THE ROOM

Tommy Wiseau is a living legend.

His debut film “The Room” was first released in 2003 on Sunset Boulevard, at the Laemmle Sunset 5 Theater, advertised as a drama in the vein of Tennessee Wiliams’ work.

The film concerns a man named Johnny (Wiseau) living with his fiancée, Lisa, who decides to cheat on Johnny with his best friend Mark. The ensuing drama builds to a destructive climax in which the lives of all involved are shattered. It’s a timeless tragedy into which Wiseau poured his soul.

Moviegoers responded positively. It was released on DVD in 2005, made its network premiere this year as the annual Adult Swim April Fool’s Day joke and just concluded a brief run at Ciné. With such a following, how can the film be anything but brilliant?

It is a brilliant film, but not in the way Wiseau intended.

Moviegoers are hardly moved by Johnny’s plight. Instead, the audience erupts into laughter from the very first scene. There are so many things to find humorous in “The Room”: Wiseau’s inexplicable Eastern European accent, the weird combination of his shaggy black hair and bodybuilder’s physique, and the awkward delivery of some truly inexplicable dialogue, (“Keep your stupid comments in your pocket!” yells one character).

It is difficult to talk about this film without spoiling the delightful lines or bizarre quirks that make the experience riotous. If one looks at “The Room” as a serious drama, it appears to have gone wrong in every possible way. Every cliché of what moviegoers call bad filmmaking is fulfilled in “The Room,” yet it’s incredibly popular. The midnight screenings in Hollywood still draw huge crowds. People line up for blocks to see the film that has been called the “Citizen Kane” of bad movies.

The out-and-out hilarity of Wiseau’s unintentional comedic masterpiece is unmatched.

This all begs the question, though: What is a “bad” film? If “The Room” brings more laughter and enlivens an audience more than any critically acclaimed comedy in years, how can it be so bad?

Wiseau’s intention was clearly to make a film about how women can destroy men’s lives – although he has embraced his infamy and claims that the comedy was intentional all along – but the script offers no insight into relationships or gender roles. Of course not.

Wiseau’s film is a work of art, but not one to be watched with an eye for emotional gravitas or insight. The movie stands on its own as a new breed of comedy. With the consistent laughter this film provokes, it is hard to believe that the comedy was unintentional.

VERDICT: See “The Room.” See it with friends. Enjoy it. A film this fun is more than just “bad.”

- Brendan Boyle

SURROGATES

Movies about future societies and their technologies have reappeared and even plagued pop culture ever since Fritz Lang’s 1927 release of “Metropolis.”

This decade’s additions, such as “Minority Report,” “I, Robot” and “AI: Artificial Intelligence,” have all succeeded in recreating the original mystique of “Metropolis,” and are even more accurate in their portrayals of the future due to being released much closer to the future in question.

Unfortunately, this past weekend’s release of “Surrogates” was not a step forward in sci-fi history.

Unlike its predecessors such as “Minority Report,” which were adapted from novels or short stories, “Surrogates” is based on a graphic novel. The lack of textual back-story is most likely responsible for the movie’s weak plot.

Great sci-fi movies have used their futuristic settings to stage interesting stories about complex characters who must cope with the dangers of living in corporation or government-controlled societies.

“Surrogates” is not about interesting characters, but is instead about commercialized surrogates that people use as alternate, improved bodies.

The concept is interesting, but the film does not spend much time explaining surrogacy to the viewer. Instead, it spends more time focusing on a simplistic and boring investigation of a murder.

Bruce Willis’s character, Tom Greer, merely wanders from scene to scene, only motivated to solve the murder.

Slowly, Greer’s investigation leads him to discover one person’s plan to destroy the surrogate population, causing the Earth’s people to start living as humans again.

The surrogate population and special effects merely act as futuristic motifs that prop up a simplistic, clichéd plot. Ultimately, the theme of natural humanity triumphing over a synthetic alternate would seem to make the movie deep or profound, but it comes across as predictable and contrived and is the central weakness of the movie.

VERDICT: “Surrogates” will definitely be forgotten in the next year, especially as James Cameron’s “Avatar” will overpower “Surrogates” as this year’s best surrogate-inspired sci-fi movie.

- Matt Evans