Man of the Year

User Score
5.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 58 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 21 out of 58
  2. Negative: 21 out of 58

Where To Watch

Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. JoshuaC.
    Oct 14, 2006
    2
    Its so poorly executed. The mis-match clash of trying to suddenly be a politcal thriller and a comedy NEVER works. Besides a couple funny moments, when finally it goes poltical thriller it never recovers. Not recommendable.
  2. LarryMartin
    Oct 15, 2006
    3
    A weak script and lack of focus by the directer doom this poor effort.
  3. BarbP.
    Oct 16, 2006
    2
    Completely misses the audience. The humor is aimed at the dumbest common denominator, and the waffling back and forth between the slapstick-Robin Williams run-on joke and Laura Linney's take on The Net makes your brain hurt.
  4. MarkB.
    Nov 2, 2006
    3
    A late-night TV political comedian (Robin Williams) decides to actually run for the Presidency, apparently assuming that the public would find his pathetically toothless, Jay Leno-like barbs preferable to the platitudes and do-nothingism of his two major-party opponents. If that's really the case, we're all in big trouble: Barry Levinson's remarkably spineless, would-be A late-night TV political comedian (Robin Williams) decides to actually run for the Presidency, apparently assuming that the public would find his pathetically toothless, Jay Leno-like barbs preferable to the platitudes and do-nothingism of his two major-party opponents. If that's really the case, we're all in big trouble: Barry Levinson's remarkably spineless, would-be satire (which lacks even the minimum requirements to characterize it as such) not only scrupulously avoids drawing blood, it doesn't even try to nibble on any of its apparent targets. The Republican challenger and Democratic incumbent (an old-school type who managed to gain the White House anyway, making this film a bigger fantasy than any of the Lord of the Rings series, together or seperate) aren't caricatured at all; Williams' monologues pathologically shy away from such hot-button subject matter as Iraq, abortion, the role of religion in politics or anything that really matters to either side of the spectrum. Levinson's spinelessness has been repeatedly measured in other reviews and posts against the cogency of his supremely well-observed and still relevant 1993 faux-documentary Wag the Dog; I'd prefer to recall the script he cowrote for 1979's ...And Justice For All, a two-hour primal shriek of agony and outrage against the inequities and ineptitudes of the American legal system that was too raw and passionate to care much about being tagged as heavy-handed; flaws and all, it was a work of courage that Levinson appears to have lost long ago. God bless Laura Linney, who as a suspicious pollster who discovers something ominous in the vote-counting process, seems to be under the illusion that she's acting in a real movie; whenever she's on screen, particularly in two scenes when her character is in jeopardy, she almost convinces us too. The most trenchant (if not especially original) observation that Man of the Year makes is that many potential voters get more of their news from comedians like Jon Stewart, Bill Maher and Stephen Colbert than they do from more traditional sources. Here's an idea: why not make a movie about a Colbert-type--a liberal pretending to be a conservative--conducting a psuedo-campaign who becomes forced to decide whether to continue playing his familiar role or really say what he believes when his run for high office really catches fire? That's gotta work better than almost anything in Man of the Year...provided that Levinson and Williams stay far, far away from it. Expand
  5. BillR
    Oct 21, 2006
    3
    The problem with people who vote positively on movies like this, is that they are so used to choking down garbage that they forget what anything really good is. This movie was VERY flawed. This movie was executed very poorly.
  6. KateJ
    Oct 21, 2006
    2
    I hate upvoters who have no taste or intelligence. They couldn't possibly think when watching a movie, they just choke down one bad movie full of crap after another, trying to wonder why all these "evil critics" always hate there "averagely rated films" Simple answer: You
  7. DavidC.
    Oct 21, 2006
    2
    Severe lack of focus meets poor execution.
  8. WillO
    Oct 23, 2006
    2
    "Man of the Year" is a film without an identity, it doesn't quite know what it wants to be, and doesn't really achieve anything. For those of you who are expecting high comedy, if you've seen any Robin Williams standup in the past few years, those same jokes litter this film. Perhaps the most telling sign that this movie fails as a comedy is the fact that the characters on "Man of the Year" is a film without an identity, it doesn't quite know what it wants to be, and doesn't really achieve anything. For those of you who are expecting high comedy, if you've seen any Robin Williams standup in the past few years, those same jokes litter this film. Perhaps the most telling sign that this movie fails as a comedy is the fact that the characters on screen spend more time laughing than the audience, sort of a makeshift laugh track. Perhaps ironically, there's a laugh track joke in the film. "Man of the Year" is a prime example of a good concept poorly executed. Collapse
