I give this movie a C+. While some jokes were really funny, on the whole it just felt as if I was watching Robin Williams being himself on a talk show. It was weird too how the movie tried to be a comedy and a thriller at the same time. The mix just didn't work well at all. That and the lack of plain sense in movie just make it suck a bit.

Explain the thriller part to me, please. Im never going to see the movie, but i heard a lot about it trying to be a thriller and it has me curious.

SPOILER...

Well basically, Williams' character gets elected because there was a glitch in the new electronic voting system implemented in the USA. A woman (Laura Linney) realizes this glitch before the election tells her boss, but bc he would've lost tons of money in stock and would look horrible, they decide to send a man to drug inject her with all kinds of drugs so that she can be made out to be a druggie if she tells anyone. But basically she decides to tell Williams herself and in the meantime they fall in love she hasnt told him yet and she gets constantly followed by men that are trying to capture/kill her. That's the thriller part of it. Didn't mingle well with the comedy. And Robin Williams is just not that great at doing romance either IMO.

Wow... this movie sounds even worse than I had thought.

LOL.

I think Robin Williams is funny, but... wow. That's some plotline.

Jeff Goldblum plays the lawyer who is behind all the bad things that happy to Linney.

How someone could actually have any desire to spend $8-12+ on seeing this movie is beyond me.

I got free screening tickets courtesy of WOKJ

Holy christ, that plotline is insanely complicated and ridiculous. Robin Williams either stars in comedies or thrillers. Not both at the same time. GET IT STRAIGHT, MORK-BOY.

Heh, talk about a case of bipolar disorder. It isn't that bad of a movie, but both the comedy and thriller aspects never manage to be that interesting. Yes, this is a serious thriller and a political comedy.

Yikes. I still rather enjoyed myself and I find this to be better than comparable material like American Dreamz.

B-

I agree.

Same grade even.

Here's my "thoughts":

We went to an 8:40 show of Man of the Year (about 80% full in a 300-seat auditorium), and found the film so terrible that we left after an hour. I'm pretty sure this is only the second or third time I've ever walked out of a movie voluntarily. Something about the movie suddenly morphing into some ridiculous conspiracy thriller (one scene actually made me jump! I was like...I thought I was seeing a comedy) just really, really ticked me off, especially since I wasn't even finding the stuff with Williams particularly interesting.

I won't give it a grade since I didn't see the whole thing.

Man of the Year: C-

Robin Williams tries his very best to save MAN OF THE YEAR, a film which can't decide if it's a bright political satire or a sinister corporate thriller, but fails.

He stars as a popular, Jon Stewart-esque comedy newsman who, night after night, aims sardonic barbs at the fractured political system in Washington D.C. and gives a voice to the exasperated nation. After a flip comment ignites a grassroots campaign, he finds himself the top Independent candidate in the upcoming presidential election. In an incredibly surprising upset, he wins, beating more conventional Democratic and Republican opponents. But, as one mild-mannered Silicon Valley employee (Laura Linney) discovers, his win might be the result of a widespread glitch in a revolutionary new voting computer used nationwide.

It's here the movie splits into two and a disturbing, off-putting identity crisis rears its ugly head. The film tries to be both a comedy (a cartoonish Williams visits his new colleagues wearing a powdered wig) and a thriller (Linney is assaulted and drugged in her home by a mysterious criminal, sent by her nervous superiors to intimidate and terrify her). Barry Levinson may've been behind such modern classics as GOOD MORNING, VIETNAM, RAIN MAN, and WAG THE DOG, but he drops the ball here, allowing bizarre tonal shifts to inflict significant damage upon his film. We can never become involved with the more serious matters because we know pure comedy will soon follow. Also, he dulls the political message as to not offend anyone, which turns what had the potential to be a relevant satire into nothing more than a whimisical, inconsistent farce.

Robin Williams dials up the mania and does generate significant laughs, but he can only carry the film (and his thin character) so far before it begins to tear. Veteran character actress Laura Linney fares much worse, delivering a grating, unsure performance. The less said about their chemistry-free romance the better. Of the supporting cast, Christopher Walken and Lewis Black steal scenes as Williams' character's steadfast right-hand men, while Jeff Goldblum's wasted as an amoral lawyer who is not on screen enough to blossom into a full-fledged villian.

Overall, MAN OF THE YEAR isn't an awful film. It never bored me and certain elements, such as the charismatic, scenery-chewing Robin Williams, are successful, but it's definitely underwhelming because it could've been so much more with a clearer script and a braver, less-PC message.

Ha. I know exactly what scene you are referring to, and I can say that half of the audience (retire-aged folks) jumped out of their seats. Expect many appoints to be set me cardiologists, specifically regarding pacemakers out of whack. Yikes (again). I can't say I didn't see it coming (spoilers...).

That might be the film's biggest problem - flirting a fine line between thriller and comedy diminishes the effect of either aspect.

