Sir Stewart Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 I'm curious as to whether anyone else came out of Pineapple Express with the feeling that it is an anti-pot smoking film.I thoroughly enjoyed it, laughed like crazy and by halfway through, I wondered how I would make it through the rest of the weekend without wanting to get high.But by the time I was walking out (after the Huey Lewis & the News (!) title song end credits), I felt no desire to toke up. Why?Well, consider the argument/break-up scene between the two leads. Seth Rogan's character says that the reason they're in this mess is because of weed. James Franco's character (about to light his pipe) disagrees, and they (temporarily) go their separate ways.Unless I'm mistaken (I'd like to see it again to be sure), that's the last time anyone smokes up for the rest of the film. Not only is there no more getting high, but by the end, the entire underground stash is destroyed and all of the bigtime drug dealers (the bad guys) are dead. The sole survivors are our two (or three) heroes - who now have no connections, and don't exactly ride off into the sunset looking to get high. Not that any of this makes the film any less funny or enjoyable, it just seems odd that a film billed (and reported on widely) as a 'stoner comedy' could possibly have the ultimate message that pot messes up one's life. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JUDE Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 I haven't seen this nor am I really into the pot. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
myboyblue Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 I haven't seen it but I read that the director is actually anti-pot (don't recall if it was Judd Apatow?). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aricandover Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 saw it yesterday, and I feel like I should've waited for it to be on HBO. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JUDE Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 The only thing I really know about this film is that it's supposedly based upon the Brad Pitt stoner character from True Romance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reni Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 I disliked this movie so much, it pains me to analyze it. So, I won't. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JerseyMike Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 It was a cute movie, but when I left the theater, few of the jokes stuck with me. Luckily, I didn't have to pay for the movie. I did see a screening of Tropic Thunder, and that was hilarious. Robert Downey Jr. should take home the Oscar! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted August 11, 2008 Author Share Posted August 11, 2008 This thread is going great! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aricandover Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 This thread is going great! great job. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 So, what you Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted August 11, 2008 Author Share Posted August 11, 2008 great job. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 This thread is going great!Listen, buddy--fuck you. Probably. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
alison the wilca Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 this movie would have been way better if there were no actual murder/big time crime. if maybe they had thought they had seen a crime committed and then were running around paranoid the whole time, i would have liked it a lot more. i hated how serious some of the stuff was and i really didn't like rosie perez's character. And what happened with the girlfriend and her family? they never really wrapped that up. plus, there was no heart in that story line. maybe more interaction between the family and seth rogen would have made for a more light hearted film. there were some great funny things in this movie, but it was really missing something. as someone who can't even stand the smell of pot, i still find it quite funny to watch people be goofy. why couldn't it have been more goofy?! i did catch the anti-pot message as well, but i think those "above the influence" ads do a much better job. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 James Franco stole the movie. And SS, that's actually a pretty interesting idea there, but I don't think it's a very obvious message if it's there. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted August 11, 2008 Author Share Posted August 11, 2008 I'm surprised at peoples' reactions in this thread - I thought the film was hilarious. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aricandover Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 They had a funny little thing going for about 40 minutes, then it all went to shit. and Rosie Perez was useless, they could have left her out and the movie would have been the same. She's the Jar Jar Binks of stoner films. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reni Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 They had a funny little thing going for about 40 minutes, then it all went to shit. that was about my assessment of it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TCP Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 WHAT!This was the funniest movie I've seen since, yep, Superbad. Loved the relationship that built up around Seth Rogen and James Franco. My only problem is they never wrapped up the story line about him and his girlfriend... But regardless, it was worth the 10 dollars, for being absolutely hilarious while still having a lot of heart. As for the anti-pot smoking movie, I could see what you mean but I don't think they drove that message home enough for it to be considered "anti-pot"... cause I left wanting to smoke a bowl Quote Link to post Share on other sites
benjamin Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 WHAT!This was the funniest movie I've seen since, yep, Superbad. Loved the relationship that built up around Seth Rogen and James Franco. My only problem is they never wrapped up the story line about him and his girlfriend... But regardless, it was worth the 10 dollars, for being absolutely hilarious while still having a lot of heart. As for the anti-pot smoking movie, I could see what you mean but I don't think they drove that message home enough for it to be considered "anti-pot"... cause I left wanting to smoke a bowl I thought it wasn't that good at all. Feels like it was thrown together too quickly to benefit off of Knocked Up and Superbad. Pineapple is not nearly in the same district as those 2. I didn't laugh all that much and I wish I waited for video. Sigh.... I miss Freaks & Geeks Quote Link to post Share on other sites
augurus Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 I expected more form a Judd Apatow movie. They movie doesn't stick to any themes and hugs the friendship one way too tight even though their argument has plenty of holes. The movie jerked some moderate laughs from me. Red (Danny McBride) should have died very early. What happened to calling Angie? So are we to assume that Dale Denton is also not a good friend? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 I'm surprised at peoples' reactions in this thread - I thought the film was hilarious. dude, if it makes you feel any better...i agree with you. granted, i haven't actually seen the film yet and i'm just being nice because your a pal and all...but i agree with you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
the carlos Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 we are going to see it this week and I've decided based on this thread that I will walk away from the film with the distinct feeling that it was an anti-pot film. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 Rogen doesn't think so:AVC: In a lot of movies with stoner characters, there's a scene at the end where the smoker throws away the pot, to symbolize that they've changed. Was there ever any pressure for you to do that, to have an arc that was a little more "redemptive"? SR: There was from Judd. If you ask Judd, he sees this as an anti-weed movie. I don't know what movie he's watching. [Laughs.] I can't imagine any outcome for this movie other than people watching it and wanting to smoke weed. But I think that's a testament to the fact that we really didn't put in any strong message when it comes to the weed. They don't say, "Hey, everyone should go smoke weed," they don't say "Hey, no one should." Each character deals with it in their own way. There is no definitive conclusion about it. Because again, to us, that's not what the movie is about. It's not about "Will these guys stop smoking weed?" It's about "Will they be friends with one another?" So we didn't feel like that was an issue that needed to be addressed, really. And we purposely didn't. Yeah, Judd definitely Quote Link to post Share on other sites
radiokills Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 i liked forgetting sarah marshall Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.