New on DVD Oct 06 2008 @ 05:30 am
REVIEW: You Don’t Mess with the Zohan
Directed By: Dennis Dugan
Written By: Judd Apatow, Adam Sandler, Robert Smigel
Starring: Adam Sandler, John Turturro, Emmanuelle Chriqui, Dave Matthews, Mariah Carey
Running Time: 113 minutes
Rated PG-13 for crude and sexual content throughout, language and nudity
This review was originally published on June 6th, 2008.
Truly great comedies don’t play like stories that have jokes stuck to them. The really memorable ones play like single jokes that are two hours long—letting their plots develop naturally, but building towards a comedic climax. This was true of Arsenic and Old Lace, and It Happened One Night, and Annie Hall, and Young Frankenstein, and yes, even What about Bob? If Adam Sandler’s films have proven anything, it’s that he doesn’t understand this. Ignoring his brief forays into “art house” pictures (Punch Drunk Love et. al.), he’s essentially made the same movie ten times since becoming a big star. One imagines it gets pitched to producers something like this: “An outcast overcomes rejection and failure, saves the day, and gets the girl. And there are a lot of penis jokes.” (Producer: “Sold! Can we give you ten million dollars right now? Please?”)
I’ve had a complicated relationship with Sandler since he started this lucrative business. There’s part of me that really, really wants to hate these movies. They’re badly paced. They’re ineptly directed. They exist mainly to fill the pockets and ego of Mr. Sandler, neither of which they would actually do, if there was any justice in the world.
And yet, they always win me over by the end.
The Zohan. In the flesh.
You Don’t Mess with the Zohan is, of course, the latest example of this. I wanted to walk out several times, and probably would have if I hadn’t committed to reviewing the thing. I rolled my eyes throughout the screening, even as the thirteen-year-olds around me giggled when the same penis joke was repeated for the tenth time. And yet, when the thing was over, I was feeling pretty good. I had had a good time, and a little bit of my faith in humanity was restored. I can’t explain it. It’s as though Sandler knows his films are train wrecks, so he gives audiences inspiring endings to keep them coming back, or something. Actually, they basically play out like comic melodramas, with the bad guys getting pounded into the dust and the good guys coming out on top, much improved by the experience. And really, who isn’t a sucker for that stuff?
You Don’t Mess with the Zohan starts with a premise that at least feels original, even if it’s not: Sandler plays the title character, who’s been christened with a definite article because he’s a famously unstoppable killing machine in the Israeli army’s counterterrorist unit. He yearns for civilian life, however—specifically, he wants to be a hairstylist. Faking his own death, he escapes to a Middle Eastern neighborhood in New York City, where he attempts to learn this new trade. He has to claw his way up from the bottom, though—starting as a broom boy. Oh, and some Arab terrorists spot him and want to kill him. Oh, and some businessmen want to buy the neighborhood and turn it into a mall, so they’re trying to incite racial violence between the Arabs and the Jews. Oh, and the Zohan has to convince his Palestinian boss Dalia (Emmanuelle Chriqui) to go out with him. And there’s probably some other stuff happening as well.
The problem here is that Sandler and co-writer Judd Apatow (yeah, that guy just won’t go away) have enough plot for a TV miniseries, but only enough funny jokes for an SNL sketch. There’s no doubt in my mind that Sandler has a sign hanging above his desk that reads, “WHEN IN DOUBT, PENIS”; for this film, he’s at least supplemented it with one that says “WHEN IN DOUBT, HUMMUS.” The jokes that aren’t about the size of Zohan’s, erm, manhood (actually, for those of you who care, he claims the bulge in his pants is actually “my boosh”) are about his overuse of the Middle Eastern chickpea delicacy (which is variously compared to semen and diarrhea throughout the film). The overly-complex (and under-explained) plot tends to sag under the weight of the jokes that fall flat (i.e., most of them), and the result is an excruciating second act. There are, however, almost enough funny parts to convince me to recommend this one. A sampling:
- An extended Rocky sequence that involves John Turturro beating up a live cow.
- The Zohan, calmly discussing the complex issues of who owns the Holy Land with Palestinian terrorists he is simultaneously beating the snot out of.
