It’s commonplace these days to hate Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer on general principles. One of the reasons I hate them is that their parodies have virtually no angle of approach. This makes it next to impossible for me to find something about their films worth reviewing. There’s nothing there – no themes, no visual techniques, no symbolism, no clever dialogue, no nuanced performances, no item of discussion. There’s just unadulterated goofiness, a series of comedic vignettes that don’t really go anywhere and aren’t connected by a plot. The question is: Can we watch a disjointed mess and still laugh at it? There was a time when I could have answered yes; I remain to this day a fan of the “Hot Shots!” films and the “Naked Gun” trilogy, all silly and transparent and inconsequential, but also undeniably funny.
 
But the days of Jim Abrahams and David and Jerry Zucker have long gone. Now we have Friedberg and Seltzer, men most critics would like nothing more than to watch burn at the stake, their scripts serving as kindling. I understand their feelings. They’re not funny. They’re not talented. They know how to make movies in the strictest sense – making use of cameras, actors, sets, special effects, costumes, and makeup – but they have absolutely no idea how to tell a story. They reached a new low with “Disaster Movie,” quite possibly one of the worst movies ever made. The only film of theirs I’ve given a pass to is “Meet the Spartans,” which, to this day, I’m still getting flak for. You’ll forgive me if I have no control over what I think is funny. Yes, “Meet the Spartans” made me laugh. Get over it.
 
Having said all that, I now find myself in the position of reviewing their newest film, “Vampires Suck,” a spoof of the “Twilight” saga. The second word of the title is fitting. It would be much easier, and would take up far less time, to describe what doesn’t suck about this film, and even then I’m acting out of desperation since the jokes really aren’t all that funny. There are two moments that stick out in my mind. One is when the female lead gets her first look at the Edward Cullen parody and describes him as having “pale skin, really big hair, and a constipated look on his face.” The other is when the Jacob Black parody removes his shirt without provocation and then holds up his contract, which states that he has to appear shirtless every ten minutes of screen time. He then repeatedly sprays his chest and abs to make them glisten.

There’s no need to describe the plot, regardless of how intimately familiar you are with the real “Twilight” films or the books that inspired them. The film stars Jenn Proske as Becca Crane. Get it? It’s Becca instead of Bella, and her surname is Crane instead of Swan, like the birds! Matt Lanter plays her vampire boyfriend, Edward Sullen. Get it? His character always acts sullenly, and Sullen rhymes with Cullen! Chris Riggi plays a werewolf named Jacob White. Get it? His name is a color, and it’s now the opposite of Black! Three evil vampires eventually appear, one girl and two guys; when they pose, a fisherman mistakes them for the Black Eyed Peas. Bookending the film are references to a rivalry between those on Team Jacob and those on Team Edward. One girl, and I forget which side she’s on, outdoes her opponent by whacking her across the face with a shovel.
 
I think I deluded myself into believing I would like this movie. After all, I’ve thus far been very unimpressed by the “Twilight” saga; if I can’t enjoy them as serious films, I figured, maybe I can enjoy watching someone else make fun of them. No such luck. As it turns out, I would rather watch all three “Twilight” films back to back than have to sit through “Vampires Suck” again. This is a desperately unfunny movie – unfunny and unfocused, Friedberg and Seltzer lacking the conviction to develop their jokes properly. Some are dragged out to the point of monotony, such as Becca’s inability to deduce that her new hometown is rife with vampires, even when shops signs and banners make it abundantly clear. Others aren’t followed through, such as when Edward throws a rock and randomly hits a girl looking very much like Alice from Tim Burton’s latest film. Others still are just plain odd, like references to the Kardashians and, of all people, the Canadians.
 
The more I see parodies like “Vampires Suck,” the sadder I get, for it seems that inane escapism has given way to complacency. Neither “Hot Shots!” nor “The Naked Gun” can be considered art, but at least an effort was being made with its humor. Now, it’s as if no one is even trying. How much thought do you think went into the scene of Edward juggling an apple, a bowling ball, and a baby, all of which just happened to roll out of Becca’s backpack? How about when Jacob’s shirtless pack arrives, at which point they spank themselves and dance lewdly to the Weather Girls’ “It’s Raining Men”? It’s useless to complain; all five of Friedberg and Seltzer’s movies have made money, despite none of them reaching the 10% mark on the Rotten Tomatoes scale. Clearly, they know something I don’t. Either that, or audiences’ perceptions of what is and isn’t funny has drastically changed. Either way, it depresses me.

- Chris Pandolfi

More Recent Reviews:

Chronicle (2012)

Innkeepers, The (2012)

Kill List (2012)

Woman in Black, The (2012)

Man on a Ledge (2012)

 

  Recommendations: