Buy posters from this movie

It’s now 2003 and moviegoers have every right to expect that they’ve evolved past the leering and astonishingly stupid humor of a Sorority Boys – but here it is all the same. Were it not for a few modern references, I’d place a large bet that Sorority Boys had been sitting in a vault somewhere for the last 15 years. But while even the cheesiest T&A flick often had aspirations of a message or a point (OK, no they didn’t), Wally Wolodarsky’s Sorority Boys seems nothing more than a bloated and outdated pastiche of tired slapstick, obvious misogyny and painfully unfunny smarm.

The director used to be a producer for The Simpsons. Then he moved on to this, thereby proving that taking a massive step backwards is a worthwhile career move only if you get paid gobs of money. I approached the film in a goofy good mood, hoping to be tickled by some low-rent jiggle humor. My charity was wasted. So astonishingly unfunny is what’s on display here that I’m sincerely astounded that this movie ever saw the inside of a multiplex. (Not only that but it also grossed just over $10 million bucks, thereby proving that there are some states in the union that allow house pets to buy movie tickets.)

The plot is familiar to anyone with a TV, phone or eyeballs: three misfit college boys must dress as women and infiltrate a sorority. That reading the previous sentence took less than 2 seconds and that this movie clocks in at over 90 minutes should give you a clear indication as to how much tedious filler is on display in Sorority Boys, but tedium’s far from the biggest problem.

Why is it that grown adults, people who’ve most likely worked DAMN hard to get a gig in the movie business, are consistently under the false impression that dildoes are funny? Just the very sight of a big rubber wiener seems certain to cause audience hysteria. I simply don’t get it. Sorority Boys is way too infantile for even an immature grown up to enjoy and it’s certainly too vulgar for the pre-teen audience…which leaves the keening teenagers as the main demographic for dreck like this.

I don’t blame the audience; when teenagers are looking for a movie to go see, they generally have very limited options. Those options generally include shitpiles like Sorority Boys, Slackers and Van Wilder. What’s a socially minded 17-year-old to do? If he wants to hang with his pals and maybe get a little closer to that pretty redhead from biology class, the movies represent the most common entertainment option. Then they look in the paper and go “Hmmm, Stealing Harvard or The Hot Chick?” In other words, studios will always earn the Teen Dollar regardless of quality – which is why we get so many godawful Teen Flicks. (Crap is easier to produce than is quality.)

So yeah: three doddering morons stumble through a sorority house while (poorly) made up as women. The flick features a half-dozen wholly hateful jabs on women and then hopes to make up for it during a pathetically contrived finale. (Gotta love when the slapstick poop humor suddenly turns into a treacly scene of mock sincerity.) The actors range from entirely forgettable to biblically annoying and only the quirky actress Heather Matarazzo (who really ought to know better) remains from this crater unscathed.

For every five Teen Flicks made back in the 80’s, we were treated to something like "Revenge of the Nerds" or even a "Better Off Dead". This new trend offers none of that; the swill keeps on pouring out while the next inevitable "American Pie" sequel stands as the high-water mark. Surely our teenaged movie freaks deserve a little better than that.

link directly to this review at https://www.efilmcritic.com/review.php?movie=5809&reviewer=128
originally posted: 05/04/04 10:37:24
 printer-friendly format