Death at a Funeral (2010) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
173 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Remake
allanmichael309 September 2019
Watch english version and then you see how its a dirrect copy but not as good.
17 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
It has its fair share of funny moments, but does not live up to the original
Jackpollins19 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
It's unfortunate watching a talented cast not live up to their considerable talents. This is why Death At A Funeral, a remake of the 2007 British farce is so unfortunate. While the funny, talented cast does what they can and produce their fair share of laughs, they don't live up to their considerable talents nor does the film live up to its original. I think the reason I actually kind of enjoyed this is because I view the 2007 version and this version as two completely different films, but it's hard not to compare the 2 if you walk into this version having already seen the 2007 version. I'm happy that this story is getting a wider audience because the script is brilliant. A cast including Martin Lawrence, Regina Hall, Columbus Short, Chris Rock, Zoe Saldana, Luke Wilson, Danny Glover, Peter Dinklage, Keith David, Loretta Divine, Ron Glass, Tracy Morgan, James Marsden, and Kevin Hart create a better than average comedy, but not the comedy this talented cast could of created. I really liked the cast and did laugh at this more than at something like, say, The Bounty Hunter. I'm sure a lot of people are gonna like this, but, unless you have not seen the original, and in that case, do not know there was an original, you can wait for video, or better yet, skip it.
40 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Very Unfunny
murdakillemall17 April 2010
I had a feeling this movie wouldn't be funny at all. The previews didn't look funny but some family members wanted to see it so off we go to watch it.

For being a "comedy" I don't remember laughing at all. I guess most of the "funny" stuff is when people make mistakes in the movie. Acting was average, comedians weren't funny, but if you are a fan of slapstick movies, you may like this one.

Now, I like some slapstick actions in some comedies but to me even this one had bad or too much slapstick. I don't ever remember falling asleep at a comedy but I fell asleep at this one.

The movie could have played out the same way with a much cheaper cast but then again, maybe no one would have watched it.
51 out of 104 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Uninspired remake of a great comedy
Gordon-1115 August 2010
This film is about the funeral of a family man. the funeral turns out to be very eventful with many surprises.

"Death at a Funeral" is almost the same as the British original, be it the title or the plot. The British one was really funny, I remember myself laughing very hard when I watched it. This remake, is mildly funny, but it is just in a different league. It uses cheap humour to make people laugh, and it lacks the witty dialog of the original. Moreover, characters are less sympathetic and more annoying in this remake. Despite a few funny moments, I would stay "Death at a Funeral" is an uninspired remake of a great comedy.

Maybe filmmakers will bear in mind that remaking such a recent film in the same language with the same plot is not such a good idea, as it will inevitably draw comparisons between the original and the remake.
78 out of 94 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A farcical film with a measured tempo where every gag works.
toqtaqiya28 November 2010
Death At A Funeral is easily one of the funniest films I've seen in months. Those looking for something hilarious should definitely see it. It's a simple film; just a series of events and misunderstandings at a funeral. All these lead to real chaos, however. The physical and even the spoken humour is well executed. The whole cast deliver solid performances. The script is surprisingly good for a film like this. Add to this a fitting ending, and you've got one satisfying comedy. There's some gross humour, but unlike recent gross-out comedies the stuff here actually works and doesn't feel unpleasant. In addition, most gags contribute to later events in the story. Death At A Funeral is a solid Hollywood product with a star cast that manages to make every star worthwhile. It doesn't break any new ground, but it's truly hilarious.
20 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A Decent remake with Very Funny Moments
cinemaofdreams18 April 2010
I am truly astonished at the average rating this film is getting on this site. This is not a great movie but it is a good movie with some genuine laughs. I enjoyed this far more than Date Night, which was also good and had a few laughs. I think Hollywood needs some lessons on comic timing and the such. Truthfully, this could have been a far better movie but when it works it works very well. Neil Labute demonstrates that he is a very competent director. The film is well paced, and the acting is from good to very good. It does not turn into a blacksploitation comedy at any time. So, OK it is not a masterpiece but it is worthy of a far higher rating than it is getting here.
20 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
See The English Originl
jkurtz556 December 2018
This lacks all the wonderful English sense of irony. That version was laugh out loud funny. This version doesn't work,
54 out of 62 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
"Fun at American Funerals"
Kamurai2522 September 2020
Really good watch, would watch again, and can recommend.

This is a remake of the 2007 "Death at a Funeral" which was English where as this is the black / american version. Personally, this was very large shoes to fill only 3 years after the original.

Surprisingly, the movie is almost beat for beat the original, and they even got Peter Dinklage to reprise the same role (apparently a rare thing to do in the industry), which begs why they didn't get Alan Tudyk, also American, to reprise his role (and my fav from the original). James Marsden tries to put his personal spin on it, but it does look like he is very much imitating Tudyk for the most part.

Luke Wilson replaces the Scottish role, being the only other white actor which says more about how the English take to the Scots as out of sorts than anything. It's a stupid thing: the whole world should get along better.

This is an awesome cast: Zoe Saldana, Chris Rock, Martin Lawrence, Danny Glover (probably my favorite in this one), Tracey Morgan, Kevin Hart, and Keith David. And they're all fantastic, even the people I'm less familiar with were on point. So I do give this version points for better casting and bigger personalities.

The movie is a little brighter, a little more fun with the characters, but it's still the same great, funny story.

I wouldn't blame you for watching one over the other, but I still like the original better, mostly for Alan Tudyk.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
A pointless remake of an excellent British film.
NorthernDragon25 May 2010
Despite having double the budget and some pretty big Hollywood stars the 2010 release adds nothing whatsoever, and in fact is in many ways inferior.

Not only are there some very lacklustre performances in particular from Chris Rock and Martin Lawrence as the two sons of the deceased, but the camera work in some sections is truly awful with the decision to use "handheld" or steadicam photography resulting in the picture shaking so badly in some sections that it is almost hard to watch.

Despite all this many of the best moments of the original are copied perfectly and work just as well as they did the first time around meaning that there are several good laughs to be had, but when you've got the choice of watching this or the original there's really no contest.

Distinctly average.
189 out of 231 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Comedy Repeat
sebell19177 October 2018
Sorry guys, but in this day and age I get my laughs where and when I can, so I'm going to disagree with most reviews. Granted this remake wasn't as good as the original but it still made me laugh out loud and glad to see Peter Dinklage return in his role as the dad's squeeze.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Why why why
tori_mills12 February 2019
Completely pointless remake

The original British version was perfect.... This remake is appalling
40 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Unrated laugh out loud comedy
Macleanie2 July 2019
I should start off by saying that this is the only version I have seen of this title. It is totally underrated though and I have watched it several times and it never fails to make me laugh out loud! Its silly fun but non stop chaos which makes you feel awkward. Its got a host of stars who all play their part. Theres some good humour in here and its light hearted. Its a comedy I would recommend to anyone and everyone.
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
An average comedy
MihaiSorinToma27 August 2017
A family reunion at a father's funeral is going to turn very nasty as everyone holds a secret who's unveiling will leave deep marks on the others.

It's a comedy which besides having a good idea and being very funny provides nothing else than a big disappointment. You see, everything has its limits and when you break them (especially as often as this movie does) you end up with a cavalcade of awkward, stupid and unnecessary situations. It starts very promising and funny but that's about it, degenerating rapidly into scenes and characters which shouldn't have been there, all ending up as exaggerated as it can be. I really was expecting more but hey, there's always a better movie waiting to be seen.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Why?
stillcrows196230 August 2019
Oh, that's right - no talent, thoughts, or creativity left in the world, evidently. And only three years after the original MUCH BETTER film. Next time just file for unemployment if you're that desperate for money. The original is excellent and fruit far too high for the likes of those involved in this wreck.
47 out of 56 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Same basic movie as the 2007 British version, but not nearly as entertaining.
TxMike6 September 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Just over two years ago I saw the 2007 British movie of the same title. I gave it a rating of 8 out of 10, it is a funny and interesting take on a family funeral that turns into a family crisis. It was funny without being "dirty." Meanwhile, I read that this movie was being re-made with an American take, set in Los Angeles, and with American actors and American sensibilities. Reportedly the producers were impressed with the British movie and wanted to re-make it so that a wider American audience would get to see it.

