A common theme among reviews of House Bunny is that it is a pretty lame movie (think two stars out of four) but Anna Faris is the one good thing in it. In fact, poor thing, she needs better material. We have been down this road before (John Candy, any one?), but it is not like there are loads of good movies out there these days anyway. In fact, some praised (like the latest Indy Jones flick) are imho not that good.
Anyways, the reviews got me -- someone told me once that she thought any given movie had something good in it, something to enjoy and all, and this was long before the $12 movie ticket. So, when review after review basically raves about the lead of a movie, in a genre that is of the "it's not rocket science, but if even mildly amusing can be a fun watch," well it actually works out to be a rather positive review. Even if the person didn't quite mean it that way.
Upfront, let me say that the reviews were on balance correct: Faris was great, and this wasn't that good of a movie. It was mostly standard fare, and the "clean her up, she's a babe" subtext is sort of offensive, you know?* The parts about staying true to yourself and not just being concerned about your looks are nice and all, but don't quite wash with a chunk of the movie. This is standard hypocrisy, but still ...
Faris is very good in this film. Colin Hanks, who didn't really remind me of his father that much (Rumer Willis did remind me of her mother), was pretty boring. Emma Stone, as the brainaic of the Zeta sorority, did add something to the film. Kat Dennings as the cynical feminist also was welcome. And, the rival sorority's leader had a few good moments (favorite line, roughly: "you are an older, sluttier version of the sort of girl we are looking for").
But, Faris was the show. It was enough. Sometimes, a trifle of a movie is all we like to watch. And, when they have a secret weapon, we really are willing to look past its problems. You can say all you like, and often be accurate, about its problems. The fact many films have them [feminism is somewhat lacking is lots of films, ask Katherine Heigel], and sometimes its okay to have somewhat guilty pleasures, doesn't change that.
Compare it to a related film, Legally Blonde, now a favorite musical for the preteen set. ("Ashley is having her debut of Broadway today! She's working her way up to Mamma Mia!") There, El played vapid, but deep down was a blonde brain. Likewise, deep down -- though rich -- she was comfortable with the lady who does her nails. Signs of that with Shelley bonding with the sorority (another comfortable family for someone who grew up an orphan), but LB had more complexity. And, surely had a more feminist friendly plot. As to Legally Blonde, it also was a better film because the lead wasn't the whole show. It gave other supporting characters some real character development and things to do. House Bunny had much less of that, a lazier plot.
Anyways, it's a perfectly acceptable late summer movie, and the lead makes it better than some other comparable fare.
---
* And, poor Beverly D'Angelo, who has to play the older biatch role. Hugh M. Hefner comes off pretty lame, love him all hurt and upset, eating lots of ice cream (he's just one of the girls at heart, poor thing) , and so caring. A trick by a vindictive wannabe playmate, not Hef only liking really young things led to Faris being kicked out of the mansion. Just to set the record straight!
Oh, and what is with those closing credits that talk about all the characters and events in the film being fictional? I guess here, even with a few playing themselves, that is actually on the money. But, still ... how about Clinton running for President (and a jogging cameo later on) in Definitely, Maybe ... totally fictional?