I don't get it.


Just about every post about this movie is screaming hilarious, best comedy of all time, etc. A few parts were funny to me. Most were just weird. Maybe thats the thing. Its that weird, random sense of humor that doesn't sit well with me. Hardly ever makes me laugh.

However, the end bit with Katherine was awesome.

reply

same here, its kinda funny just not that 'hilarious funny' to me. Though I have to say its an interesting take on the vampire and werewolf genre.

reply

true, that was something new to see. I like when movies do that. I get worn out of the same old story.

reply

That's the main thing I enjoyed with this movie - I didn't feel like I had seen it a bunch of times already

reply

Personally, I concur with all those highly enthusiastic posts (maybe not the greatest of all time but it’s definitely up there).

Mind you, I didn’t know about Taika Waititi or this movie’s reputation before I saw it, and honestly I wasn’t expecting much. But frankly, it ended up being one of the funniest, cleverest, and most satisfying movies I had ever seen.

Maybe the humor in it can fly over some people’s heads or it simply doesn’t click with them. At any rate, this is a fun and interesting movie.

reply

Watch it again in 5 years. Taste changes over the years, you might like it more!

reply

If you don't get absurdist humor, you don't get absurdist humor. Don't worry about it.

reply

It's not really laugh out loud slap your knee funny, but if you pay attention to small details I think it's one of the most brilliant and funny movies I've ever seen. Look at the furnishings in their home--small, taxidermied animals all over the place, strange artwork and old pictures of people. In the scene where Stu is teaching Vlad how to use internet dating, it looks like there is paper money thumb-tacked to the wall. Why? lol

The entire premise is funny--they're vampires, cold-blooded killers, but they knit scarves, turn pottery, fuss over flat chores, have fun with modern technology, and in the case of Viago, really just long for love. They didn't miss a detail....like Petyr's tomb with the chicken feathers stuck to the walls. That cracked me up for some reason.

Spoiler--Deacon can't stand Nick through most of the movie and blames him for Petyr's death, yet he's the one who tries to comfort Nick after Stu is killed. They're complex characters. On the one hand Viago casually kills that young woman who dreams of going to University and traveling as if she's a mosquito, yet pines outside of Catherine's nursing home night after night.

Strange, though... I found the original short film from 2003? or so to be dull and awkward and I didn't laugh once. It was the same actors, but they seemed flat and not at all charming like they are in this film. It also didn't help that the fake fang teeth they used in the short film were too big and fake looking. I found it distracting. I also don't find the new tv series very good, either.

reply


I agree with hoosiergirl on all counts, especially the original short - hard to believe this was greenlit on the basis of that film

IMHO, this film would appeal most to fans of "Spinal Tap" for a lot of the same reasons - little details that flesh out the characters' lives and a sense of genuine pathos. I thought it was actually kind of touching, how the vampires all fell into a funk after Stu's "death." "Spinal Tap" had a lot of similar beats.

As for why the original was so dull, it's just a reflection of how hard these movies can be to actually make. I watched "Spinal Tap" outtakes once, all the bits they improvised that didn't make the final cut, and almost all of it was weak.

reply

Didn't work for me either. It's basically a mocumentary about a bunch of slightly pathetic vampires and to be honest I've never found that format funny. In fact it reminds me of the original UK version of The Office but even less appealing because everyone is a delusional looser.

reply