So, curious, I got the DVD of this new movie from my public library, and I watched it yesterday with Natalie, a college student who incidentally has the DVD of the British movie and watched it again just last week.

In quick summary, this American version is nowhere as good or as funny as the British version. The characters' names are changed, and of course the location, but other than that it is pretty much the same movie, but with more toilet humor and more profanity thrown in, neither of which help make it a good movie. Both Natalie and I agreed on this point, and both of us observed that this one doesn't "flow" nearly as well as the British original. The scenes are the same, but the story doesn't flow as well from scene to scene.

So, while the British "Death at a Funeral" is inventive and funny, this American "Death at a Funeral" is just disjointed and profane. Unless a viewer just wants to see a predominantly black family movie, the British movie is superior in every way.
17 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
I was quite entertained by this version of Death at a Funeral
tavm3 May 2010
This is another picture I watched with my movie theatre working friend. It's a remake of a Frank Oz-helmed film for Britain that came out just three years ago. This version was directed by Neil LaBute with a cast that included Chris Rock, Martin Lawrence, Tracy Morgan, Luke Wilson, Zoe Saldana, James Marsden, Peter Dinklage (the only one to reprise his role from the previous version), and Danny Glover. Many of the people I just mentioned provided many good laughs, especially Marsden as a drugged wanderer, though there were also some-pardon the pun-dead spots as well. Still, this was quite an entertaining comedy to me that didn't become too unbelievable in the way things happened. Since I hadn't seen Oz' version, however, I can't compare them yet. So on that note, that's a recommendation for Death at a Funeral.
10 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Death at a Funeral
Scarecrow-8814 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Mega-star line up of African American actors in a highly bizarre comedy directed by Neil Labute(of all people)about the hi-jinx and shenanigans which take place during the day of a patriarch's funeral. Chris Rock and Martin Lawrence are brothers having to contend with a dwarf(Peter Dinklage in a piece of inspired casting)threatening to show a sex photograph of himself with their father! He wants 30 thousand dollars or else their mama will see her husband's dirty little secret(emphasis on little). Loretta Devine is the widow, Keith David the exasperated preacher who just wants to sermonize and move on, interrupted over and over by Rock who has to deal with numerous issues, Zoe Saldana(Avatar; Star Trek)with a lot of problems on her plate(a doctor father who doesn't approve of her boyfriend, the significant other(James Marsden, as you have never seen him before) who reacts crazily to a hallucinogenic drug he believed was a Valium, a former lover(Luke Wilson)interested in a relationship with her, although she knows he just wants pops' money), Regina Hall as Rock's wife who desperately wants a child(even attempting to seduce her husband, not wearing any panties, before the funeral!), and Tracy Morgan as a friend of the family who must cope with the demands of disgruntled, wheel-chair confined retirement home relative, Uncle Russell(Danny Glover who steals every scene he's in, even referencing his most famous character, Murtaugh from LETHAL WEAPON). Marsden's basket-case antics and Glover's brutal honesty are definite highlights, not to mention, the reactions of Rock and Lawrence when they discover daddy's hidden life. Poor Morgan suffers from "pigment mutation" which has him constantly scratching, as well as, being defecated on when his hand gets caught under Glover's ass when he needs to drop a load in the toilet! Marsden thinks the casket of the dearly departed is moving with someone inside and removes all his clothing while recuperating in the bathroom after being told he was given a different kind of drug than Valium! Glover comments truthfully about everything, he's the relative of the family you wish to harness, often saying things without hesitation. Saldana is mostly running around with Christopher Short(as her brother, who whipped up a batch of hallucinogenic pills for a friend, them getting placed in a Valium bottle which finds its way to Marsden)trying to keep Marsden from causing an embarrassing ruckus, quite often unsuccessful. Luke Wilson is Saldana's father's chosen favorite and continues to court her despite her every resistance(he can not take no for an answer when its quite clear she is head-over-heels for Marsden). Rock lives under Lawrence's shadow(Lawrence is a successful author, although it's established that he isn't exactly a very good one)and wants to be a writer despite the lack of talent, yet as a "tax man", he's carved out a fine life for himself and Regina(Rock is the one who helped pay the bills, including the funeral expenses while Lawrence was flat broke). Perhaps the gay jokes might turn the stomach of many homosexuals, but its all in good fun and really not *that* harmful(the "little people" are also poked fun at when Dinklage is held captive by Rock and company when he tried to confront the widow about the photographs, plenty of zingers from many of the principles in the cast). Every member of this massive cast get a chance to shine, each with their own little moments. Certainly the comedy is broad and the plot is all over the place, more slapstick and farce than anything else.
6 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Awful remake
schubej-122 March 2019
Recommend passing on this one and watch the original released in 2007. The first version was incredibly funny. This one was barely amusing.
30 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good movie
akhilomanakuttan-9147413 March 2019
Its a good movie having a laught to laugh i enjoyed the movie well all the people in the movie acted so well
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
In a Word, Unnecessary
colinrgeorge27 April 2010
'Unnecessary' is probably the best single word description of Neil LaBute's "Death at a Funeral." I mean, there's really no precedent for the release of a same-language remake a paltry two and a half years after its original, and yet the guest list arrives for this new "Funeral" with almost as fast a turnaround as a Hollywood sequel. Hell, Chris Nolan hibernated on his second "Batman" film longer.

