More than anything else, the summer of 2005 will be remembered for jumpstarting the renaissance of the R-rated sex comedy.
Until now, for every \American Pie"" sequel, there have been a baker's dozen of flaccid farces like ""Van Wilder,"" ""Tomcats"" or ""Slackers""-a film so unfathomably bad it motivated ""Slacker"" director Richard Linklater to try and get its name changed in order to avoid confusion between the two.
I would argue that audiences wanted something a little more reined-in, a little less off-the-wall. Something with less emphasis on upping the gross-out ante and more on likable characters and raunchy but good-natured humor-which the hits ""Wedding Crashers"" and ""40-Year-Old Virgin"" amply supplied.
""Wedding Crashers"" has just surpassed the $200 million mark and, financially speaking, it deserves its many comparisons to ""There's Something About Mary."" Its success was fueled by substantial word-of-mouth, it stars members of the Frat Pack and critics and audiences alike applauded it not only for its agreeable raunchiness, but for its sweetness as well. But is it really as good as everybody says?
Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed much of ""Wedding Crashers,"" especially the beginning champagne/ejaculation montage, which itself sums up the essential appeal of the movie-watching Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson crash weddings. But as this is a mainstream comedy, it's only a short wait until the wedding crashing stops and the moralizing begins; once the plot shifts into gear, ""Wedding Crashers"" becomes a rather leaden and unconvincing love story between Wilson and Rachel McAdams.
""Wedding Crashers"" is almost always amiable, but it meanders and drags after a strong start, strenuously trying to juggle a supposedly sweet love story, a typical fish-out-of-water scenario, and a whole slew of diversions-including the prominence of McAdams' fiance's alarming abuse, a disconcerting subplot which seems like it wandered over from ""What's Love Got to Do With It?""
It is also the first movie I think I've ever seen where Christopher Walken isn't given a single funny or subversive thing to do or say (hell, even ""Gigli"" knew how to use Walken effectively), and that's downright inexcusable. With the exception of the third-act ""surprise"" cameo, the film follows the beaten path, relying on Wilson and especially Vaughn's charisma to carry it over the rough patches.
""The 40-Year-Old Virgin,"" on the other hand, is the real deal: It's charming, continuously hilarious, insightful and even wise about its subject. Writer/director Judd Apatow makes as strong a feature debut as any this year, using the naturalistic approach he perfected with his wonderful cult darling shows ""Freaks and Geeks"" and ""Undeclared,"" and the affection he has for Steve Carell's lovable virgin and his raucous pals (Paul Rudd, Seth Rogan and Romany Malco) show through in every frame.
The characters, especially Carell's love interest (the lovely Catherine Keener), feel like flesh-and-blood people, acting as unpredictable and endearingly erratic as most of us do in real life. Unlike ""Wedding Crashers,"" the love story enhances the laughs instead of interrupting them; Keener and Carell have a wonderful connection, and I'll take their engagingly awkward chemistry over Wilson and McAdams' borderline-fake Hollywood interaction any day.
Apatow's film isn't perfect but it is a truly authentic sex comedy. In order for a sex comedy to succeed, it needs to be as plausible as it is funny. ""Crashers"" may be the movie everyone is clamoring about, but ""Virgin"" will have more longevity.
Ten years from now, which will you remember more fondly: the first twenty minutes of ""Wedding Crashers"" or Steve Carell trying to figure out how to put a condom on? I know which one I'll remember.