- Evidently, Hezbollah has a “Terrorist Supply Hotline.” Do I need to say anything else?
- Some of the best surrealistic slapstick I’ve seen in a long time. Even for an Adam Sandler flick.
- Mariah Carey, being funny. On purpose. (“I love you too, horny little man! Buy my albums!”) I’d say this could finally be her big comeback…if her latest album didn’t suck so much.
- Dave Matthews. Just…Dave Matthews.
The only thing funnier than jokes about sex with middle-aged women is...oh, pretty much everything
That being said, this one is still punishment to sit through. Really, the best thing I can say about it is that it seems to have its heart in the right place, with its call for peace in the Middle East. Given the reactions of the teenagers I watched it with, though, I’m guessing that most of its target audience couldn’t even find Israel on a map, much less understand the historical, sociological, and religious context for its never-ending conflict. I’m imagining two possible scenarios here: in one, a teen watches this film, reads up on the Holy Land, becomes passionate about it, grows up to be a great peacemaker, and wins a Nobel Prize; in the other, a teen watches the film, then says to his buddy, “Huh huh, it was so funny when Zohan banged that MILF,”—and then goes home to play Halo 3 for six hours.
I’ll let you decide which is more likely.
on Jun 07 2008 @ 1:21 am 1. Thadd Harrington said …
Oh, be nice. Sandler’s made some good movies. I mean, yes, The Longest Yard was a remake, and there was an excessive number of penis jokes in it, not to mention that roughly half the cast was composed of professional wrestlers, but it was still good. And Happy Gilmore wasn’t bad at all. In fact I don’t remember any penis jokes in that one, although I could have just repressed them.
on Jun 07 2008 @ 1:13 pm 2. christian said …
I kind of love HAPPY GILMORE as it combines the best of Sandler’s character and surrealism. And the Bob Barker fight is a genuine classic scene.
But. Most of his films have been awful. I like him, but I can miss this one. The trailer scared me off.
on Jun 08 2008 @ 8:56 am 3. Fletch said …
Mr. Harrington, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
on Jun 08 2008 @ 12:08 pm 4. Luke Harrington said …
Um…thanks? Where did that come from? (Please explain. You have me really confused.)
on Jun 08 2008 @ 2:39 pm 5. Luke Harrington said …
Oh, okay. Just did quick Google, and now I see that that’s a line from Big Daddy. Should have done that in the first place.
I kinda liked that movie…it’s not Sandler’s best, but it definitely has the best alterna-pop soundtrack ever.
(Been years since I last saw it, though.)
on Jun 12 2008 @ 9:52 am 6. Daniel said …
I’m outing myself as a Mariah Carey fan here, but I actually thought her latest album was pretty solid…
ANYWAY, yeah, Zohan was weak, save for some decent cameos. Your last paragraph says it all.
on Jun 12 2008 @ 10:26 am 7. Evan Derrick said …
Ok, we’ve got the raging villagers, the pitchforks, the insatiable bloodlust, and the burning Mariah effigies ready, Daniel. We just need to know where you live and we can get the show on the road.
on Jun 12 2008 @ 10:33 am 8. Luke Harrington said …
Minnesota. Duh.
on Jun 12 2008 @ 11:16 am 9. Evan Derrick said …
Oh yeah. Duh is right.
on Jun 12 2008 @ 2:52 pm 10. Daniel said …
But WHERE in Minnesota? Just follow the music…by the time you arrive, you’ll be hooked.
on Jun 12 2008 @ 3:30 pm 11. Evan Derrick said …
Unfortunately for you, Daniel, all of these pitchfork toting villagers are deaf. Your siren songs will have no effect on them.
on Jul 03 2008 @ 12:10 pm 12. James said …
It takes extreme pain on my part to say this, but I actually enjoyed SOME of this film.
Whew, that was a load off my mind…
For me, there were only scene in which I had a genuine laugh was when the Prickly Palestinian (Rob Schneider) was trying to dial the Phantom’s phone number.
on Oct 06 2008 @ 12:11 pm 13. Maurice said …
Just a short note here. I posted comments for “The Love Guru” which covers my dismay at the glut of knuckleheads who support “Saturday Night Live” CMs doing stupid films and also covered Hollywoods predilection to make and distribute bad films in the blog for “Death Race” so I think my distain for the Zohan is a given.