Nevertheless, the reality is that the decidedly Afro-American-friendly version of the dysfunctional family comedy (notable only because it really is the later film's sole distinguishing feature), is now in theaters, leaving anyone who remembers the Frank Oz original to ponder why.

LaBute and star Chris Rock, who also served as a producer on the film, cheekily 'adapt' U.K. writer Dean Craig's screenplay by peppering it with hip-pop pop-culture nods to Usher and R. Kelly, and leaving the rest, in essence, unchanged. On one hand, I appreciate the sentiment in that it doesn't presume to outdo its progenitor, but that's its problem as a standalone piece: it's either identical or inferior in every conceivable way. As such, the majority of its first-time audience will probably appreciate the comedic build-up having not been spoiled on the gags, and that's fine for right now, but it poses a potential dilemma, say, ten years down the road.

When film buffs and historians look back on "Death at a Funeral" (which they honestly have little reason to), the choice between the two versions will be obvious. Plus, they'll have no idea who "Usher" is.

Likewise, even today I'd recommend a rental of the 2007 film over a ticket to its 2010 counterpart, because, well, the original is the original, and for all its faithfulness, the remake actually accentuates what's lost in translation. The pop-culture one-liners clash with the characters on the page, and leave them feeling half-formed and sloppy on the screen—Are we watching Chris Rock do what makes Chris Rock hilarious, or are we seeing him play a repressed, introverted protagonist? The answer, messily, is both.

On that level, there's a creative integrity to the original performances that is impossible in LaBute's version. Martin Lawrence, Danny Glover, Tracey Morgan, Zoe Saldana, Peter Dinklage, Luke Wilson, and others comprise an undeniably talented cast that does an admirable job performing characters that were written as upper-crust Englishmen, but watching Rock sulk his way through the film makes it abundantly clear that they're not being themselves.

There's also the not-so-insignificant matter of LaBute's bland artisanship. In the past, he's been responsible for equally lifeless big-screen adaptations of his own stage plays, and a spectacularly poorly-received remake of "The Wicker Man"—It begs the question, why was he asked and trusted to shepherd this project? There's no single performance in the film that feels particularly informed by his hand, and LaBute fails to bring a single funny idea to the table. In adhering so rigidly to "Funeral" prime, his remake is marked by an absence of directorial and comedic vision.

I have no qualms with anyone who enjoyed "Death at a Funeral" for the first time via the LaBute/Rock version. A lot of what made the British comedy memorable has survived, and even with a jaded precognition of the gags, I mined a couple laughs. However, the fatal flaw of the 2010 adaptation is that the 2007 version exists. It's not like it's antiquated or anything; it's three years old.

