don'talways get a full feel for the people around you to truly let loose andhave a grand time yourself because they're nothing but loafers, idioticand get themselves in entanglements for all the wrong reasons--notexactly charismatic to say the least, even when laughing at them. Notto mention the character development went in and out whenever they feltlike it: from knowing better to not knowing better, to doing it becausethey're forced but then enjoying getting caught up in it.Swardson probably has the most range as he's nearly capable--he was theone who built a complex bomb after all--but doesn't want to let down afriend, so he goes along to get along. The others arrive in one stateand leave in a similar state: little growth, little to learn. Thecredits rolled down somewhat abruptly without showing the after partywhere their adventurous story is told or their reward is enjoyed. Yeah,it's a silly comedy but there doesn't feel like that much in the way ofa challenge rather than a contrivance for life's struggles, as a shareof the setups are there to a point, just not always capitalized on ortransitioned to its own advantage. The twin sister literally feels likethe twin sister without a name, as she's dropped off in the storysomewhere as a mirage to work towards for the slacker Nick, aseverybody else around him is becoming more successful. Chet so happensto like his full time teaching job, and Nick's lost love so happens tobe moving to Atlanta during all this mayhem. There were some lines herethat are funny from the jittery Aziz Ansari and some here nor therefrom the others, but overall hit and miss. To its credit the movie goesby very quickly, as in they move from one place to the next in a rapidsuccession, even if what they're doing doesn't always feel thatgravitating or memorable past a cursory viewing, if that even. Ifyou're a die hard fan of a performer here, I recommend a rental. A freerental. A free rental when you're all taxed out and there's nothingelse to watch.

FlashCallahan (2012-05-24 21:07)

Doesn't really deliver....

I wasn't a fan of Zombieland, I thought it was one of the mostoverrated movies of 2009, but I like the cast and I thought the plot ofthe story was promising.The basic premise is, Danny McBride is playing the same character likehe does in every other thing he's in (not a bad thing) but the twist isthat Fred Ward is his dad.Danny needs $100,000 to hire a hit-man to kill his dad, so he straps abomb to Jesse Eisenbergs chest and tells him he must rob a bank in thenext ten hours or go Ka-Boooom! Sounds really good, and has the chanceto be one of the funniest films of the year.it really isn't, it's rarely funny, and despite the film being only 90minutes long, it drags.It's not the casts fault they are all really good. It's just that thescript writers expect the audience to laugh at the same jokes we werelaughing at nearly ten years ago, but with added swearing.It tries to be original, and just when it's in danger of getting good,the film depends on innuendo and profanity, which i'm all for, but itgets a little too much in this.It's a great premise, with some good performance, but the script letsit down.great Tanning salon commercial though.

Nuz_Reviews (2012-05-22 04:08)

