When we watch films of the spoof genre we see funny jokes that make fun of other films recently released (Scary Movie) making fun of the stereotypical conventions of other films (Not another teen movie) and hilarious characters that we can associate with in context (Austin Powers) Johnny English justified the genre perfectly, meaning its unfunny, tries it make fun of the spy world and has predictable written all over it.
Personally I'm not a huge fan of Rowan Atkinson and this 2003 film did nothing to increase my likability for him. As great a comedian as he may have been in 'Black Adder' he is unable here to make this film even acceptable with a low performance as the dim-witted agent. His annoying childish speech throughout was driving me up the wall. His character is supposedly trying to mirror an idiotic James Bond. Fair play they might have the spy conventions worked out but are unable to make them interesting. Also the fact he is trying to act big headed all of the time is enough to drive anyone mad.
EVERY scene is predictable I could have written it myself. Sitting with my sister I told her the ending specifically, involving what happened with the Archbishop of Canterbury and she said 'Have you seen this before?' And that was half way through the film.
The story is overly coincidental and blown out of complete proportion. Rowan plays the daft agent who is sent to track down some missing jewels. The fact that he 'knows' what is going on is ridiculous, seeing how dumb he is. Some ideas are resolved too quickly and the whole plot is dumb driven so to speak. It tries to captivate the audience by containing scenes where the central character is being made a fool of (which happens all the time so be prepared for the same ideas being used) having too many action scenes to justify the action genre, all blown out of proportion and are no way shape of form realistic, making the film unacceptable viewing if you wish to appreciate a real life scenario.
The stereotypical characters are also used to justify the genre. Natalie Imbruglia stars as the central woman and is never convincing as she is uncomfortable in-front of the camera and forms unhealthy chemistry with other actors. John Malkovich to is unacceptable as the stereotype villain but is probably the most interesting character as audiences wonder what he is up to, although it is predictable in the end.
Although predictability may have been the purpose would anyone find that interesting? 'Shall we sit down and watch Johnny English?' There is no fun watching a film which is unfunny, predictable and doesn't add anything new which so many other spy spoofs such as 'Austin Powers' with its funny characters does.
A film to criticise if you deem necessary but don't get your hopes up for enjoyment. With minimal laughs, a predictable plot, a story involving stereotypes, it's a film destined to be hated.
Personally I'm not a huge fan of Rowan Atkinson and this 2003 film did nothing to increase my likability for him. As great a comedian as he may have been in 'Black Adder' he is unable here to make this film even acceptable with a low performance as the dim-witted agent. His annoying childish speech throughout was driving me up the wall. His character is supposedly trying to mirror an idiotic James Bond. Fair play they might have the spy conventions worked out but are unable to make them interesting. Also the fact he is trying to act big headed all of the time is enough to drive anyone mad.
EVERY scene is predictable I could have written it myself. Sitting with my sister I told her the ending specifically, involving what happened with the Archbishop of Canterbury and she said 'Have you seen this before?' And that was half way through the film.
The story is overly coincidental and blown out of complete proportion. Rowan plays the daft agent who is sent to track down some missing jewels. The fact that he 'knows' what is going on is ridiculous, seeing how dumb he is. Some ideas are resolved too quickly and the whole plot is dumb driven so to speak. It tries to captivate the audience by containing scenes where the central character is being made a fool of (which happens all the time so be prepared for the same ideas being used) having too many action scenes to justify the action genre, all blown out of proportion and are no way shape of form realistic, making the film unacceptable viewing if you wish to appreciate a real life scenario.
The stereotypical characters are also used to justify the genre. Natalie Imbruglia stars as the central woman and is never convincing as she is uncomfortable in-front of the camera and forms unhealthy chemistry with other actors. John Malkovich to is unacceptable as the stereotype villain but is probably the most interesting character as audiences wonder what he is up to, although it is predictable in the end.
Although predictability may have been the purpose would anyone find that interesting? 'Shall we sit down and watch Johnny English?' There is no fun watching a film which is unfunny, predictable and doesn't add anything new which so many other spy spoofs such as 'Austin Powers' with its funny characters does.
A film to criticise if you deem necessary but don't get your hopes up for enjoyment. With minimal laughs, a predictable plot, a story involving stereotypes, it's a film destined to be hated.