  9. MarkH.
    Oct 14, 2006
    3
    This film is a soggy, sorry mess. Which is a shame because I went with the highest of expectations given the track record of the director Barry Levinson (Wag the Dog) and Robin Williams who collaborated on the brilliant war comedy "Good Morning, Vietnam. "This time around, the director gets trapped by one to many storylines in search of a decent plot. Williams is excellent when left to This film is a soggy, sorry mess. Which is a shame because I went with the highest of expectations given the track record of the director Barry Levinson (Wag the Dog) and Robin Williams who collaborated on the brilliant war comedy "Good Morning, Vietnam. "This time around, the director gets trapped by one to many storylines in search of a decent plot. Williams is excellent when left to improvise but the rest of the project is a 3rd rate corporate thriller that makes little sense....Rent "Mr Smith Goes to Washington (1939). Its a much better movie about the same concept of a populist politician against the establishment....and while you're at it, you should check out "Meet John Doe" with Gary Cooper...an even blacker, more cynical look at American politics and values by Capra.... Expand
  10. MattM.
    Oct 15, 2006
    2
    This film was pretty much as un-funny as a comedy can be. We left the theatre during the scene where the woman and Tom Hobbs are talking after paintball. I couldn't help but role my eyes at how cheezy and boring it was. Christopher Walken does his usual weird thing, but instead of being brilliantly weird, its just plain creepy. Jeff Goldblumes acting is laughable also. Not a funny This film was pretty much as un-funny as a comedy can be. We left the theatre during the scene where the woman and Tom Hobbs are talking after paintball. I couldn't help but role my eyes at how cheezy and boring it was. Christopher Walken does his usual weird thing, but instead of being brilliantly weird, its just plain creepy. Jeff Goldblumes acting is laughable also. Not a funny film at all. Expand
  11. EthellB.
    Oct 15, 2006
    1
    I called it! I friggin' called it! There was too much buzz about this movie..."oh yeah....so funny...a comedian as president...that's great." AHHHH! it sucked. robin williams is disgusting!! anywho, i called the suckage of this film. I knew it.
  12. ChuckW.
    Oct 15, 2006
    3
    Levinson is a weenie and Williams wasted his talent on years of doing blow. Sad.
  13. StuCop
    Dec 29, 2006
    1
    A horrible mess...fails as a satire and fails as a thriller. You know it's bad when the script calls for the supporting cast to constantly tell eachother how funny the main character is being...seriously several times Frank Black turns to Christopher Walken during one of Williams impromptu monologues and says "Boy he's really being funny now"....though it's painfully A horrible mess...fails as a satire and fails as a thriller. You know it's bad when the script calls for the supporting cast to constantly tell eachother how funny the main character is being...seriously several times Frank Black turns to Christopher Walken during one of Williams impromptu monologues and says "Boy he's really being funny now"....though it's painfully apparent that nothing Williams says in this movie is either funny or sadly even scathing. Expand
  14. May 14, 2011
    0
    If they wanted to make a movie about a late night host, Conan O'Brien was the Choice.
    Any movies based on John Stewart and Steven Colbert are sure to fail. And this was one of them. A dull, boring, never a single laugh, just a sad and miserable movie. It's just boring.
Metascore
39

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 30 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 30
  2. Negative: 9 out of 30
  1. Levinson diverts his film into a political thriller with its own conspiracy theory, an improbable romance and a curious subplot that feels like an anti-smoking ad. Little wonder his bewildered star, Robin Williams, looks confused much of the time.
  2. Reviewed by: John Anderson
    50
    A curious hybrid -- a political/action/comedy/thriller in which Robin Williams becomes president of the United States. A movie as uneven as it sounds, "Man" is less laugh-out-loud funny than topical and suspenseful.
  3. 30
    Levinson loses his movie, his audience, and his purpose in a tangle of conspiracy theories and crackpot notions that sink the movie just when it begins to transcend expectations. In short, it would have been great if it had stopped, oh, 12 minutes in.