Yeah, I did not want to see a political thriller. And it had such a silly silly premise for that. It would have worked into the comedy but not in the tone it took.

hmm, I thought the thriller elements in this movie where pretty cool. alot of the jokes at the beginning fell flat for me. The movie was pretty average till after the Election, then it exploaded with awsomeness. (far better than RV).

B+

Ugh. The previews totally made you think it was a comedy, but then near the end, it turned into a quasi-thriller.

wtf?

grade:C

I guess since I read that this was a semi-thriller (and I really hesitate to call it that, but there's no better word for it), I wasn't surprised by it and liked the film a little more than the rest. It's never laugh-out-loud funny, and overall, the film isn't that great, but I didn't think it was that bad. Just rather average, with a few funny scenes here and there. C+

In the end, there was too little comedy and too little thriller. They should have kept one and stayed with it. Either path could have been interesting; a political thriller on a glitch in voting machines, or a comedy on a topical comedian making a bid for the presidency. Lewis Black and Chris Walken steal the show, period. I am a huge Lewis Black fan though, so I'm probably biased here. I didn't buy Williams as a comedian/talk show host. His comedic delivery could never work the same way as Jon Stewart or Bill Maher. Not to say it's bad, it's not the same. Golblum is wasted. The movie dragssssssssss... it felt about three hours long.

Overall, not very good. C-

You know a film's terrible when it is part-comedy and part-so bad that it's unintentionally funny. That's exactly what this is - a movie with a serious case of multiple personality disorder. Is it a comedy? Sure, with Robin Williams' one-liners and the basic plot of him running for president. Is it a thriller? Why not, with the absurd idea of a computer glitch causing a false election, based off a notion that's incredibly stupid. Is it a romance? It tries to be, by setting up Laura Linney - who's in thriller mode - and Williams - who's in comedy mode - as a not-so-perfect match. Is it terrible? Absolutely, as none of the separate genres blend together well or are even good in their own right. It gets so bad at times that you feel compelled to laugh at the thriller moments - like Linney going batshit crazy in a cafeteria, or her attempting to be an FBI agent, or when she figures out what's causing the glitch, or when she attempts to explain it to Williams. I could not believe some of what I was seeing. It's not a total failure, though, as Williams is funny when he tries to be. Other than that, though...

I wish they had stuck to political comedy. The "thriller" element is plain ridiculous. C-

The coffee shop scene was definitely the funniest scene it had. And then her almost getting hit by a truck at the phone booth. Both hilarious.

Grade: C-

Let me just get this out of the way. It's 5:30 in the morning and I just finished watching this film and I have to say that I am completely confused. Not by the thriller aspect of what was marketed as a comedy. No. What I'm confused at is that I really enjoyed the film. I mean really enjoyed it. But I can't really say why because this is a very flawed film, from how it was concieved to how it was marketed. There is no possible way you could market this film without cheating the audience. You either play up the thriller aspect of the movie and rip the people off who expected it to be a Robin Williams comedy. Or you market it as a comedy and then betray the audience that thought it was a comedy. The thing is, I don't think it was ever supposed to be a comedy. Comedic elements? Yes. But it's mostly "lite thriller".

That saying, the story had me interested throughout. Yes towards the end I couldn't help but feel, okay let's move it along, but in it's bi-polar way the film works.

As a comedy, it somewhat works. I feel that there could've been more of a setup at the beginning of the film. In the course of seven minutes we learn how Dobbs had a popular TV show and then one day was asked why doesn't he run for president. Okay, how about we see a little bit more of Dobbs first? Why is he so popular? From what I could tell, the jokes were all from Williams, and it's stuff you've heard before, enough to the point where you might groan and say, this again? That saying, the debate scene works perfectly.

As a thriller the film once again somewhat works. I can't believe I'm saying this, but there are a couple of legitimate "boo" moments. The one in her apartment is dead on. I thought the voting system thing was played up very well.

I think what Levinson was trying to get at though was a moral tale. If you had a chance to be president at your own will, at your own choice, would you take it? If someone like Stewart and Colbert ran, and then do to a "hush hush" voting glitch, became president and knew about it, would they be serious enough to take the job? Or would they be in way over their head. The best scenes in the film are in the oval office and at SNL, and I thought Williams was very good in both scenes.

A couple of things bothered me though. Jeff Goldblum. He's not in the film enough. He's there for five scenes and then somewhat disappears towards the ending. He's undersused. As for the film, it drags at the end, but it should've been about five minutes longer with a little bit more setup at the beginning. As I said, we are just thrown into the film. Maybe we're supposed to give little thought as to what is going on? The film's ending is also a little too idealistic for my own taste.

When you mesh the two together, and as far as I can tell with this thread, I'll be the lone one who thinks this, it works. I enjoyed the performances and I enjoyed what I think Levinson was trying to get at.

B+

C-.


Just not a very good film.

The mix of genres didnt felt right and few scenes were just plain laughble. Its was fairly enjoyable.

C+