I want to go after Luke for a second because he, apparently, dosen’t feel it necessary to read my stuff. Oh sure, I have slogged thru countless reviews he has done and laughed along with the audience at his crude attempts at slapstick up there on the stage. But we all know that it was that same, uncomfotable laugh we do in church when the pastor tells some joke he heard that morning in the 3rd grade Sunday School room. Nobody thinks it’s funny, we just wanted to be polite so that God didn’t rain down fire on our way home from the service. I say all of that with tongue firmly planted into my cheek. God won’t rain down anything but rain.
That said, Luke’s slapstick is lousy.
First, I appreciate Luke attempting to glean at least a couple of nuggets of worth out of this astoudingly lousy film. It’s not a loser on scale with “The Love Guru” or “Semi-Pro” but it is a clunker. So, kudos for trying to make this pig ear into at least a rayon purse, but it is a wasted effort. It’s not fun. It’s not even a loveable clunker.
My Dad had a loveable clunker, a 1969 Chevy and we loved that truck. We would pile cheerfully into it, wondering if it would start or if we would have to get out an push start it. I liked to push start the best because when Dad popped the clutch, the truck would lurch and stagger and belch out a cloud of smoke as it started. Then we would all run to catch up to the beast and leap into the front seat or into the bed. Which was cool cause you’d shoulder roll into the back like we all saw Chis George do on an episode of “Rat Patrol.”
The problem with the Zohan is that it’s not a truck we pushed, it’s a plance. It’s munitions plane that is filled with C-4, TNT and pipe bombs and the fuel tanks are full. So, instead of a funny cloud of smoke, the thing blew up. And Adam Sandler is gonna blow up as well if he doesn’t stop letting Rob Schnider book his films.
There are few actors who’s films are so up and down than this guy. Here are some ups:
Punch Drunk Love
50 First Dates
The Wedding Singer
Spanglish
Here are some downs:
Little Nicky
The Water Boy
Happy Gilmore (apparently, Bob Barker is the real star in this piece of nonsense.)
Like a yoyo, baby. Just like a yoyo. Whooa. Sorry. I channeled the Osmond Brothers there for a sec.
Back to Luke. He is not the movie police. Nor is he the Adam Sandler Police. He’s not even the Church Police. It’s not his responsibility to me or others to ensure that we only see quality films. He’s just a reviewer on a site for movies and he tries to do us all service by posting a review. While I am want to smack his head with a Zohan DVD case and then rub his nose in it like I would a puppy that whizzed onto the carpet, I will refrain and instead, thank him for being as honest as possible and trying to do what is right.
Still, if he read my posts, he could have saved us all a lot of aggrevation.
Keep it up Luke. Never give up. Never surrender.
on Oct 06 2008 @ 2:15 pm 14. Evan Derrick said …
“Back to Luke. He is not the movie police. Nor is he the Adam Sandler Police. He’s not even the Church Police. It’s not his responsibility to me or others to ensure that we only see quality films. He’s just a reviewer on a site for movies and he tries to do us all service by posting a review. While I am want to smack his head with a Zohan DVD case and then rub his nose in it like I would a puppy that whizzed onto the carpet, I will refrain and instead, thank him for being as honest as possible and trying to do what is right.”
I’m curious, Maurice. Given the above comment, especially in the context of Luke’s review, what is your opinion on the role of a film critic? I’m sure Luke will have further thoughts, although he’s just switched jobs and is no longer in front a computer all day (as he used to be), so he probably won’t stop by till this evening.
Regardless, entertaining as always, Mr. M.
on Oct 07 2008 @ 12:55 pm 15. Maurice said …
Thanks, Evan and I feel you have posted a valid question, one that I answered in a comment I made about “The Ruins.” I’d like to address this one directly, but first want to say that I was merely ribbing Luke for having to review this stupid film. And it really is stupid, another miss by Sandler, whom I enjoy very much. I am just puzzled by his inability to say “no” to these mind numbing bits of pap he involves himself with. It’s frustrating to keep getting “Billy Madison” when I want more “Punch Drunk Love.”
