Everyone Saying Year One Blows

First off, film critics—discluding anyone on this site, Roger Ebert, and Will Leitch—are shitheads. I’ve not read a movie review that leaves the critic looking like anything but a pompous asshole. Therefore, I typically ignore what is said about a film and view it based on previews, chance of nudity, and whether or not Paul Rudd is featured.

So, aha! Year One is sure to be a winner! Not only is Rudd a character, but also comic geniuses Michael Cera, Jack Black, and David Cross. Furthermore, it’s a Harold Ramis production! What else could a film rube like myself ask for?

If you said “nothing that I can think of” or “what’s a rube?,” you’re right and I don’t really know, but I think that’s how you spell it. However, if the omniscient band of film critics know anything, they know that this flick is supremely disappointing.

Much of the criticism centers around the film’s premise, which mirrors that of the Mel Brooks classic History of the World: Part One. Many feel that, while the jokes are similar, Year One is far less humorous. Additionally, the film plays like an unfunny Monty Python installment. And I’ve seen some bad Monty Python installments.

Again, it’s not that I’m disappointed in these reviews—I couldn’t give a shit less, to be honest. It’s just surprising that an all-star cast, featuring the white-hot Cera, could produce a clunker. Perhaps the criticism is borne from unrealistic expectations; still, I’d expect at least a couple of favorable reviews. As of now, everyone says it’s a major letdown.