Review: ‘The House’ Is a Comedy Built on Despair

saw this on a plane. Liked it for several reasons not the least of which it eviscerates the whole concept of worshiping at the shrine of the unaffordable college of your choice.

Just saw this film. One of the worst films I have ever seen in my 55 years on earth! It seems to have been written by a 10-year old boy. The plot is ridiculous, the jokes are not funny, the dialogue is juvenile, and the violence is gross. DO NOT waste your money!

Another useless review from NYT. Would ya mind mentioning whether or not the film is actually funny, or well-acted, or just lame, or giving us anything more than your scant observations on its supposed connection to current socio-political milieu? We don't really give a fig whether the studio let you screen it in advance.

If people really want "a dark, startlingly bloody journey into the bitter, empty, broken heart of the American middle class, a blend of farce and satire built on a foundation of social despair" with an unparalleled casino sequence I think Albert Brooks' "Lost in America" (1985) still holds the crown. Admittedly, a bit light on the "bloody" bits this gem still coolly eviscerates both the American Dream and those who reject it all while uncomfortably exploring all the things we do to both obtain and hang on to our "nest eggs" and the status that accompanies them. All that and you get a pitch from Albert Brooks in his pajamas (the loser) to Gary Marshall (the house) on "the boldest experiment in advertising history".

Watched the trailer. Put it on my "maybe" list for a long-haul flight.

The notion that bad behavior must be punished was foisted upon the country by the Motion Picture Production Code, which insisted that unwed mothers, gangsters, prostitutes, adulterers, and other characters unpalatable to Christians (who were, of course, the major political force behind the Code) had to suffer for their misdeeds. The big studios negotiated for years over the enforcement of the code, insisting that their audiences did not want to see these "namby-pamby" (I believe that was Joseph Schenck's term) films they were being forced to make which did not reflect the reality of people's lives.

Unfortunately, decades of Code enforcement shaped several generations of American movie-goers, who came to expect that things would always turn out well for the hero and that the villain would get his just desserts.

But, as most of us who have spent any time in the real world know, the bad guys frequently win, and are often rewarded out of all proportion - the shining example being the glorified slumlord and money launderer who now occupies the Oval Office.

The Code is old news, and art is now simply reflecting reality again. If we don't like it, one thing we can do is to stop voting criminals and creeps into office. If we work on developing a better society for all, movies will reflect something better.

Sounds like "Eating Raoul" for the 21st century.

I presume it is no Straight Outta Compton.

Welcome to the age of Trump.

I'm with Mr. Scott on this one. Certainly not a Critics Pick, but over the top, tongue in cheek kind of fun. I laughted a lot. Or perhaps at a time when Trump is President and Christie is wallowing on an NJ beach he closed, I am desperate for any humor at all.

I like your reviews very much Mr. Scott--I look forward to them. And your probably right about this movie.
But you need to get away from this country for a little while.
And, hey, we all do, don't we?

I haven’t seen the movie yet, but as America increasingly becomes a country of unregulated robber barons and their fawning armies of sycophants and slaves, it is nice to see from A.O. Scott’s review that Hollywood seems to be keeping up with the times.

I guess one of the problems not having press screenings is that details can get lost. Although I haven't seen the film, I've seen the trailer, and it's "Buckley" College (which I assume is fictional) and not "Bucknell" as written about here.

I can't imagine the real non-fictional Bucknell is happy about this confusion, so I hope you will fix that, and not have to post this comment.

Our current president is the very embodiment of rewarding bad behavior.

Funny, the Wash Post just out-and-out panned it.

I have yet to see the movie, and I will, so I might be wrong, but I do not think so. Mr. Scott is the best reviewer so when he writes "it is a dark, startlingly bloody journey into the bitter, empty, broken heart of the American middle class" I think he is pulling our leg. The creators of this comedy have likely never even come close to seeing such tragedy.

Big tip off that this movie is bad: it's less than 90 minutes long.

"We're not nice people. You can bet on that." How did Adam Sandler not get cast for a part in this movie?

The aggressive violence in this movie really threw me for a loop. Had to cover my eyes during the finger-chopping scene. Also did not like the scene where two women are beating each other to a bloody pulp. Too bad, as I wanted to like this movie. Stay away.

"there is something admirable in a movie that examines some of the worst aspects of modern American life with blunt, good-humored honesty. We’re not nice people. You can bet on that."

A movie for our time.

Movies have always reflected the American angst. During the Cold War there were many explorations of the potential for nuclear destruction and its results. Art reflecting society with a graphic reality. Most of these movies tried to maintain some moral anchor in the face of the apocalypse. This movie sounds like a reflection of these disaster films from the 50s and 60s but without any moral underpinning. It is reflecting a society that is imploding not exploding. In many ways it sounds even more frightening.

I'll reserve judgment until I've seen it but the idea that everyone cheats and that bad behavior frequently goes unpunished is nothing new and not necessarily realistic, let alone commendable. Witness the recent and atrocious "Rough Night," an alleged comedy in which a cadre of gal-pals accidentally kill a man they believe to be a hired stripper and spend the rest of the film trying to cover up the crime and get rid of the body. The girls' behavior is disgraceful by any standard of decency but the filmmakers are so flummoxed as to how to play it for laughs that the movie seems less cynical than downright vile. There were good actors involved in that one, too, but about all one could feel on their behalf was pity.

Your review inspires me to see a movie I'd have otherwise overlooked. The social reflection you claim for "The House" is a snap shot of our moment, with a greedy, voracious ruling class, a middle class hopelessly stuck in terrible compromises, a working class manipulated by infotainment to vote against its own best interest, a criminalized underclass, and a business ideology that permeates everything and reduces those in every class two social roles, as you write, "predator and prey."

I saw this movie today. We love Amy and Will, and know they are funny. However, this was a total disappointment. Yes, there are some good jokes and I laughed here and there, and you know I don't mind serious cursing at all, but I felt they really overdid it, like they were trying to be cool or something. A waste of time really, wait for it on cable or go see Baby Driver, which is pretty good.

Amy Pohler is a brilliant comedian & actress and if you have never seen Will Ferrell in 'Your Welcome America' you owe to yourself to find it and be astonished at his nuanced & revelatory performance.