Has the body of an action flick and the heart of a comedy

I really enjoy these action-comedy hybrid types. Very fun. With thatbeing said, I will admit that I am certainly within the demographic ofthe target audience for this film. That demographic being high schoolboys, college dudes, and young men in their 20s. Perhaps even some intheir 30s and possibly 40s could enjoy it too. But, mainly those ages17 to 28 will especially enjoy this entertaining "dude flick." So, withall of that in mind, I may seem a little bias towards this particulartype of film since I am in fact in my 20s. I will try my best tocriticize as I see fit. And, let me just reiterate by saying that thismovie is definitely not for everyone and may get a bad rap with allthose older professional film critics out there.On to the review.Set in Grand Rapids, Michigan, 30 Minutes or Less begins with thedriving montage of a pizza delivery man named Nick, portrayed by JesseEisenberg. The song featured in the montage was Tick Tick Boom, by TheHives. Being a Hives fan I enjoyed it immensely. Ya see.. Nick worksfor a man that resembles the private parts of a grown man, and he hasto deliver the pizza under 30 minutes, otherwise it's free of chargeand it's taken out of his paycheck. It becomes tricky when the ordersare placed outside of the proper delivery radius. His boss doesn'tcare, and even though Nick has a junker Ford Mustang, his insanedriving skills make it all possible. Great set-up for what is about tounfold in the next about 80 gut-wrenching minutes, okay.. maybe notgut-wrenching, but you'll definitely feel something if you laugh like Idid.We all know Eisenberg made a brilliant performance in The SocialNetwork, but I enjoy the other characters he can play too. He can dothe smart-slacker or the smart-achiever or a mixture of the two, whilesimultaneously being funny. Not many actors can play multipleattributes so opposite of each other in completely different genres.And, for the ones that can do that, they are the best of the best andthe most famous. I look forward to Jesse's career.If you at all enjoyed the director's other action-comedy Zombieland,then this one is for you too. Both will keep you laughing hysterically,while grabbing your attention with somewhat of a sympathetic appeal. Ilook forward to more of Ruben Fleischer's films, even if they don't allend up being comedies. He can really entertain on screen with asimplistic approach. I like that. The idea of his films are over thetop, but the cinematic approach is not. His next project is in pre-production and scheduled for 2013, The Gangster Squad. Also, for thoseof you whom are Pineapple Express fans, you will most certainly enjoy30 Minutes or Less.The plot of the film is seemingly as simple as they come, but stillworks well for a movie like this. The idiotic duo of Dwayne and Travis,played by Danny McBride and Nick Swardson in that order, make it allthat much more entertaining. They are tired of being poor losers andwant something bigger for themselves. With the help of Travis'unexpected pyrotechnic understanding and Dwayne's insanely (what hebelieves to be smart) entrepreneurial mind, the two are able to come upwith a Dastardly plan to acquire enough cash to hire an assassin(Michael Peña) to kill Dwayne's dad, The Major, portrayed by Fred Ward.Side note: I found it interesting that Danny McBride's character isalways having daddy issues (i.e. the TV show Eastbound & Down); well, Iguess that's the only other role I can think of, but still funny.Obviously the plan that Dwayne comes up with entails the hostage use ofNick. Nick then convinces his best-friend Chet, Aziz Ansari, to getinvolved with this life or death situation. Along with Jesse Eisenberg,Aziz is definitely becoming one of my favorite comedic actors. Mostnotably known for his role as the character Tom Haverford in NBC'sParks and Recreation, he always gives my cheek and abdominal muscles aworkout.Without giving away too much of the simplistic plot, it's obvious whathappens here just by watching the trailer for this movie.So, throughout the film Nick is caught up with his romantic interestKate, Dilshad Vadsaria; and although attractive, she doesn't really addanything to the film. As sappyily annoying as it was, they should havejust stuck with a strict bromance.The car chasing was appealingly entertaining, but with the CGI socommon these days it was nothing that I haven't seen before and beforeagain. I just thought they could have done something more insane duringthose scenes.Although not for everyone, if you agree with most of what I have justwrote about this action-comedy flick, then I would highly recommend yougo check it out with all your buddies. This may be a movie to take yoursignificant other to as well, but I'd leave it to the platonic guysnight out. If you are hesitant to pay the $8+, then I'd wait for theDVD availability. Enjoy it with a case of beer.8/10 Stars.

lourensini (2012-05-22 00:02)

Watch with your folks when you don't wanna take much out of your neurons

An improbable situation witch reminds me of "Pinneaple Express". Thingsthat can't -in a daily basis- happen and could get even worse fasterthan you think. 30 minutes or less is what to need to see this moviewon't make you crap out your pants laughing, but will present you withsome funny crazy stupidities that leads the story in some out of thepossible situation (truth to be told: you'd like to tell your grandkids30 years from now if it did happen to you).I'm kinda tired of stupid characters doing stupid things. They'restupid, being stupid is not that funny, speak like an idiot even less,but yet, producers insist on and make them sociable morons.This is those kinds of movies made to relax your mind watchingsomething that does not make you think. If you can watch it with matesdrinking some beer when you've done a lot in that weekend and justwanna relax, the movie is made for your. If not... go watch adocumentary.

TheUnknown837-1 (2012-05-19 10:56)

A movie with very little respect for humankind in general, but isn't that very much the same with many of us audience members?

