Anchorman Film Review
It is difficult to say what makes something funny, but pretty easy to tell what is not. This film clearly is not.
I have previously talked about how inconsistent the characters were; this is a trait of poor films and TV shows, including the woeful series of movies directed by Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer, which includes such cinematic rot as Date Movie (2006) and Epic Movie (2007). In Anchorman, the randomness and wackiness is not the inherent problem. The problem is that the characters and their world were not established as such. Films often require you to suspend your disbelief: Steve Carell’s idiot character Brick should by no right have a job on a news show, but we allow it for the sake of the comedy, just like we accept that Laurel and Hardy manage to find new jobs every week despite their awful work record. This is all right. Completely changing a character from how they have been established in the beginning without good reason is not.
Burgundy was introduced as a James Bond in the introductory voice-over, but the film failed to show it, and continued with this theme with all of its characters. Oddly, the Bond-like character appeared in a few scenes: when Vince Vaughn’s rival news team appeared, Burgundy was able to put them down successfully with his smug words, which fit the character of the introduction (although the argument basically came down to a childish “We’re better than you”). Burgundy ended up an amalgamation of three characters: the Bond, the buffoon, and Ferrell as himself. The Bond appeared rarely, despite him being the character who should have been present throughout.
The buffoon took a leading role and became increasingly irritating, especially with his “comedy voice” which I suppose was meant to make the things he said funnier. One gag I’m sure Ferrell thoroughly enjoyed was, “discovered by the Germans in 1904, they named it San Diego, which of course in German means a whale's vagina.” Ha ha, he said vagina! Saying “vagina” was unnecessary; I think the joke would have been funnier if he had just said “blowhole.” The joke here should have been that he was pretending to be knowledgeable and failing, not that he said “vagina.” A subtler choice would have maintained plausible deniability. No one, not even an idiot, would needlessly say “vagina” if they were trying to impress someone.
Ferrell as himself appeared in any scene that required emotion or romance. He spoke in his own voice, losing his suave affectation or '“comedic” buffoon voice. One scene that was particularly painful to watch took place after he loses his dog and calls the newsroom from a phone booth. The fake crying is too over the top, and not in a funny way, more like a really painfully unfunny way. This was followed by the quote, “I'm in a glass case of emotion!” delivered in that comedy style to suggest it is supposed to be funny and could hopefully turn into a catchphrase. If it was delivered with real emotion, it could have been a funny line, but Ferrell is not the actor this character requires.
Other characters also suffer from major inconsistencies that the writers either did not consider or probably thought would be amusingly ironic. They did not succeed. The news team is introduced individually: Brian Fantana (Paul “Mike from Friends” Rudd) is a ladies’ man, Champ Kind (David “Todd Packer from The Office” Koechner) is a chauvinistic, redneck sports nut with a cowboy hat, and Brick Tamland (The 40 Year Old Virgin & The Office’s Steve Carell) - to put it nicely - has a brick for a brain.
Then, during the rest of the film, Fantana displays little to no success with women (completely disregarding his introduction as a ladies’ man). Champ shows homosexual feelings of love towards Burgundy (despite a scene in which they explain that none of them understands the concept of love). Brick remains consistently mentally challenged, but his introduction has him speaking uncharacteristically clearly to explain that he has an IQ of 48. From that point on he becomes stiff, idiotic, and speaks in short words, which works for the character description, but is an odd departure from how we saw him at the beginning of the film.
Veronica Corningstone (Christina Applegate) is the final leading character, yet another who fails to keep true to their opening description. We first meet her at a party where Ron tries to pick her up with the line, “I want to be on you.” He fails spectacularly as she is not impressed. Neither was I: James Bond would never have said that!
We next see her when (surprise!) she joins the news team, to much dismay, although they all find her attractive and take turns hitting on her. The narration explains that she is used to this sort of thing and does not let it get to her. She brushes off the advances of Brick, Champ, and Fantana, but when Ron tries again and messes up, she tells him that she expected more of him. At this point, I question why she would possibly expect more from the man who said, “I want to be on you.” It is not long before she is inexplicably in love with the man and I am wondering where the strong, self-reliant woman went.
Veronica Corningstone (Christina Applegate) is the final leading character, yet another who fails to keep true to their opening description. We first meet her at a party where Ron tries to pick her up with the line, “I want to be on you.” He fails spectacularly as she is not impressed. Neither was I: James Bond would never have said that!
We next see her when (surprise!) she joins the news team, to much dismay, although they all find her attractive and take turns hitting on her. The narration explains that she is used to this sort of thing and does not let it get to her. She brushes off the advances of Brick, Champ, and Fantana, but when Ron tries again and messes up, she tells him that she expected more of him. At this point, I question why she would possibly expect more from the man who said, “I want to be on you.” It is not long before she is inexplicably in love with the man and I am wondering where the strong, self-reliant woman went.
Another major player is Ed Harken (Fred Willard), the station manager. Unfortunately, this role suffers from Willard’s acting phase of appearing in anything and phoning in his performance. The rest of the film plays like a “spot the celebrity” game in which we are invited to point and laugh at the familiar faces popping up in unusual places in strange outfits. Ben Stiller as a Spaniard! Ha ha ha no.
The plot goes pretty much like this: boy meets girl, boy gets girl, boy and girl break up for a stupid reason, boy and girl reconcile. Yeah, that story you’ve seen a million times in pretty much every film; the story that is usually attached to another more interesting story. In my opinion, more attention should have been paid to the news team rivalries, which are played out like gang warfare. That was an interesting concept, but they did nothing with it except tack it on as a joke. And that is all there is to say about that.
Another change I would have made would be the scene in which Burgundy speaks to his dog Baxter. I almost found this amusing, but they overloaded the scene with punch lines. What would have been better is if they had taken the separate jokes and dotted them throughout the film, instead of squeezing them all into one bit.
The subtitle of the film is “The Legend of Ron Burgundy.” Nothing he did during his run-of-the-mill romance story was in the least bit legendary. He was introduced as San Diego’s number one news reporter, but that was it. Unfortunately, even this was not done well. As viewers, we have no idea why he is the best. All we see are bloopers and some audience responses to him being on-screen.
I would have liked to see him show us that he was the best by watching one of his reports. Take Bruce Almighty for instance. Jim Carrey plays Bruce, a charming, funny reporter who does not get the chance to prove himself as a serious journalist. We actually see this through watching him in action reporting a story. We are not told this by a narrator and expected to accept it. We are not expected to continue to accept it despite watching a series of blunders, and being let in on the knowledge that all he does is read from the auto-cue.
I found out after watching this that I had seen the unrated version with extra scenes. Presumably, the filmmakers thought these would be the scenes that fans would respond to most, but they did little for me. All they added was more swearing and toilet humour. In conclusion, comedy writers and filmmakers need to read through the scripts after they have written them, to see if they make sense and are actually funny before they go ahead and film them. Will Ferrell is not a talented man.
Comprehension Questions
What is the author's opinion of the film mentioned in the text?
What does the author say is easy to tell about something that is not funny?
According to the text, what is a trait of poor films and TV shows?
Who are the directors mentioned that the author criticizes?
Why does the author say that inconsistency in characters is a problem in the film?
What is an example given in the text of a character whose job doesn't make sense but is accepted for the sake of comedy?
How does the author describe Ron Burgundy's character in the beginning of the film?
What does the author criticize about Ron Burgundy's character in the film?
How does the author describe the buffoon character played by Will Ferrell?
What joke does the author criticize in the text and suggest an alternative for?
How does the author describe Ferrell's acting in emotional scenes?
What inconsistency does the author point out about the characters of Brian Fantana and Champ Kind?
What inconsistency does the author point out about the character Brick Tamland?
How does the author describe Veronica Corningstone's character in the beginning of the film?
How does the author describe Veronica's attitude towards advances from her colleagues?
What change in Veronica's character does the author criticize?
Who plays the station manager in the film, and how does the author describe his performance?
According to the text, what aspect of the film could have been more interesting and explored further?
How does the author describe the plot of the film?
What does the author suggest about the scene where Ron Burgundy speaks to his dog?
How does the author criticize the portrayal of Ron Burgundy as a legendary news reporter?
How does the author compare Ron Burgundy to another character in a different film?
What version of the film did the author watch, and what additional content did it include?
What suggestion does the author have for comedy writers and filmmakers?
What is the author's opinion of Will Ferrell as an actor? Why?
Answers
The author's opinion of the film mentioned in the text is negative.
The author states that it is easy to tell what is not funny.
Inconsistency in characters is mentioned as a trait of poor films and TV shows.
The directors mentioned and criticized by the author are Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer.
The author argues that inconsistency in characters is a problem because the characters and their world were not properly established.
The author gives the example of Steve Carell's character, Brick, who has a job on a news show despite being an idiot.
Ron Burgundy's character is introduced as a James Bond-like character in the beginning of the film.
The author criticizes the fact that Ron Burgundy's character does not consistently reflect the James Bond-like character established in the beginning.
The buffoon character played by Will Ferrell is described as becoming increasingly irritating, especially with his "comedy voice."
The author criticizes the joke about San Diego meaning "a whale's vagina" and suggests that the joke would have been funnier if the word "blowhole" was used instead.
The author criticizes Ferrell's fake crying and delivery of the line "I'm in a glass case of emotion!" in an unfunny way.
Brian Fantana is inconsistent in his success with women, and Champ Kind shows homosexual feelings towards Burgundy, despite earlier explanations about their lack of understanding of love.
The author points out that Brick Tamland speaks uncharacteristically clearly in the beginning of the film to explain his low IQ, but later becomes stiff, idiotic, and speaks in short words.
Veronica Corningstone is described as a strong, self-reliant woman when she is first introduced.
Veronica brushes off advances from Brick, Champ, and Fantana but expects more from Ron Burgundy, despite his inappropriate pick-up line.
The author criticizes the fact that Veronica inexplicably falls in love with Ron Burgundy, which is seen as a departure from her initially strong character.
Ed Harken is played by Fred Willard, and the author describes his performance as lacking effort.
The author suggests that the news team rivalries could have been explored further and treated as an interesting concept.
The author describes the plot of the film as a typical romance story that follows the pattern of boy meets girl, boy gets girl, boy and girl break up, and boy and girl reconcile.
The author suggests that the jokes in the scene where Ron Burgundy speaks to his dog should have been spread throughout the film instead of being concentrated in one scene.
The author criticizes Ron Burgundy's portrayal as a legendary news reporter and mentions that the film fails to show why he is considered the best.
The author compares Ron Burgundy to Bruce, a character played by Jim Carrey in the film Bruce Almighty, and suggests that Bruce's skills as a reporter are demonstrated through action, not just narration.
The author watched the unrated version of the film with extra scenes that included more swearing and toilet humour.
The author suggests that comedy writers and filmmakers should review their scripts to ensure they make sense and are actually funny before filming them.
The author's opinion of Will Ferrell as an actor is negative, describing him as untalented.
