The Other Guys Review

Published 5 years ago by

the other guys review The Other Guys Review
Screen Rant’s Vic Holtreman reviews The Other Guys

Disclaimer: I am not huge fan of Anchorman and my favorite Will Ferrel performance is from the film that put him on the map as a theatrical comedic actor: Elf. I know that people find the guy funny but to me, he plays essentially the same role in many of his films – clueless, yet egotistical with over-abundant quantities of self-esteem that would make any under-performing yet cocky high school kid blush.

Will Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg play detectives Allen Gamble and Terry Hoitz, terribly mismatched police partners who are essentially paper-pushers at their precinct. At the beginning of the film they (and everyone else in the police station) are vastly overshadowed by a pair of super-cops played by Samuel L. Jackson and Dwayne Johnson. Jackson and Johnson are the uber-hip, super popular, testosterone-oozing media darlings of the police force, and are looked up to by everyone in their precinct except for Terry. The film opens with a chase sequence with the dynamic duo, and while I get that it’s meant to be over-the-top, it left me thinking that I was in for a really stupid movie.

Thankfully, from there it down-shifted a bit and got funnier. Sam Jackson is getting to the point where it seems he just does self-parodies, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Dwayne Johnson plays his character in a manner that fits him like a glove (imagine his character from Get Smart, but double the ego and remove any hint of “nice guy”). Terry used to be a popular detective on the street until an unfortunate accident involving a well-known sports figure – and now he’s relegated mainly to desk duty with Gamble, someone with whom his relationship the word “incompatible” is a woefully inadequate descriptor.

Terry is an easily angered, aggressive kind of guy while Allen is a laid back, nerdy, goody-two-shoes personality. Most everything he does drives Terry crazy and makes the pair look silly in front of their co-workers. While Terry is desperate to get back into the thick of things on the street, Allen is quite content to be a desk jockey (he’s a police accountant). Allen’s “big case” is going after someone who is constructing a huge building without filling out the required scaffolding permits. It turns out that the person in question is one David Ershon (played by Steve Coogan), a billionare investor who has lost $32 billion through bad investments for a major bank. The bank is not about to have a quarterly financial report come out that reflects such a staggering loss, so they’re demanding that Ershon find a “sucker” from whom he can extract $32 billion in order to replace the loss. To ensure he doesn’t run off and that he completes this task, he is assigned a team of “bodyguards” led by Ray Stevenson (Punisher: War Zone).

Eventually the scaffolding investigation leads our intrepid detectives to what’s going on with the billions, and Allen is determined to get to the bottom of it before someone is bilked out of $32 billion with Terry at his side.

A lot of people bash on Wahlberg as an actor, but I’m a fan of the guy. Here he actually let himself go a little in the gut area (belly fat) and it makes him seem more of a regular guy. He plays angry and on the edge well, although there was one scene where he confronts his ex-girlfriend in a ballet studio where his character jumps the rails completely and comes across like his IQ suddenly dropped about 60 points. I actually liked Ferrell in this film because it harkened back to his role as Buddy the Elf – very honest and straightforward, but without that over the top extreme ego his characters usually display. He and Wahlberg played well off of each other. Steve Coogan, who is usually very funny, was not even remotely funny in this film. There was a scene that was an obvious take-off on the “greed is good” speech by Michael Douglas in Wall Street which fell completely and utterly flat. It was weird seeing Eva Mendes as a subservient wife in the film – not bad, just weird.

Overall I found the film sporadically funny, with a lot of chuckles sprinkled throughout and the occasional laugh out loud moment. There were a lot of gags in the film in the “awkward funny” vein, which are often difficult to pull off. I’ve seen plenty of films where that’s attempted and the supposed humor only makes me cringe – here it was for the most part pretty funny. One thing that seemed added after the fact was the voiceover narration, which the film could have definitely done without. Oh, and a bit of  a warning: I was really surprised to find out after the fact that this movie is rated PG-13 – as I sat watching it I would have sworn it was rated R due to the suggestive and vulgar language.