"30 Minutes or Less" is a movie that does not hold most, if not all, ofthe human race with high regard or, for that matter, with very muchrespect. But how ironic, for isn't that very much the same with many ofus audience members? Evidently with the Hollywood executives andagents, for a great many movies of recent years have been about thecynicism and follies of humanity - that's including some sillycomedies. "30 Minutes or Less" is one of those satirizing comedies; itcaught me completely off-guard because I walked into the auditoriumknowing next to nothing about it. All I knew was that it starred JesseEisenberg, that wonderful actor from last year's "The Social Network"and it centered upon him as a pizza delivery boy with a bomb strappedto his chest. That's in the movie, too. The bomb was strapped there bya couple of garbage-mouthed lowlifes (Danny McBride & Nick Swardon).What I didn't know was that it was that they strapped it to his chestbecause they want him to rob a bank, so they can hire a hit-man to bumpoff Mr. McBride's egomaniacal ex-Marine father, played with a lot ofenergy by Fred Ward.Now it's easy to tell it's a comedy."30 Minutes or Less" is not a sidesplitting, laugh-out-loud comedy. Ionly found myself splitting my gut a couple of times as I watched it.Most of the time I was just grinning with some amusement. But I amstill recommending the movie for two reasons. One, because it held myattention effectively for the better part of an hour and a half,because I was grinning for a very good reason. Because of the wit andenergy that director Ruban Fleischer and his screenwriter, MichaelDilberti were using to satirize just about everything in contemporaryAmerican culture. They attack it all. Underage drinking, lack ofrespect towards abstinence, high-mindedness in the younger generation,even elements of consumerism such as Netflix (as when Aziz Ansari, asMr. Eisenberg's roommate, gripes that he's paid twelve dollars forthree movies that he has not watched in an entire month). Anotherelement it picks at is a typical human characteristic: the desire toblame somebody else, which comes into the most effective play duringthe bank robbery that the plot revolves around.It is sort of a sick joke with a lot of below-the-belt humor and fartoo many utterances of the F-word that it needs, but the satiricalelements of the gags allow them to get by, even if just bit a littlebit. As I was watching it, I kept on the look out for what thefilmmakers were pointing fingers at and applying it to scenarios in myown life, whether it had to do with me personally or somebody I know orjust happened to be acquainted with. It happens to all of us, even thebest of us. And the movie keeps on playing with them, up until itsabrupt, stop of an ending, which makes me wonder if perhaps there wasan alternative shot but left on the cutting room floor. It neededsomething more at the end.It also works because of the sheer talent of its cast. Mr. Eisenbergshells out another wonderful performance, speaking rapidly yetfluently, with that same quirky, high-on-himself manner that earned himan Academy Award nomination last year. Nowhere does it say that aprotagonist has to be affable. Mr. Ansari, a fairly new face to thecinema, is effective as well and it is refreshing to see a minorityactor in a comedy where others get laughed at as much as he. As the twolowlifes, Mr. McBride and Mr. Swardson are also in good form, and themovie does a good job at not making us identify with them. That hasbecome a disturbing trend with other pictures. I wish she were in themovie more, but there's also a wonderful actress named Dilshad Valsariaas Mr. Eisenberg's girlfriend (and Mr. Ansari's twin sister). I lookforward to seeing her in other pictures. Supporting roles are playedwell by Mr. Ward, Michael Pena, and Brett Gelman."30 Minutes or Less" is uneven and not all of the gags work. It couldhave also been better-directed (containing too many long andtwo-shots), but enough of its hits earn it a pass as far as I amconcerned. It's nothing new to satirize what has become Americanculture, but it has been handled well here. Not memorable, butfascinating enough to hold attention while it's in motion.

k_m_simpson (2012-05-18 19:37)

It's Definitely Directed at 17yo Males

It's directed at 17yo males, there's definitely no doubt about that.You almost have to divide this movie into two parts, the first half andthe second half. The first half was so bad, I actually turned to one ofthe other folks I went with and said, "Okay, I will give it 5 minutesmore. If it doesn't improve, I'm walking."Well, it did improve, and a lot. The second half of the movie wasgreat. The plot is fun, and the movie is interesting. The actors werevery good, and Jesse Eisenberg and Aziz Ansari really played off eachother well as Nick and Chet. I would have liked to see more of FredWard, but the little bit he had was great.The language and sex were really off-putting, though. I am by no meansa prude, but this was simply put in there to be there. None of itreally contributed anything to the movie. Quite literally, every otherword was F--K and there were several in-depth descriptions of sexualpositions, and quite a bit of nudity and groping in the first half.

patsworld (2012-05-17 23:15)

Good plot, lousy writing

This could have been a fun movie...there is a plot, the casting isgood...but once again, we have a prime case of screen writers whoreally aren't. It's as if, in half the movies these days, and this is aperfect example of one, the writers have no clue as to how to writedialogue, so they decide to talk dirty for an hour and a half and callit good. It isn't. It's awful. If this is still the remains of tryingfor shock value in movies, it doesn't work anymore. It's boring. It'sdull. It's repetitive. Viewers don't want shock value. We wantentertainment. Somewhere out there in Hollywood land, there have to bewriters who can actually write - who have imagination - who havecreativity. But, unfortunately, none were hired for this movie. Blah!

(2012-05-17 10:07)

as good as expected

30 Minutes or Less is about as good as you would expect based on thetrailers. There was nothing groundbreaking here, but there was never alull. The acting was good, but a bit shaky. I thought Jesse Eisenbergdid the best, though he was probably playing a dirty mouthed version ofhimself. Aziz Ansari was given the best lines of the film, but hisacting was the shakiest, definitely not with the confidence he has onParks and Recreation. Danny McBride plays the same character he alwaysplays, but at least he does it well. All in all it was a good film, hadme laughing the whole time. There was definitely an excess of foullanguage, but it was to be expected with this film. I haven't seenanother movie similar this summer, so I would recommend it.

jjnoahjames (2012-05-16 19:42)

Almost walked out after 30 minutes or less! A potentially great comedy.

