Carl the Critic: reviews "Sophomore"

Experience/Expectations: Well it's finally happened; I have successfully found a movie that is even worse than "Killer Klowns from Outer Space". I went to a screening recently, and it was here I came in contact with a movie which I hope never sees the light of day!
Let's give a little background about the story about the movie at hand. You see when a movie is made it needs to "get out there", to be distributed by someone who is willing to pay for this movie to be seen in theaters (whether these theaters are your typical Regal, AMC, or Palace theater or the Art Houses for the smaller movie like the "Little Theater" in Rochester, NY.) Studio movies don't have as big of a problem getting a movie distributors, but many small independent films such as the one I am about to talk about need some convincing, so they hold screenings, where a group of people gather together to watch the film in question and answer a survey about the film to show investors that the movie is worth investing.

If I was a potential investor, I would personally make sure that this film never sees the light of day. Why was it so bad you asked? Let's start with the very first thing every good movie needs!

Story/Critique: Story? There wasn't one! If there was it was trying to be a branching structured film with multiple stories of characters that are either unnamed or forgettable by the time the movie was over. At the end credits, the film tells us about the characters and what became of them after their sophomore year of high school and everyone at the screening was asking, "Who was that person?"
The film has a very confusing opening, in which words randomly crawl across the screen. It wasn't until I got my survey that I knew that the movie was called "Sophomore".
Which brings me to my next point, why would you base a movie on your sophomore year of high school? It is the most boring time in High school, where almost absolutely nothing of significance happens. Freshmen have "Freshmen Fridays" (which if the film is to be believed, was a tradition started in Bible, BEFORE THERE WERE SCHOOLS!!!!), Juniors have the Junior Prom, and the Seniors have the Senior Prom, getting into college, graduation, & graduation parties so to base a movie on the year of "wise-fools" is not really that entertaining.
You really want to know what this movie reminds me of? "Dazed and Confused". If there was any High School comedy that this film ripped off the most it was definitely this one. There was the Freshmen Friday, relationships between people of significantly different age groups, and for some reason, kids who aren't even freshmen yet are going to High School. But while "Dazed and Confused" has the excuse that this was the first day of Summer Vacation, "Sophomore" has these three kids who are just at the high school all year round, who do nothing but drool over a tennis player named "Honey Brubaker". I wish I was joking, her name is Honey Brubaker, I guess her parents' ambitions were for her to be a prostitute when she gets older.
The kids whom I have mentioned, have no business being in high school (they don't go to class ever through out the entire movie), and have a very pointless story in the movie. Their story evolves around trying to sleep over at Honey Brubaker's house because one of the kids saw her sleep walking around her house, topless, in the middle of the night... Wait what? That's a little disturbing, creepy, and has nothing to do with high school, but after seeing her naked for the second time, these youngsters learn that women are not objects... AND that if a girl catches you looking at her naked body she will flash her breasts at you like a perverted game of peek-a-boobs!
This film makes absolutely no sense, and it's a comedy isn't that funny, it's disgusting. Here are some of the gags you are likely to find in this movie:

• A kid breaks into his math teacher’s house to take a crap in her toilet because he is getting revenge for her yelling at him in class, but accidentally craps on her bathroom floor (How does that happen?). The teacher calls the police saying (very slowly) that someone broke into her house and pooped on her floor, and then 5 seconds later 20 cop cars come to the rescue. When the policemen asked her who did it she has the opportunity to identify the bastard, but instead she feels bad and says that she didn't know who it was... LADY DID YOU FORGET THAT HE TOOK A SHIT ON YOUR BATHROOM FLOOR! IN TEXAS THAT'S A CRIME PUNISHABLE BY DEATH!!!
• A drunken teenager, who looks like a gay lumberjack, eats a hot dog, then turns to the nearest black kid and accuses him of stealing the hot dog he just ate (apparently when you're drunk you have "short term memory loss"). Later on he throws up and finds out that he did eat the hot dog after all.
• Patrick Warburton (the big star this film promotes who has less than 30 minutes of screen time) plays a janitor who spends the entire night drinking at the school with his buddies, getting drunk, drives home during a winter storm (and doesn't have an accident), throws up on the window of the car, passes out on the puke covered window, wakes up the next morning to find himself glues to the window with frozen puke, and so his son has to come out and pull him off the window. [WHAT THE HELL MAKES THIS FUNNY? Just because you puke on a window doesn't mean it's the comic genius of Mel Brooks.]
• A girl is filling up her car with gas, there's a drunken Hispanic kid in the trunk, and there's a dog in the passenger seat. The dog is some how able to lock the car doors, put the car into drive, and drive the car into an old couple's front yard. (I'll admit that as funny as it is to see a dog or even a baby driving a car, it really doesn't do anything except make the audience go "Oh look it's a doggy!")
• At the very end of the movie, there is one jerk-off who has a dream of standing on top of the school, raising his arms to the sky, and having all the women take off their shirts because... They are women, and objects of male pleasure. I'm sorry but wasn't the point of the story with the kids to say that women are NOT objects of male pleasure? This is retarded, and when the guy actually does this on the roof of the school, a woman actually takes her shirt off!

These are the only real "funny" moments in the entire movie and they are NOT FUNNY! They are perverse, and disgusting, and you don't have to make a woman topless if IT MAKES NO SENSE! I could stand on the roof of any building in the world, and raise my hands to the heavens, this is not going to make all the women in the world go "well, he is on a tall building, and his hands are raised, I think I will just strip off my shirt and show the world my breasts because I am a woman and that's what we do!" This is why there are feminists in the world, because of movies like this piece of crap who treat them like they are all little whores. Women do not do that! I might not know a lot about them, but I'm definitely sure that a normal woman would find this film extremely offensive.

Which brings me to my next point, who is this film made for? We can rule out women, and children (besides for nudity there are a couple of times when the f word gets dropped in the most inappropriate times), but the humor is so disgusting, and so immature that I don't think there is anyone who would want to watch this piece of cinematic trash.

Overall: Because I had stated that "Sophomore" is worse than "Killer Klowns from Outer Space", (and if you are a regular reader you'd understand why this is such a big deal), "Sophomore" would clearly get a rating of -∞.99 out of 10 (that's negative infinite point ninety-nine out of ten).

Update: On January 13, 2012 at the "Little Theater" in Rochester, New York, the film was finally released.
After receiving a huge pile of hate mail in my spam mailbox I decided to re-watch the film. I stand by what I said months ago, but I also came to the conclusion that I was a little harsh on this film. Surely there must be something good that came out of this movie? Well I guess it's good to see actors who look like they go to high school, Patrick Warburton and Amanda Plummer do pull off good performances, and most of the cinematography was actually very well done (with the exception of the ending being a little over exposed but it's not that big of a deal).
I also want to say that I have nothing against the film's director T. Lee Beideck. I say this because the majority of the hate mail I get tells me to "Stop insalting (I believe they meant "insulting") Beideck! You are an idiot!..." The fact is, this is his second film, I never saw his first film "Driver's Wanted", and I never said anything about his direction in my review. Just because I didn't like this movie doesn't mean he's a horrible filmmaker, I just didn't like this movie. But I hope he does make more, I hope to watch more of his work and check up on him, and he definitely has potential. So, T. Lee Beideck, I hope for you the best, and I can't wait to see your next film, and the fact that you actually are making movies shows that you have accomplished something that many have only dreamed of doing.