Finally, I have a caveat, which most of you will no doubt not heed: If you want to leave the theater having enjoyed this film and in a good mood, I would suggest that you leave just as the credits start rolling. Why? Because here you have what is supposed to be a goofy spoof of “buddy cop” action movies, but once the credits start to roll you’ll be presented with graphics and statistics with an obvious, blatant political message about the evils of capitalism, covering everything from corporate Ponzi schemes to CEO pay to what’s happened to the value of the average person’s 401K. Frankly, it was completely bizarre and as it started I was waiting for some kind of punch line – but soon enough I saw that directory Adam McKay was serious. If this had been attached to Oliver Stone’s upcoming Wall Street 2 I would have thought it an appropriate bookend – but at the end of a comedy?

Most bizarre and inappropriate idea, ever. I don’t know how the studio let this thing out the door with an ending like that.

So, if you leave the theater prior to the credits, you’ll probably left having enjoyed The Other Guys.

[poll id="62"]

Our Rating:

3 out of 5

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. That’s a perspective Vic,,, one I’m sure your comfortable with…
    I however no longer bow to pressure on this subject.

    For the sake of diplomacy, I have nothing more to say on it. ;-)

    • 790!! how was your day man?

  2. Daniel F
    LOL yeah u need more LOLS LOL!

  3. Antman the highlight was picking up the “Kick Ass” dvd for $11.99 new.


    I’m watching it now!

    • it kicks ass 790, i liked that one a lot. think im gonna get some hong kong flicks this weekend

    • 790 for PRESIDENT!!!! Hell yes! ( except for the Kick Ass viewing. Unless your watching the version where Cage is on the edit room florr) )

  4. Hit Girl & Big Daddy stole the film,,,,,

    • yep :)

  5. I read the first 2 lines of this article and decided that your comments were just going to be opinion. I like Will Ferrel as do millions.

    I have seen the trailer and found it very funny.

    • What’s a review of anything if not opinion? Were you looking for just a plain, barebones description of the movie?

      • @Paul77

        I don’t disagree with your not liking opinion-only reviews, those which are full of I liked or I didn’t like comments and no actual information. That said you should give Vics review a read before making that judgment. Most critics don’t respect others opinions enough to make such a disclaimer on a movie they reviewed that features actor(s) they don’t normally enjoy on film. In fact, because Vic gave this 3 stars with the disclaimer about not enjoying Will Ferrell’s characters normally makes this review a better one for fans of Will Ferrell. How? Well if someone who doesn’t enjoy Ferrell for the most part still gives the film 3 out of 5 stars what does that tell you about the film? That regular Will Ferrell fans are probably gonna love it.

  6. Has anyone noticed this film is a complete rip off in just about everyway of COP OUT. So sick of seeing these films come out back to back, same premise just different actors. I like Will and Mark but hate these kind of films.

    • then you know not to watch them anymore

  7. I love these types of films….

  8. this review startled me because the person who wrote doesnt seem to understand the concept of a “movie”. Its as if they expected a serious film.

    • blaise,

      Yes, you’re absolutely right. I’ve seen hundreds of movies but for some reason I’m STILL not clear on the concept.


  9. I didn’t laugh once. with all the hype I expected a great movie. Terrible disappointment and a waste of money. Every joke and site gag has been done before and better.

  10. I agreed with a lot of your review, but I boosted my rating to 4 instead of 3 for one reason only…the last 60 seconds of the movie, where they explain what they mean by “the other guys”.

    That message was so moving, so right, you could feel the people in the the theater responding. It was that great inversion of the norm, that celebration of a different (finally) way of looking at it — this could in fact be the most radical movie made in the last 20 years.

    But don’t take my word for it. I think the message is good enough that everyone should see it…even if they have to wait for Netflix.

  11. This was THE worst movie I have EVER seen. (The capitals really sell it right?). It peaked at the two early deaths, which were, admittedly, hilarious. And it was rapidly downhill from there. As a big fan of Ferrel and Anchorman, I can’t understand why he would do this movie. The script wasn’t funny, and the product placement was appaling, for instance,

    “Wow your hair is so smooth.”
    “I use VO5″

    That was in the middle of the climactic car chase.

    Unbelievably, the plot of this movie was actually convoluted. And the film was LONG, about 1hr 50 I believe. Both the leads had totally unnecessary love interests, and incredibly annoyingly all the plot threads were resolved, but in the most painfully unfunny and mundane fashion imaginable. I say it was annoying because it added at least 20 mins to the movie. Just terrible.