30 minutes is about a boy who delivers pizzas in thirty minutes or lessbut end up getting kidnapped in the process. The script is exciting.I laughed hard during this film, but a minute later I was gettingannoyed because they dropped the F-Bomb so much that it interfered withimportant dialogue and joke making. This movie crosses two very bad"lines". This was the first.The second was when they drop the F-Bomb so much that it becomesartificial. An actual person would not curse this much over an hour anda half period. It become VERY PRETENTIOUS, and B-MOVIE like.So there you have it, it's half hilariousness, and half pretentious andover the top, to the point that the acting, and authenticity of thefilm is threatened.

cashmere-12 (2012-05-16 05:16)

What Humour?

Everyone is saying it is the funniest movie of the summer. There was nohumour in this movie. I didn't hear a laugh in the whole theatre. Itwas so boring I was waiting for the bomb to go off so the movie wouldbe over.I thought from the director of Zombieland it would be a lot better. CanI have my money back?The language and sex were a turn off. Near the end it did get a littlebetter..only because maybe the end of the movie was in sight. NickSwardson was the stand out character. If there was comic relief it camefrom him. Wait for the DVD to come out save your money.

Jackpollins (2012-05-12 23:13)

From Zombies to Bank Robberies

There's something strangely appealing to me about movies that aren'tbased on or inspired by a true story, but seem to just fall into thatcategory of film. That's the case with 30 Minutes Or Less, asurprisingly comedic film about a pizza delivery boy who has to rob abank or be blown up. If you haven't heard the story, in Erie,Pennsylvania, a REAL pizza delivery boy tried to rob a REAL bank andREALLY got blown to pieces. I wouldn't blame people if they didn't gosee this movie because of that. With all that out in the open, I amhere to say I thoroughly enjoyed every second of 30 Minutes Or Less.The things that keep 30 Minutes Or Less from being just another raunchycomedy for the summer is that it's not a raunchy comedy..it's a darkcomedy. Sure, you could say that Horrible Bosses was a dark comedy..but30 Minutes Or Less actually deliver on the dark part (that's not to sayI didn't also enjoy Horrible Bosses). Moving at a very smooth and veryfast 80 minutes, director Ruben Fleischer keeps things going. Fleischeralso directed another fairly short, very enjoyable action comedy calledZombieland. While his previous work would appeal to just about anybody,this film really depends on if you like any of the stars or not. If youcan't enjoy any of the stars, don't even bother. Speaking of the stars,the bromances between both pairs of guys are greatly constructed,bringing a real chemistry and heart to the film. Jesse Eisenberg as thepizza delivery boy who is faced with having to rob a bank and AzizAnsari (one of my favorite comedians, just so you know) as his recentlyex-best friend are great together and their different comedic styleswork really well together. Same goes for Danny McBride and NickSwarsdon as the two completely idiotic psychos who put the pizzadelivery boy in the predicament. McBride and Swarsdon both have goofycomic delivery, but Swarsdon is happy goofy and McBride is vulgarlygoofy, making for some great laughs. Also, Michael Pena plays a hitman, and while Pena was really funny in another dark comedy, ObserveAnd Report, and while he's not as funny here, he brings 30 Minutes OrLess a fair amount of its enjoyable darkness. 30 Minutes Or Less maynot be for everyone, but if you want a very dark, very funny, andsometimes very heart felt end of the summer treat, then go see it.

Colin George (2012-05-12 09:37)

Less than Funny

Jokes are overrated. The best comedies cull humor from character flaws,and while the cast of 30 Minutes or Less has those to spare, humanfoibles have little bearing on the way these people behave. Instead,it's about one-liners and crass one-upmanship in a string ofexponentially less believable scenarios. First time screenwriterMichael Diliberti (previously credited as executive assistant toproducer Scott Rudin) blunders his way past a great premise to lowestcommon denominator comedy.Nick (played by Jesse Eisenberg of The Social Network) is a pizzadelivery boy who gets jumped by a pair of goons (Danny McBride, NickSwardson), and strapped with a bomb and an ultimatum: rob a bank withinten hours or face the explosive consequences. Sounds exciting, right?Wrong.Zombieland director Ruben Fleischer ignores the inherent tension. Thehomemade bomb should be a volatile, omnipresent threat, but there'snever any indication that the device will actually explode. Granted,I'm not expecting Hitchcock here, but if I can't have suspense, evenlogic would suffice. With a whole ten hours on the clock, Nick and hisbuddy Chet (Aziz Ansari) idiotically ignore every safer stratagem attheir disposal while playing ball with the crooks.Part of the problem is that McBride and Swardson are portrayed as suchinept villains, and occupy so much screen time. 30 Minutes or Less, at90 minutes or less, prominently features these characters out ofnecessity to fulfill its own feature-length ambitions. Dramatically, itmakes no sense — is Nick really the type of guy who would steal$100,000 at the behest of stooges like these?A better 30 Minutes or Less would have ditched its emphasis on theantagonists and focused instead on Nick's foiled attempts to extricatehimself from his predicament. As it stands, he seems all too willing tomake himself an antihero: not just in robbery, but in voluntary crimeslike grand theft auto and threatening a cop. It would have been morebelievable and exciting if the character complied only as a desperatelast resort. That his roommate accompanies him on the heist is moreasinine still.As always, if 30 Minutes or Less were funnier, it would be easy toforgive the injustice done to its premise. The humor is hit-and-missleaning toward the latter, and even my eager audience was rendereddeafly silent by many of McBride's big moments. It isn't expressly hisfault — his character just doesn't belong in the movie, and there's notmuch character there to begin with.To draw a comparison, Tropic Thunder ranks among my favoriteaction-comedies of recent years because its characters instigate theplot, not vice versa. In that film, dramatic tension is elevated by theconflicting egos of its cast. In 30 Minutes or Less, narrative devicesas lethal as Nick's bomb vest routinely hold the story ransom.But the real robbery isn't a bank job — it's the shameless adoption ofmodern comedy's worst habits by Diliberti and Fleischer. From theircasts of emotionally stunted man-children to their disposablepop-culture jabs and gratuitous bawdy dialogue, the irony of theseR-rated comedies is that they cater to a PG-13 crowd. 30 Minutes orLess had an opportunity to distinguish itself with action beats, butthe nearest it comes to Die Hard and Lethal Weapon is mentioning them.Even in a summer with little competition, Fleischer's film is light onlaughs and even lighter on character. Now there's a commodity that'sunderrated.

