40 Days and 40 Nights

American Pie. Road Trip. Not Another Teen Movie. Add 40 Days and 40 Nights to the list of Hollywood's most egregious sex comedies.

First off this is far from a great movie but it's an ok night of entertainment if a) you're in the mood for a sex farce and b) there's nothing better on at the cinema. It has a lot of flaws, most notably the liberal applying of schmaltz across the whole film but it does have it's rewarding moments and interesting characters such as the Bagel guy who knows everything except how to turn up on time. A lot of the comedy is too heavy handed but there are moments which genuinely made me laugh. I particularly liked Josh Hartnett's Priest to be brother struggling to listen to Josh's tales of sexual encounters.

That said the two main characters are somewhat lacking in life and could have done with a bit more development. This is a largely French funded film and it does show in places. There are elements of French farce about it but with transposing the action to California it was always inevitable there'd be the standard Hollywood ending and it doesn't "disappoint" in that respect.

Hopefully this won't be the best film you'll see this year but it certainly could be worse.

After his girlfriend dumps him Matt goes through a lot of meaningless sex that makes him feel bad,so in order to give himself time to recover he decides to give up sex and anything to do with sex for Lent.

I liked the idea, but the movie ended up being a disappointment.

Josh Hartnett is pretty bad in this movie. I can't think of any other movies with him, but considering that I know his name he did a few, so he might be a good actor. But this movie really doesn't show it. I wonder if he even knew it was a comedy, because he sure didn't act as if he did.

Actually besides having a more or less original idea for a romantic comedy the movie didn't go too far from it. The joke was pretty much the same all through 90 minutes. And it was also stupid. It was the kind of sentiment I would expect for a teen movie, but the characters in this one were in their 20's, the whole "omg the poor guy can't live without sex" thing is just dumb. And this is what the whole movie was about, exaggerated and annoying.

Also, while I think sex themed comedies can be very funny. Only this one was trying to be romantic, and this is what made her sexual theme fail. Some of the jokes were off, and seemed more vulgar than funny for the genre. Actually the only time I laughed was at the Bagel Boy.

The story was not well thought through. It makes no sense whatsoever to me why Erica was mad at Matt about the whole abstinence thing. It's not like he decided not to have sex ever again in his life, or that it was a personal insult to her or that he was supposed to tell everything about himself on one date only. Silly. Same as the ending. I don't want to spoil, but what happened with Nicole was in no way funny. And it was also pretty unnecessary, one could have done it better without it.

I doubt it.

Someone who wants to have sex but is somehow thwarted; now THAT'S funny ... well, potentially funny. Someone who wants NOT to have sex but is somehow coerced into doing so; that's NOT funny.

-Actually, very frequently it IS funny, but under conditions that don't hold here. The man who simply wants to read a book or work on his woodcarving but has an insatiable spouse; that can be amusing. The man who for obscure "because it's in the script, that's why" reasons gives up sex for Lent … well, whatever. If the film wants to ignore this tepid premise and tell jokes about, say, badminton, that could work. But the sex that's been renounced is something we never hear the end of. It's like listening to someone say, "No thanks, I don't want any sugar in my coffee," six hundred and fifty times.

How long is this guy doing without, anyway? Forty days; a little over a month. Please. Most of us spend, give or take, the first five THOUSAND days of our lives without sex (and it's only so few if you accept the film's extended definition). How hard can it be?

Not a single player in the story has a brain, and the central character is in addition one of the wettest schmendricks ever to be pushed forward as a romantic lead.

First of all, I would like to make the reader aware that the following commentary will reveal certain elements of the film's plot. If you would rather not have them revealed, then I would not recommend reading past this paragraph. However, if you watch the movie, I would urge you to think about the full implications of its various scenes.

I watched this film with two friends of mine, and despite the fact that we have fairly liberal views, all three of us (this includes both female and male) were rather appalled at what was shown, and found that there are some serious moral problems at hand. First and foremost, while some viewers might not realize it, Josh Hartnett's character is raped towards the end of this movie. His ex-girlfriend has sex with him, while he is tied to a bed, intoxicated, and only marginally aware of what is going on. In spite of this, the film does not seem to show the seriousness of the incident. The main character seems to be casual about what happened, albeit disappointed that his celibacy did not reach the 40 day mark; his current love interest, played by Shannyn Sossamon, chooses to be angry, instead of being supportive, and his ex-girlfriend revels in snide triumph. The rape of men by women does occur in real life; it is a horrific crime, as is any other form of rape, and this movie certainly doesn't help in making the society aware of its existence.

The film also paints an inaccurate and incomplete picture of human sexuality, since men are portrayed as sex fiends, who find it next to impossible to not be controlled by their desires, while women are depicted as manipulative whores. Shannyn Sossamon's aforementioned character is an exception, but she appears to be emotionally unstable, since she walks out whenever there is a problem, instead of making an attempt to communicate. When the main character ends up with her, this is treated as an "and they lived happily ever after" sort of ending, whereas realistically, what he probably has in store for him is another psychologically-damaging relationship.

The problem at hand is not in what happens in the film, but in the film's attitude towards what happens. I am not saying that a rape scene in a movie is always unacceptable. What I am saying, is that such a scene should be treated as a rape scene, and not as a casual sexual encounter. While I believe in artistic freedom, I also believe that film producers hold a level of responsibility for the sort of message that they carry across, and that is why I felt that something needed to be said. I would generally not recommend this movie, but to those who are planning on watching it - please be aware of what is going on.