What is the role of the film critic? Personally, I view him/her to be Tenzing Norgay. I want my critic to Sherpa me to the summit, not run ahead of me and point out the reasons why I won’t make it. See, I am on a quest. I want to find and watch the perfect movie. It hasn’t been made and may never be but I have to struggle to reach that pinnacle. There are dozens of reasons to abandon this lunacy but as long as I don’t harm myself or others, let me get frostbite on my extremities.
I like this site for a very good reason: It reviews. I like the role of reviewer rather than film critic. Look back down thru the last 100 years and see what harm the critic plays with film history. Until Hedda Hopper and Louella Parsons arrived, people just went to see movies. Any movie or all movies. Those two shrews really worked for the studios and papers and were more interested in sordid gossip rather than report honestly about a film review. Who gave a crap about Joan Crawford’s inability to stay married? I mean, really. Even if she and Bette Davis decided to brawl on Oscar night, what did it have to do with Baby Jane?
Pauline Kael still haunts my waking hours. I feel that she, along with the likes of Rex Reed ,ruined many a viewing for the populace. To think that a person’s vision for their film could be made or broken on the knee of someone who suggested that their vision was blurry is wrong. It’s a movie, it’s the way the director sees it. Okay, so the director has cataracts. See it anyway. With very few exceptions, any film has something that redeems it. Judge its merits for yourself and that way, when you lemming over the cliff, you are following your own heart and not the ass of another lemming.
Roger Ebert is the only one I read or listen to. He never once has made me feel that I was doing myself a disservice by going to see a film. Even if it was “Speed Racer.” Sure, he calls them stinkers and gives them the thumbs down but you never get the vibe that if you see the film, he will disapprove. I have disagreed with him many times, including “The 13th Warrior”, a film I never tire of watching. But his opinion I respect and our tastes and likes parallel.
Here’s something I learned at the feet of Mr. Ebert: Movies are a metaphor for sex. I don’t mean the films themselves, I mean WATCHING a film. They are like one night stands or girlfriends. There are those that you see just one time and it’s thrill that you never forget. When it’s over, there’s glow that you feel, you are euphoric and wish it would have lasted longer or that you could see it again right away. There are the ones that are so unsatisfying, the Coyote Date films where you’d just as soon chew off an appendage and slink away into the night. Like an ugly girl you dated, you hope it will never again cross your mind or stray into your path. Last are the ongoing affairs you have. The films that you see again and again, sometime right after another. At times, it turns into an orgy, one viewing after another. Heck, I’ve looped “The Big Lebowski” for days on end, just reveling in love I have for the Dude.
The role I want for a critic is to say “This is the film. This is what I saw. This is what I didn’t like or did like.” Nothing more than that. If I had a refund for every time I let myself get suckered into a “Zatoichi” experience and groaned and threw popcorn, I’d build my own movie house. But I saw it and I went because I researched the film and knew what to expect. Yet what about my experience with a movie like “Uncle Buck?” I did not like this movie the first time. In fact, I did chew off a toe just to take my mind off of what I was watching. But it is now one of those films that, the more I watch it, the more I like it and even recommended to friends. If I had gone along with the reviews at the time, I’d have missed seeing John Candy at his best.
Film critics do provide a service. They help glean some of the marl out of the water and I am all for that. But I want it should come down to me saying “seven come 11!” and taking my chances rather than being hogtied to the hood of Pontiac and driven to my living room by Fascists.
I don’t really think that film critics are like that, I just wanted to use the word “fascists”.
As an aside, I know I use a lot of sarcasm and try to be funny. That is my intention, Evan, to be funny. I know opinions can cause tempers to flare and debates run hot as a result. But this is friendly board and there are lots of jibes thrown around in the name of fun. So, while I was kidding with Luke’s review, I meant no offense. If it might have seemed as such, I apologies. He writes very well and is most fair.
I have been known to go too far. Please don’t hesitate to publicly smack me on the head with any handy object to bring me back in line. This is a great place to vent and I hope to hang around for awhile.
on Jan 10 2009 @ 11:07 am 16. [review]: You Don’t Mess with the Zohan « …yet made of stars said …
[...] at: MovieZeal • Tulsa [...]