Hellmant (2012-05-09 08:38)

Michael Cera should now be known as the poor man's Jesse Eisenberg!

'30 MINUTES OR LESS': Four Stars (Out of Five) I guess Jesse Eisenberg is a full-fledged movie star now; headlininghis first action/comedy film to an opening weekend more impressivefinancially than most Michael Cera vehicles (and Eisenberg is no longerplaying a Michael Cera type role)! Cera should now be known as the poorman's Jesse Eisenberg and it's great to see Jesse branching out as well(he's not the goofy nerd in this, he's kind of a laid back punk). He'sgot great support as well in the form of other up and coming comicactors like Danny McBride, Aziz Ansari and Nick Swardson. It's directedby former Eisenberg collaborator Ruben Fleischer (who also directedJesse in 'ZOMBIELAND') and written by first time film writers MichaelDiliberti and Matthew Sullivan. It's definitely a great team and theresult is just as impressive. Eisenberg and friends bring their A gameand the movie works because of it.The film is a buddy movie through and through and it tells the story oftwo groups of friends; one is our heroes, Nick (Eisenberg) and Chet(Ansari), and the other is the film's antagonists, Dwayne (McBride) andTravis (Swardson). Nick is a slacker pizza delivery driver who'ssecretly been seeing his best friend's sister, Kate (Dilshad Vadsaria),for years. Dwayne is a huge underachiever as well who's constantlybeing put down by his overbearing father (Fred Ward). When a strippergives him the idea of murdering his father to inherit a million dollarsfrom him Dwayne enlists the help of his buddy Travis. The two come upwith the mad idea of strapping a bomb to a pizza delivery guy andforcing him to rob a bank of a hundred thousand dollars in order to payfor a hit on Dwayne's father (they hire the stripper's hit-man lover topull off that job). Nick of course becomes their tormented victim.The film's plot has been criticized for it's resemblance to a real lifetragedy (in which a pizza delivery guy was actually strapped with abomb and forced into robbing a bank) but the writers and otherfilmmakers responsible for the film say they had only 'vaguely' heardof the real news story. Having seen the movie I highly doubt anyresemblance to the actual events was intended. The movie is just a funaction flick. Esenberg is great in the lead but it's McBride thatreally steals the show (he's hilarious). Swardson and Ansari are bothfunny as well. The cast is pretty much perfect actually. Fleischer'sdirecting is fitting to the material and the pacing is perfect as well(I think I actually enjoyed the movie more than 'ZOMBIELAND'). Thescript is witty and full of memorable laughs also. If you're lookingfor just a fun and hilarious 83 minute flick to pass the time with thisis the movie for you.Watch our review show 'MOVIE TALK' at:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_gpux8_tZ4

GoneWithTheTwins (2012-05-08 16:40)

The dialogue is the highlight of the film, making splendid use of five comedians' abilities to ramble, insult and spout profanity.

