Comedies have to be the hardest type of film to pass judgement on yet people still manage to try. Nothing is more subjective than humor, and the fact there are critics in the sphere of cinema that have the gall to decide when something is funny is almost insulting. 30 Minutes or Less wasn’t necessarily a film that was lauded as “not funny”. It was however unusually criticized for the type of comedy it attempted, and much of what was said about it almost makes no sense. Most reviews were mixed or average, and perhaps this was unfair.
30 Minutes or Less wasn’t necessarily a film that was lauded as “not funny”. It was however unusually criticized for the type of comedy it attempted, and much of what was said about it almost makes no sense.
Make no mistake, 30 Minutes or Less is not going to speak to the masses or change the way the world looks at comedy. That said, it would be wise to view the finished product in a more objective light. For one thing, the story is fairly original. A deadbeat and his friend hatch a scheme to kill his father for the small fortune he’d leave behind. In order to do this, and to insure it does not come back on either of them, they kidnap a pizza delivery boy and strap a bomb to him. Once done, they inform the delivery boy that he must rob a bank in exchange for his life, using the take to pay a hit man to kill his father.
The plot sounds ridiculous, and it is, but the curious part is in how critics addressed this point. Reading reviews at the time of its release, one would’ve almost been led to believe that the film WASN’T supposed to be ridiculous, which in and of itself is comical. The whole point of the movie is how outrageous the entire situation is, it’s not even meant to be taken with an ounce of seriousness. Apart from the obvious, it’s not as though there was much else to complain about either. The movie is shot to a professional standard, it’s directed fine and cut with decent transitions, the acting is adequate on everyone’s part and the comedy is definitely there (even if it’s unnecessarily vulgar, and at times basic). Between Danny McBride’ interactions with Nick Swardson, and also between Jesse Eisenberg and Aziz Anzari, there is plenty of quick witted improvisation and enough random one liners to get plenty of laughs. There’s enough about 30 Minutes or Less that makes it more than watchable, just apparently not enough to appease the snobs.
Ruben Fleischer may not have directed an award season game changer, but this was hardly the goal either. Fleischer and his team’s only real hiccup was probably not having the marketing push necessary to bring in the big bucks even though they don’t appear to have lost money on the film; and this wouldn’t necessarily put them directly at fault anyway. Either way, 30 Minutes or Less is not some grand gift from Hollywood, but, it’s still not even close to as bad as the art house brigade tried to make it out to be. So take a look, be the judge.
