A young Maurice Pitka – Mike Myers morphed into a tween courtesy of CGI – explains his parents’ occupations to Guru Tugginmypudha, played by Oscar winner Ben Kingsley. Prior to becoming missionaries, they were dog groomers. “So,” asks Tugginmypudha, “they were into doggy style before they got into the missionary position?” Of the hundreds of bad puns and old jokes in The Love Guru, it is this one that best illustrates the film’s sense of humor. The audience had already made the joke in their heads, but Myers insists on repeating it anyway as if asserting his control over the humor and only allowing the audience to laugh when clearly instructed to do so. The Love Guru’s most noteworthy trait is its insistence on hammering jokes into the skulls of its audience; refusing to let any pun die as Myers mugs into the camera to squeeze every possible laugh he can out of it. Despite the fervor with which the film attacks every joke, the whole thing seems rather halfhearted on everyone’s part, including Myers.
Yet audiences would have known none of this before seeing the film, so the reasons behind The Love Guru’s commercial failure are a mystery. Many of his comedies have been critically panned, so why this was the first time audiences decided to listen is unknown. The film’s failure is probably just as big of a mystery to the studio – local shops in my area had Love Guru Halloween costumes, indicating they expected another Myers’ cultural phenomenon a la Austin Powers. Comedy is a fickle animal; three years ago, The Love Guru could have very well been one of the most successful films of the year. It is a good example of the mob mentality of popular cinema, the way filmgoers arbitrarily decide that a film is good or bad sight unseen. Why were the pop culture references and scatological humor of Austin Powers loved by audiences while those same aspects of The Love Guru despised?
Is this the worst film of 2008? Not hardly; nor is it one of the worst of all time as some have claimed. I’m indifferent to Myers and I can’t really tell whether The Love Guru is any better or worse than any of his other films. It ranks about the same with me. As it is the end of the year, a lot of critics will spend a lot of time explaining why The Love Guru is horrible and why they’ve chosen it to be one of the “year’s worst.” I’d like someone to explain why it is any worse than his other mega-hits. Perhaps the public has simply grown tired of Myers’ shtick. We’ll have to wait to see if his next comedy — likely a film not very different from The Love Guru – is any more successful.
by David Carter | Source: Paramount DVD
21 Dec 2008 11:36 PM | Comments (5)
Is it possible that the blatantly racist aspect of Love Guru kept audiences away?
I’m not saying likely, I’m saying possible.
Racism is a curious issue with Love Guru. Narratively speaking, Guru Pitka is caucasian, not Indian—but certainly his portrayal of the character is “Apu-esque” for lack of a better term. Myers’ accent aside, the film offends several groups equally: dwarves, Canadians, and African-Americans would have every right to be offended as well. In terms of the modern strain of comedy films that relish in being offensive, I’d say that Love Guru is more on the restrained side.
i’wd like nd loves to someone nd i know that he loves me or not………
Surprisingly, or not, those who found the film most amusing were those that have read Deepak Chopra’s works. Anyone who knows Chopra understands or appreciates the jokes at a deeper level than the average movie-goer. While to a small percentage, this made the film, it was, to most, Myers’ biggest failure.
This has nothing to do with racism i know sorry
This was a much smarter film than it was given credit for. I do believe you need some understanding in Eastern Philosophy and the hypocrisy of the self help industry. I think most hated this film because just about everyone has read a self help book at one time or another and probably felt like a moron after this film.
Evan
22 December 2008
5:04 AM