Though it won't win any awards for its plot, 30 Minutes or Less doesexcel in the department it clearly directs all its efforts to –dialogue. The script provides plenty of hilarious and offbeatsituations for its slew of miscreant characters to immerse themselvesinto and it's here where the laughs emerge. The double duos ofprotagonists and antagonists trade insults and colorful verbiage in arapid-fire exchange of vulgarities and insights. While the crudenessoftentimes outweighs the overtly funny, praise does go to the actorswho dish out the majority of their lines as if improvising – it'spossible most if it actually is ad libbed, but either way these randomrants paired with the stars' idiosyncratic characterizationssuccessfully deliver the laughs.Enraged at his callous, militaristic father, Dwayne (Danny McBride)determines to rid himself of the old man and collect his inheritanceearly. Scheming with his best friend Travis (Nick Swardson), Dwaynedecides to hire an assassin to do the deed. To pay the hit-man (MichaelPena) his fee, the duo kidnaps pizza delivery boy Nick (JesseEisenberg), straps a bomb to his chest and tells him he has ten hoursto rob a bank or else he'll blow up. Fearful for his life, Nick enlistshis best friend Chet (Aziz Ansari) to aid in his newfound criminalendeavor and the inept pair set about planning the heist as well asplotting a way to escape their dire situation.The dialogue is the highlight of the film, making splendid use of fivecomedians' abilities to ramble, insult and spout profanity in animprovised, on-the-spot manner. It's vulgar, blunt and abrasive, whichworks effectively with this collaboration. Words never get minced. Withsuch a simplistic, one-note plot, it's essential that these goofs eatup screen time with their hilarious arguing. Danny McBride uses histrademark, bitter, disgruntled attitude to craft a spiteful villain,while Eisenberg plays his typical, expressionless, quick-worded,depressed underdog. Aziz Ansari's major role marks a first for the TVveteran, and he matches wit and sarcasm with the more seasoned moviejokers – so too does Nick Swardson as the particularly dim-wittedaccomplice. Everyone's chemistry is amusing and the group emotes likegood friends gathering together for a night of wild story swapping.Despite a bungled hold-up, negotiations, renegotiations, spontaneousdecisions, altered plans and makeshift money drops, the plot is sobasic that it serves only as a setup for verbal humor. Like PineappleExpress, the funny men decide to also throw some serious predicamentsinto the festivities, which results in a bit of bloodshed that seemsout of place. Dwayne is also so despicable and unredeemable that whenthe violence begins, the audience isn't likely to care whether or nothe lives through the ordeals. Mortality doesn't have a place in thisworld of inept kidnappers, inept bank robbers and inept assassins, eventhough the occasional dosage of realism dictates its presence.- The Massie Twins

Vaughn Fry (2012-05-08 04:59)

Delivers

Nick (Jesse Eisenberg) is a down on his luck pizza delivery boy, whohas been spinning his wheels since high school both physically andmetaphorically. Wheeling about his in vintage early '90s 5.0 Mustang,Nick has to deliver pizza in guess what—30 minutes or less. Failure tocomplete delivery in time and the pie is on Nick.On the other side of the rut, Dwayne (Danny McBride) and pal Travis(Nick Swardson) are piecing together a plan to knock-off Dwayne'sfather (Fred Ward) and collect the remainder of his lottery winnings.The plan: hire a hit-man (Michael Pena) for $100,000. We've heard thisbefore this summer, but Dwayne and Nick go a step further. They orderup a pizza, kidnap Nick and with a bomb vest force him to rob a bank tobe able to pay for the hired gun. A convoluted scheme indeed.Bomb armed, Nick seeks help from his BFF Chet (Aziz Ansari). Togetherthey plot to rob the bank and in doing so form the protagonist duo. Onpaper, their quips may not scream Oscar consideration, but theirchemistry and execution are second to none. So, if that statement istrue then none would be McBride and Swardson who take up an equal stakein total run time and quality moments.30 Minutes or Less does not mess around. With a lightning fast pace,director Reuben Fleischer (Zombieland) sets up the dueling pairs andputs the plot into action. Amazingly, these pieces don't simply fallinto place; they are hurled. The timed bomb plot device works yetagain, because once underway 30 Minutes or Less doesn't let up. Cuttingback and forth from the equally inept pairings, there is never a sensethat one is missing out on the fun.Sure, $100k is a lot for a non-political hit, but these oversights arepart of the fun, giving you an idea to the intelligence of the criminalmasterminds. McBride also points out a plot convenience, and Eisenbergdisses on Facebook. The self-aware nature of these and other jokes help30 Minutes or Less ascend to regions more evolved than the targetdemo—the stoner crowd—is accustom. Still, the dialog is laced with asmuch cursing as anything out there, a basic cable censorship nightmare.30 Minutes or Less isn't exactly treading new ground, but it deliversthe laughs. Should you catch it, be sure to sit through the credits asthere is an extensive scene that ties up the plot.

ldquinn (2012-05-07 08:00)

Yuckaroonie!!!

I think I had to give this one a star rating; so, I tried to give itone-eighth of a star and I'm not sure if it will work. So, if it showsas one star, please keep in mind my intent.I never thought I'd see a need to go negative on stars, but this onewould fir the bill.I'll not go into a long dissertation . Suffice it to say that boring,tedious, juvenile, stupid all are descriptors that over inflate myopinion of this _____. I had to leave that blank, because this is noteven good enough to be called a movie, let alone a film.Save you money - even excellent layered butter popcorn doesn't makeseeing this worthwhile.

SnakesOnAnAfricanPlain (2012-05-01 04:16)

Enjoyable, but not as a comedy.

30 Minutes or Less takes a rather dark and yet funny premise, but thenplays it more like an action movie. Eisenberg is strapped with a bomband is told to rob a bank. What's quite peculiar about this film isthat it focuses so much on the Danny McBride character. It seems asthough they are trying to put some development around him, but there isnothing to like about him. He's lazy, crude, stupid, and dangerous.Aziz Ansari is just difficult to watch. He has no comic timing, and canonly express his lines in one tone of voice. The heist itself is agreat watch, and I loved how the pacing kept the movie going. It wasn'tjust a large number of failed robberies. The movie kept on movingtowards the finale. I don't think I had a genuine laugh here, but I wasnever bored and the short running time worked in its favour. Despitethe enjoyment factor, I never once believed the bomb was close to goingoff, removing any tension.

Omar Sow (2012-04-30 17:27)

Almost There

When I heard about this film and watched the trailer, it seemed like a'can't miss' hit. The plot seemed comical in and of itself, yet theflaw I find in this film is the choice of actors. Apart from JesseEisenberg, everything went wrong. The choice to include Aziz Ansari wasterrible. His outlandishly energetic character overpowered Eisenberg's,but not in a flattering way. Simply put: he should stick to stand up.McBride and Swardson's characters were crude at best and disgusting atworst. Their lines and characters were so over-the-top vulgar it ruinedthe film. Don't get me wrong, I'm not someone who hates cursing andonly watched G-Rated movies, but these characters simply madeuncomfortable. Had it not been for this, the film would have beenexponentially better. For anyone considering watching this film, Idon't recommend it. The idea of the film that one gets from the traileris a great deal more interesting than the actual film. All that said,the only good element of this movie is Eisenberg's portrayal of anunderstandable young man. His behavior is all very natural and hislines are surprisingly funny. All in all, the movie simply could havebeen better. A huge amount of potential, wasted. Grade: D-

OKReviewer (2012-04-29 23:36)

Ouch

There are plenty of bad puns to be had with the title of this movie,but the cheesiest and most appropriate I can offer after watching it is"83 Minutes Long and Still a Mess." In the age of the three-hourcomedy, I thought it would be a relief to watch a laugher with atighter belt. Unfortunately, even with the fast title, Less dragged onmuch longer than I wished it to.Less seems like a half-a**ed debacle, where everyone including theCaptain jumped ship when they felt the movie sinking. The direction, ifyou can call it that, was done by Ruben Fleischer, who couldn't havepossibly given his maximum effort on this film. His recent film successwas directing the 2009 film Zombieland, which was a taut and intriguingcomedy. Zombieland had a less original premise than Less, butconsistently provided laughter and a few tense action sequences. Lesssimilarly attempts to combine action and comedy, but provides anextremely flat and jumbled film.The writing is slovenly. There are cheap laughs aplenty, and even a fewgood belly-busters, but laughter is inevitable when you try and force ajoke every single line of the movie. My question is, why did thewriters, and director for that matter, keep the crap that didn't stickto the wall? Watching Less felt like watching a movie shot in one takebefore it hits the editing room; so many intended jokes fall flat andfail to register. Even lazier than the joke writing is the characterwriting. Of course Less is a comedy, and an intentionally stupid one atthat. Viewers shouldn't go in expecting to see detailed characterdevelopment a la Mad Men; I certainly didn't. But the characters inLess change personalities and character traits on a whim and at analarming rate.In the movie's first scene, we see Jesse Eisenberg's character Nick,calmly and deliberately con two teenagers out of 40 dollars. But, afterthe first ten minutes of the movie, even before he gets the bomb/plotdevice strapped on his chest (which admittedly would make anyone changetheir disposition), he turns into a manic motormouth. The mostoffensive and unexplained character shift is that of the amateurcriminal Travis, played by Nick Swardson (who in a side note needs tofind a new agent after agreeing to star in the upcoming guaranteed bombBucky Larson. Find the trailer if you haven't seen it already; I almostclawed my eyes out in the theater seeing it before Less). Travis startsout as a complete imbecile, seemingly unable to think independently.Then, throughout the movie, Travis tries on about three or fourdifferent personalities before Swardson gives up altogether. And withwriting that uneven, who could blame him?Aziz Ansari predictably throws down the best performance in Less, andnot simply by default. Unlike his stand-up comedy, which is aconsistently high-pitched freight train of energy, Ansari is able togive his Chet character a dynamism I didn't expect from him. Sure,there are plenty of squeaky outbursts, but he knows that the outburstseems louder and more hilarious if there is a calm before thedetonation. Ansari is the only actor relishing the gags, butunfortunately is fed plenty of misfired jokes by the writers as well.Danny McBride, deservedly renowned for his Kenny Powers character onHBO's Eastbound and Down, seems content to cash the paycheck and moveon. He plays Dwayne, a much less funny Powers reprise, whose bumblingcriminal character the writers mistakenly believe we care about. Theyinexplicably allow the movie to take a plot turn into his domain, yetthe audience could care less what fate awaits him.Good comedy shouldn't be as strenuous a venture as it is watching 30Minutes or Less. Luckily, we all live in the internet age, and while Ino longer have this option, you can save your ticket money and watchAziz Ansari stand-up videos on YouTube instead.For my other movie reviews, visithttp://scottsdoublefeature.blogspot.com

