Lots of Attempts at "Funny" But Not Much Substance.
928685
I haven't read much of O'Rourke --  just two books.  On the strength of his commentary on Adam Smith's <Wealth of Nations> I ordered several more O'Rourke books.  The only one to arrive so far is <Don't Vote . . . .>  I find it to be just quip after quip after quip and not much else.

I gather from other reviews that O'Rourke is deemed to be a political conservative.  This reviewer is about as conservative as they come.  Nevertheless I don't see much to like in <Don't Vote . . . .>  I just hope the other books I ordered are better.
334413
Lebovitz should stick to what he knows best, desserts and chocolates.  The writing on those topics is more informed and sincere (except his attempt to crack up his audience with his supposed inability to remember the names of some chocolates he must sell in a shop).

In general, the humor and search for irony is self-conscious and stretched thin.  Better editing might have weeded out or put better form to frequently repetitious, somewhat sophomoric and strained efforts at poking fun at the French and the Americans who come to visit them.  There is material to be found there, but it is not well mined by Lebovitz.  Shoelaces, jostling, line-jumping and the like don't bring on much of a smile or revelation the first time around and certainly do not bear repetition.

Recipes seem OK, but it's not really an organized cookbook--I can understand a hot chocolate recipe ("chocolat chaud!") at the end of the hot chocolate chapter, but the segue used to justify a chocolate mole recipe is the joke on that page.  Should I really look to my Paris book for a mole recipe or a Bourbon glazed pork roast recipe?  And piment d'Espelette is not smoked, that's pimenton de la vera.
1757198
It takes a strong man to be able to make fun of himself and males who are bigger and stronger than he is.  This is a comical and slightly silly example of someone's idea of manliness, despite the cover of a GI Joe figure fighting a King Kong look-alike. First, we had a 'Redneck Dictionary' which I reviewed previously; he was just silly because of the way he said things, not what he said. He slurred words together to make one, in a fairly ridiculous way. This writer, though, uses sarcasm along the vein of Mike Weiner (alias Savage) and tends to exaggerate like mu brother Cecil always did. His constant use of vulgarity defeats the whole purpose of the theme of this touted book on Maddox's web page. I could write a book, but can't use that kind of language or thesis (which only a person's opinion), it would never get publicized like this one. For each letter of the alphabet, these essays veer way off the subject, like maybe Johnny Knoxville did in 'Dukes of Hazzard,' and he often strays off the subject and starts prevaricating. He uses self importance along the vein of Howard Stern. But then, that's what a book review is all about -- opinions!

It appears as a comic book, as it is supposed to be funny. Wide margins with illustrations galore and charts with wide spacing. The cover is like a comic book. It apparently was written for men as they like to put down each other and see who can up the other. Manliness is a result of godliness. Deep voices and all.  But some men are tougher and rougher than others; some are not as acceptable to the general public or as great an athlete as Sugar Ray Robinson or Cassius Clay.  Now, they were men!
2330101
This film is trying.  Sooooo trying.  It isn't quite slapstick enough for the under 16 traffic and not sophisticated enough for the over 35 set when some sense of irony has started its slow growth to cynicism.  It has some ho ho moments but I really don't think that they were actually planned.  The characters are stock, the plot is stock, the situations are stock.  This whole movie could have been made out of cutting floor sweepings.  One thing I realized after setting through most of it.  The movie was recommended by two sets of twenty somethings. Maybe they are developing a sense of humor because I actually took their advice and watched most of it kind of.
Oh bad joke.
737576
I'm a fan of Leitch's Deadspin, but this book suffers from what most blogs-to-books do: namely what's funny in doses doesn't quite work over 300 pages. The book is separated in various essays. Some are funny, some aren't so much, not unlike most essays collections. But Leitch does himself a disservice by relying on WAY too much ESPN bashing. The worldwide leader certainly deserves some mockery, but it feels he spends half the book driving in a nail that's already hit home. If you like Deadspin you'll enjoy this book, but come away feeling it could have been better had the author showed a little restraint.
3848990
The topic of this book is important, and I think the general message is intact. However, it seems to me that the author is forcing her comedy. When writing about serious topics, yeah, it's great to keep it light-hearted. But I just feel like she tries to be funny in places where it's not needed or appropriate. (And her sense of humor is really corny and cheesy, which does not help.)

For example, she tells a story about a woman, Wanda, I think, who hired a hitman to kill a cheerleader on her daughter's cheerleading squad. (This girl was the best on the squad and Wanda wanted her dead so that her daughter could advance in the ranks.) After she told this story and then related it to her message, she referred to this woman as "Wacky Wanda." Really? "Wacky" is not an adjective I would use to describe a homicidal woman. It just fell flat totally for me after that.

I think I was expecting more substance overall. This feels like one long blog post to me.
3880113
A mildly amusing movie that tries too hard to be funny.  Another movie where gun play and drug abuse are trivialized.
3969496
"Never have so few . . .buggered it up . . . for so many . . ." This weird little annimated feature--a first effort from brothers Ed and Rory McHenry of the UK--can't quite decide what it wants to be; a "comedic" alternate history of WWII in which Nazi Germany wins the Battle of Britain? A "satiric" mash-up of epic war movies and historical costume dramas? A tongue in cheek homage to the supermarionation of Gery Anderson and (by extension) Parker and Stone's "Team America?" Problem is, it simply doesn't work as any of those things. While some of the miniatures are impressive (1/6 scale puppets and radio-controlled models with elaborate hand-built backdrops, minimal CGI and no green screen), the jokes tend to fall flat, and, in some cases, meander into the mildly insulting. The language is definitely not family-friendly, but there's not much to engage adults either. I was expecting something along the lines of "Valiant;" which, granted isn't expecting much, but came away sadly unentertained. Disappointing, especially considering how much work went into the production; the torturously extensive and overly self-congratulatory special features on this DVD take up more time than the film itself. My advice; skip it.
4392896
There are some funny sketches, but many are bizarre and I didn't find them particularly funny. What more can I say?
1607983
Meh. It was funny at times. I enjoy her humor via social media but this wasn't very entertaining.
1589509
I had high hopes for this book, as I'm a huge fan of Jim Gaffigans standup comedy. Unfortunately a big portion of this book is written around the same jokes he has already done in his standup routines, so there isn't really much new material to enjoy. If I'd have to rate Mr. Gaffigan purely on his comedic value I'd give him minimum 4/5, unfortunately this book was a letdown. :(
2513222
There were many genuine laughs here but everything between those laughs was sterile and not all of the supposed laughs worked. I can not recommend this movie. I am surprised by the many 5 star opinions.
4543582
So many other 1 star reviewers have said it very well so I'll be brief. The jokes are funny once at most (and many of them not even once.) The writing is sloppy. I spent most of the time rolling my eyes. I really wanted to like this one too.
3694643
There are a few funny quips in here but most of them are incredibly lame. You can tell that they really went for quantity over quality.
737621
Starting out, the book had some pretty funny parts and I expected that theme to carry throughout.  Then it started talking about the twin tower attacks; then moved into talking about religion and the timeline of human existence.  And this was done with a tongue in cheek humor that fell a little flat for me.  I didn't have much interest in reading any more of the book after this so maybe it got better, but I don't see the point of dragging myself through a book I don't really want to read.  If you're looking for a book about cycling experiences or humor about commuting, pass on this one.
1782840
In the last few pages of "Packing for Mars," Mary Roach displays a touch of passion in making the case for a manned trip to Mars.  Sadly, in the preceding 300+ pages, passion was kept firmly in check in favor of a random set of anecdotes.  The anecdotes, by themselves, can be quite good, but I'm left wanting the story that hasn't actually been offered.

Billed as an uproarious trip into the world of space travel, I was hoping to get "In the Shadow of the Moon" with a funny edge.  Maybe the reverential Alan Bean meets Mr Bean.  PfM is often funny, although not side-splittingly so (my kids were, however, in stitches at a turd floating around the Apollo 10 capsule).  As a comedy, though, the author's writing style wears you out with repetition in the form of all-too-frequent overreach; trying to squeeze out one crass metaphor too many just because she could. Good comedy writers know when to pause, Ms Roach does not (Deke's 1-star review is spot-on in describing how the humor reads).

2 stars for some good snippets - many of which the average reader will not have known about previously - in what can only be described as a random collection of anecdotes aimlessly delivered.  By the time Ms Roach sets her sights on making the case for a manned Mars shot, we no longer care.

Frequently entertaining, but not a memorable read I'd recommend to others.
2672973
That pretty much says it all "NOT in the LEAST BIT FUNNY!" I have a great sense of humor and enjoy a good laugh like everyone...even at the expense of events that might not have been that funny to the person it happened to. That being said, this book of lists didn't even seem marginally funny to me; beside, the majority of the things/events described had no basis in truth and seem to be only the ramblings of a somewhat warped mind that can't really write anyway. At first I thought, "Well, maybe it's because there's no 'delivery' so I'm missing the point." Nope, it just isn't funny that's all!