The Darwin Awards (2006)

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

This is a hit and miss comedy with four or five hysterical scenes and four or five too confused to be funny scenes. It has some sharply original moments, but it also copies too much from the television series "Monk" The television series "Pushing Daisies" also seems to have elements in common.It actually could have been good as a television series. Joseph Fiennes is much better here than he was on "Flash Forward". At least here, he laughs and shows some human emotions. Winona Ryder gives wonderful support as usual.There are lots of stars here, but unfortunately there parts are only four or five minutes each. It is nice to see people like Nora Dunn and Juliet Lewis who don't work enough these days.Sadly, this was Chris Penn's last major film. He accidentally died of a massive heart attack brought on by drugs like cocaine, and over-eating steaks and chocolate milk shakes at the rather young age of 40. It is quite ironic that his last major work should be a film about the stupid ways that people die. Not to be cruel, as Penn was a wonderful actor, but his death could be added quite easily to the five or six ridiculous deaths and accidents that the movie chronicles.My favorite scene in the movie is the one at the Metallica concert. I have a feeling that Heavy Metal music fans often win Darwin Awards (awards for bizarre and stupid deaths).There's a good selection of popular songs on the soundtrack.If you don't expect too much in the way of coherence and can get into the silly spirit of the film, it can be enjoyable.Incidentally, you should keep watching to the end of the credits for one last joke at the end.

Even with one of the great casts in the history of low-budget cinema, The Darwin Awards demonstrates that if you don't know the difference between having a great premise and having a real point, you can only make a mediocre film.Michael Burrows (Joseph Fiennes) is an obsessive and neurotic criminal profiler for the San Francisco police department who loses his job when he lets a serial killer escape. Desperate and broke, he decides to see if he can making a living off his personal obsession with so-called "Darwin Awards". The title refer to incidents where people kill themselves in such spectacularly stupid ways that they arguably improve the human gene pool by taking themselves out of it. Burrows offers his services to a life insurance company, offering to save them millions of dollars in payouts by discovering when people's own idiocy is responsible for their demise. Burrows is teamed up with Siri Taylor (Winona Ryder), a veteran claims investigator who doubts Burrows' behavioral theories can substitute for her more practical approach.As Burrows and Taylor drive around the Western United States investigating "Darwin Award" cases, like the guy who welded a rocket on the back of his car, the guy who went ice fishing with dynamite and the people who thought a motor home's cruise control was the same as a plane's autopilot, the story dabbles in a bit of romantic comedy, Burrows' fixation on the killer who got away from him and the possibility that Burrows' obsession is turning him into his own potential "Darwin Award" winner. The movie eventually winds back up in San Francisco, where our two heroes track down the escaped serial killer through the use of a tourist guide book and a final scene that takes the laws of physics, wraps them up in a pretty bow and fires them into the Sun.The Darwin Awards would make a great premise for a very, very darkly comedic series on HBO. Investigating the absurdly moronic behavior that results in Rube Goldbereque death and injury would be a great formula for a black hearted TV show where you could ladle social commentary and some romantic tension between Burrows and Taylor on top of whatever imbecilic and unintentional suicide they're looking into that week.As a 90 minute film, however, The Darwin Awards is never more than mildly amusing because it never figures out what is the point of its story. Are we supposed to laugh at these stupid people? Are we supposed to laugh at Burrows for thinking he's any different from them? Is the movie trying to shame us for finding humor in the deaths of others? Is the story about death by stupidity or is it about the unavoidable but tragic risks that exist in normal life, like slipping in the shower and breaking your neck? Is the audience supposed to learn that they can't get too wrapped up in the fates of other people? Does writer/director Finn Taylor want to make a point about how society treats people on the low end of the economic and educational scale? The truth is that this movie tries to make all of those points and a few more, resulting in an unfocused and meandering story that ultimately makes no point at all. It also doesn't help that the movie mixes traditional filming with mockumentary footage without any rhyme or reason.Though it's fundamentally flawed and hampered by Taylor's inability to tell a straightforward joke if his life depended on it, The Darwin Awards still manages to be halfway decent. That's mostly due to the deadpan performance of Joseph Fiennes and the adultly adorable Winona Ryder. They create and sustain appealing characters even as the story never lives up to their acting. And any film that features the Mythbusters can't be all bad.If you'd like a lighthearted take on a very dark subject that you'll enjoy more the less you think about it, go rent The Darwin Awards.

The Darwin Awards was too well written for the substandard acting of Winona Ryder and Joseph Fiennes who were very privileged to be given the main roles. It was full of funny concepts, twists, and turns; but fell short of the gut-busting laughter that I had hoped for. I can say, however, that I won't forget the movie because the back-up casting was excellent and helped keep my attention between nodding off and hovering my finger over the "stop" button on my remote. I wouldn't necessarily recommend this movie to a friend as a "good" movie to watch, but rather something to watch if someone is home sick on a Friday night with either this or "Nanny Dearest" to choose from to keep them remotely distracted from fever, chills, and general discomfort...such as I did.

It seemed a bit disjointed. I plan to watch it a couple more times, but I'm only writing this after the 1st viewing and I was mostly going 'Huh?' through the plot related bits. Partly because the actors were mumbling, and partly because I suspect there was a lot edited out that shouldn't have been. Y'know, so it fit into the typical 90 minute format.I've read nearly all of the darwin award incidences portrayed (as well as those that didn't qualify 'cos no one got killed, like the dense eurotrash girl that didn't understand cruise control). All of them were hilariously done. Or maybe I need to see a psychiatrist.Anyway, I LOVE intelligent, well thought out films you need to watch a few times to really 'get'. Warner Ho's- uh I mean, Bro's, have really found the sweet spot with their usual Batman films and so on. They always get good reviews 'cos they're so moronic, you only have to watch them once, but if you're the type thats utterly bored of that stuff, go see this instead.I laughed so hard at the frontmen of Mythbusters as illegal weapons dealers, I think it just cured my lung cancer. +1 point.And then there's the whole homicide investigator that faints at the sight of blood thing. +1 point. Mostly for not dwelling on it so long that it became annoyingly stupid. That could have been a disaster, but it was handled well. In fact, it was so well done, that I wonder if a lot of previous reviewers even saw the irony in it.And so on... In short; it's not 'Dr. Strangelove' brilliant, because it will age very fast (although I bet you a million bucks 'ol Stanley didn't think of that either, at the time), but it's pretty good now.