brando647 (2012-04-29 15:47)

I Enjoyed it More Than the Critics, Apparently

The critical reviews of this movie serve as a reminder that I can'talways trust the professionals to assume whether I'll find a movieentertaining or not. Just about every review I saw for director RubenFleischer's action/comedy 30 MINUTES OR LESS tore it apart, even thecritics I find myself in general agreement with. It wasn't enough tokeep me from giving it a chance. I mean, come on….it's got an awesomecast and the director of ZOMBIELAND. I opted to skip the movie intheaters but caught up with it on home video, and I don't see what allthe negative fuss is about. I thought the movie made for a great time.It has a couple flaws but nothing that would go on to ruin theexperience for me. 30 MINUTES OR LESS is the story of two wannabecriminals (Danny McBride and Nick Swardson) who need $100,000 to hire ahit-man. Needing the cash and not wanting to get their own hands dirty,they nab a pizza delivery driver (Jesse Eisenberg) and strap him into ahomemade bomb vest. Now he has ten hours to rob a bank for the moneyand get it to his captors or he dies. The clock is ticking as pizza manNick enlists the help of his best friend Chet (Aziz Ansari) in robbingthe bank before the timer on his chest reaches zero. Apparently thereare a lot of complaints that this movie closely mirrors real-lifeevents in 2003, but I doubt it was the filmmakers' intentions andhonestly I couldn't care less.Action/comedies can be tricky because you need to ensure there is agood balance of both genres, and I think this movie accomplished justthat. The action is a given based on the plot and the comedy arisesfrom the actors involved. Danny McBride, Nick Swardson, and Aziz Ansariare accomplished comedians; on the other hand, Jesse Eisenberg and(particularly) Michael Peña are known more for their drama chops andprovide some of the best laughs in the movie. I still love McBride butI'm worried that he's becoming a one-note actor, and 30 MINUTES OR LESScontinues his same schtick. If you look at his more memorable movieroles (PINEAPPLE EXPRESS, YOUR HIGHNESS, and cameos in OBSERVE ANDREPORT, DUE DATE, etc.), he's always playing the over-confident,less-intelligent slacker with an ego, which he does again here asDwayne. He does it well, but I'm worried it'll be the only thing hedoes. Nick Swardson does some great stand-up and I loved his recurringbit on "Reno 911", and he brings his effeminate doofus routine to thismovie as Travis, Dwayne's partner in crime. Aziz Ansari, I'm still notsure about. I didn't see what all the hype was about when he was Randyin FUNNY PEOPLE, as his brand of comedy seems to be saying things veryloud. He's not bad here and has some funny moments, but I remain on thefence. Jesse Eisenberg is fun, even if it's hard to take him seriouslyas a slacker after his performance in THE SOCIAL NETWORK. But thefunniest man in the movie has to be Michael Peña as Chango, thehit-man. I died laughing in all of his scenes. He's funny, high-pitchedlisp and his hit-man bravado…seriously the funniest parts of the wholemovie.There's obviously plenty of improv in the movie, which means the comedycan be hit or miss depending on who's in the scene. Improv in the wronghands can lead to a lot of desperate rambling as someone scrambles tofind a worthy punchline (thankfully, most of the improv in the movieworks). I really don't know what a lot of the critics took issue with.It's a little weird how the movie is split so evenly between theprotagonists (Nick and Chet) and the antagonists (Dwayne and Travis),which means we get less time with the "heroes" of the movie. But thematerial with Dwayne and Travis is just as funny, if not funnier insome cases. The purpose of this movie is to make the audience laugh andtreat us to a few well-done action sequences to amp up the energy. Icould have done without Glenn Fry's "The Heat is On" during the carchase sequence, but I guess director Fleischer was trying to inject an80's buddy vibe to the action. Meh, it sort of weakened it. In the end,30 MINUTES OR LESS is a great movie to watch with some buddies over acase of beer.