Anyone with an open mind can still appreciate the original "Death at a Funeral," and its immediate availability for less than the cost of a night at the movies makes the 2010 remake quintessentially one thing—Unnecessary.
163 out of 217 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
The characters in the film were great and they played well their role
bernardino00215 March 2013
Warning: Spoilers
My movie choice for this assignment is "Death at a Funeral". It is a comedy movie that was telling the story of a family who organized the funeral of their father. Aaron and his wife were not that rich so they live in their father house. Ryan was a successful writer but selfish who did not like to help financially for the expanses of the funeral of their father. For the funeral, many relatives were invited include Oscar who by mistake took a drug instead of a pill so he was embarrassing everybody in the funeral. The mayor characters in the film were Martin Lawrence as Ryan Barnes, Chris Rock as Aaron Barnes, Peter Dinklage as Frank Lovett, James Marsden as Oscar. Aaron organized the funeral of his father when his brother Ryan did not take a serious in the organization of the funeral when he comes there. It is like a funeral was an opportunity for the whole family to come see each other again. At the funeral, uninvited man Frank showed up and threatened Aaron and Ryan to give him a money or he would tell their mother about his relationship between him and their father. Aaron told Ryan to pay him but he refused to do it. Frank got mad and Ryan and Aaron tried to avoid the drama. Ryan and Aaron decided to put him in the coffin with their dad because Frank hit his head on a coffee table and lose conscience. Frank waked up in the coffin and got out and traumatized everybody in the funeral. The characters in the film were great and they played well their role. From the begging to the end of the movie, each character was well engage by presenting their role in the movie. Uncle Russell played the role of entertaining and kept the audience in the mood of laughing. In the film we can see how involving and unique each character was in his role in the movie. The lighting in the movie was great. The light in the movie reinforce the mood of the scene and create an effective visual image. Different camera angles were used in this movie to create and effective sense of visual balance between one shot and another. The camera angles created emotional attitudes in the film. For example when Aaron was delivered his message about his father at the end of the movie, I saw how the camera angle presented that emotional connection in the look of Aaron and other people.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
If you want to enjoy this story...
Go and see the recent original film 'Death at a Funeral,' the British version, hilarious. It is a black comedy, which isn't depressing but is light hearted fun of the almost delicious Charles Addams school of macabre humour.

I can only surmise the US film industry thinks US viewers too thick or insular to watch a comedy in the same language with a (nowadays) slightly different accent.

If you aren't as puddle headed as they've assumed, see the original and laugh yourself sick, as I did. PS it so far has got 7. something on IMDb... enough said, you'll be pleased you did. What's more the whole family can enjoy this one without boring anyone at all let alone to death.
99 out of 132 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
OMG, This was funny as hell
dennismonares5103 July 2019
Not sure why all the hate, this was one of the funniest movies I have seen. I guess I'll have to check out the original.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Entertaining
pogirlshines30 March 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I will start with the fact that I did not like the original at all. I see other reviewers loved it. Not a fan of British comedy and thought the premise odd and childish.**Spoiler***Think the premise of killing someone, accidental or not and disposing of the body as humor is flat out insane and shows a lack of compassion that is typical of modern movies and plots.****This cast brought some life to a story line I did not care for. The original left me cold, no laughs, this remake was hysterical! This was a huge improvement because I could relate to it better. Peter Dinklage was great as the same character in both productions but believe the reason I enjoyed this movie was because of the individual talents each actor brought to it.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Watch the original instead
thufirhawat33313 July 2010
Let me cut it short. There was a refreshing, funny, utterly lovable and enjoyable death - comedy titled Death at a Funeral. It's not even outdated, came out a couple of years ago. This movie tries to live up to the original English comedy, but despite the brilliant actors like Glover and David, it doesn't succeed. It actually made every mistake a remake can make, therefore the original remains brilliant and this one is just a weak copy. Sad, but true. They tried, even tried hard, I admit, but there are things that best remain untouched. Death at a Funeral is one of them. It's a nice try, but will disappear undocumented, unlike the original one that remains a fine example of English black humor.

My recommendation: Watch that one instead.
108 out of 145 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed