Movie Reviews: "30 Minutes or Less" - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

ryan423 · 08-11-2011, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Worst. Film. Ever.

30 Minutes or Less was neither smart or clever, nor funny or amusing. Oscar nominated, soon-to-be Razzie winning actor Michael Cera Jesse Eisenberg plays a pizza delivery guy who has a bomb strapped to him by two jerks who want him to rob a bank for them. If he doesn't get the job done, they're gonna blow him up. Funny, huh?

- Ryan Schwartz TV and Film Blog

JamesG · 08-12-2011, 06:30 PM

Movie Reviews: 30 Minutes or Less

You’ve got to figure that the filmmakers behind 30 Minutes or Less were just asking for it when they came up with that title.

Critics have pounced on it with glee.

For example, Ann Horniday in the Washington Post:

“Would that 30 Minutes or Less lived up to its title. Even under 90, it feels interminable.”

Steven Rea in the Philadelphia Inquirer adds:

“The movie claims to be only 83 minutes long, but it’s the longest 83 minutes to come along in quite awhile.”

Manohla Dargis in the New York Times calls it a case of another “rude and crude comedy” with:

“shtick that helps make the title of 30 Minutes or Less sound like a cruel promise.”

Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun-Times says that the movie represents:

“an unfortunate career move for Jesse Eisenberg. He was so good in The Social Network that it is impossible to believe him as a character as dumb as the one he plays in this movie.”

(Note: 30 Minutes or Less was filmed before The Social Network)

Lou Lumenick of The New York Post is one of a handful of critics who have given the movie a decent review. Sort of.

“The film may be tasteless, moronic and lacking in any redeeming social value whatsoever. But for me, at least, it was gut-bustingly funny — perhaps this waning summer season’s ultimate guilty pleasure.”

Then there’s this left-handed compliment from Elizabeth Weitzman in the New York Daily News:

“30 Minutes or Less is probably best watched as it was made: without much evident effort. In other words, wait until it hits DVD, order a pizza and Netflix it. But if you’re bored or curious or merely looking to get out of the house, it’s just enough fun to make a $12 ticket worth your while.”

-IMDB News

shotzette · 08-12-2011, 06:44 PM

It's only 45% on Rotten Tomatoes. Still rotten, but not as rotten as The Smurfs, The Change Up, and the latest Transformers movie. Cowboys and Aliens was also 45% rotten and that turned out to be an enjoyable flick.

08-12-2011, 06:30 PM	#2
JamesG Freakshow Moderator Forum Icon Join Date: Feb 01, 2008 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 57,127	Movie Reviews: 30 Minutes or Less You’ve got to figure that the filmmakers behind 30 Minutes or Less were just asking for it when they came up with that title. Critics have pounced on it with glee. For example, Ann Horniday in the Washington Post: “Would that 30 Minutes or Less lived up to its title. Even under 90, it feels interminable.” Steven Rea in the Philadelphia Inquirer adds: “The movie claims to be only 83 minutes long, but it’s the longest 83 minutes to come along in quite awhile.” Manohla Dargis in the New York Times calls it a case of another “rude and crude comedy” with: “shtick that helps make the title of 30 Minutes or Less sound like a cruel promise.” Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun-Times says that the movie represents: “an unfortunate career move for Jesse Eisenberg. He was so good in The Social Network that it is impossible to believe him as a character as dumb as the one he plays in this movie.” (Note: 30 Minutes or Less was filmed before The Social Network) Lou Lumenick of The New York Post is one of a handful of critics who have given the movie a decent review. Sort of. “The film may be tasteless, moronic and lacking in any redeeming social value whatsoever. But for me, at least, it was gut-bustingly funny — perhaps this waning summer season’s ultimate guilty pleasure.” Then there’s this left-handed compliment from Elizabeth Weitzman in the New York Daily News: “30 Minutes or Less is probably best watched as it was made: without much evident effort. In other words, wait until it hits DVD, order a pizza and Netflix it. But if you’re bored or curious or merely looking to get out of the house, it’s just enough fun to make a $12 ticket worth your while.” -IMDB News

08-12-2011, 06:44 PM	#3
shotzette Member Senior Member Join Date: Jun 30, 2004 Posts: 1,782	It's only 45% on Rotten Tomatoes. Still rotten, but not as rotten as The Smurfs, The Change Up, and the latest Transformers movie. Cowboys and Aliens was also 45% rotten and that turned out to be an enjoyable flick.