The 40-Year-Old Virgin (2005) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)

These comments and nudity summaries refer to the unrated DVD:

Like our founding fathers, there are certain truths which I hold self-evident. You know, simple truths like "we have an inalienable right to liberty," and "any dish with sour cream in it will taste pretty good," and "Jessica Alba is smokin' hot." In fact, my self-evident truths are not that different from those of the founding fathers. They had no way to know about Jessica Alba, but all of them were known to cast lustful eyes at Dolly Madison, especially that rapscallion Jefferson. What the hell do you think they meant by "the pursuit of happiness"?

One of my self-evident truths is that comedy is as worthwhile as drama or tragedy. Write down why you think art is important. When you are satisfied with your definition, you will see that it applies to comedy and drama equally. You might have written, for example, "it offers us insight into the human condition," or "it entertains us," or "it allows us to understand others better." No matter what you have on your list, there is no reason why comedy cannot do it just as well as drama. Taking the point a step farther, you might even argue that comedy is even more worthwhile than drama, since (1) making people laugh makes them feel good, and that's a positive contribution to humanity (2) many doctors contend that laughter is therapeutic in many ways and for many conditions.

Furthermore, a universally praised comedy is more of an achievement than its tragic or dramatic equivalent because it is more difficult to make people laugh than cry. Hell, it's easy to provoke tears. Show children being brutalized. Show people dying needlessly, before their time. Show a faithful dog waiting patiently for a gentle and beloved master who will never return. 100% effective.

Dying is easy.

Comedy is hard.

The tragedy formulas work on everyone, so it is possible to create a drama with nearly universal appeal. The faithful dog trick works on everyone from Hitler to Mother Theresa. Not so with comedy. Because there is no universal formula comparable to the tragedy rules, it is difficult to make comedies with universal appeal. The ability of a comic to turn jokes into laughter is contingent on the preconceptions of the listeners. Ask Mort Sahl, whose job was to ridicule those in power. He was feted as the funniest man in the world when Eisenhower was in power, then was relegated to smoky half-empty nightclubs when his job became to make pointed barbs about JFK. Ask Dennis Miller, universally regarded as one of the greatest comic minds in history until he turned his sharp barbs at liberal America. Sahl and Miller didn't stop being funny, but their core audiences stopped laughing. A comic has to tailor his material in order to get laughs, and he had better know his audience. The ethnic jokes - no matter how brilliant - will be booed by the PC nutburgers. The sex jokes will be poo-pooed by the religious nutburgers. And don't plan on a career in comedy if you're planning to use your wit against liberals. Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert, who love to rail against stupidity on both sides of the aisle, actually get catcalls from the audience when they use their wit to make even the most obvious points which contradict the liberal canon - for daring to notice that Rosa Parks has been wildly overrated by history, or that John Kerry is a stiff-ass douchebag. Stewart and Colbert are funny and sophisticated men, but their audience just wants more Bush=chimp jokes.

Which brings us to award season. It is reasonably easy to obtain consensus on the effectiveness of dramas, but next to impossible to get people to agree on comedies, so the awards always follow the path of least resistance. Deep Throat advised Woodstein to "follow the money," but that only works in politics. When it comes to movie awards, the resident nabobs almost never follow the money, because the money follows comedies and fantasies, and the elders of the cinema church simply don't consider those worthy. (They finally had to break down and award Return of the King when it became obvious that they'd look like complete fools if they ignored one of the supreme achievements in the history of cinema, but I don't believe they will ever award a true comedy, no matter how good it is.)

When was the last time that a comedy won Best Picture? No, I don't mean one of those character-based films like Tootsie, or a musical comedy like Chicago, but a comedy that actually makes people laugh. Where are the Farrelly's Oscars for There's Something About Mary and Dumb and Dumber? Where are Groucho's Oscars for Duck Soup? Where is Leslie Nielsen's Oscar for playing Frank Drebin in Police Story? Where are the Oscars for those guys who wrote Airplane?

They must be in the mail.

Mel Brooks does have a screenwriting Oscar for The Producers and Woody Allen has two, including one for Annie Hall, which also won him Best Director. Woody is just about the only comedy writer who doesn't get the door shut in his face by the H'wood establishment. He has something like 13 "best original screenplay" nominations, including some for mediocre movies. (Alice??)

The British, to their eternal credit, do a much better job of recognizing comedy. They do not treat comedy writers as equals, but they do occasionally let them sit with the adults. In 1994, they gave the original screenplay BAFTA to Harold Ramis and Danny Rubin for Groundhog Day, as they well should have, over The Piano and In the Line of Fire. Groundhog Day was not even nominated for an Oscar! In 1997 the Brits gave the Best Picture award to The Full Monty over Titanic. I'm not sure that I support that decision, but the point is that at least they were inviting comedy to sit at the big boy table. (For the record, the Brits have been more accepting of fantasy films and other genre movies as well, awarding Best Picture awards to The Fellowship of the Ring and The Usual Suspects in years when the Yanks were honoring A Beautiful Mind and Braveheart.)

Which finally brings us back to The 40-Year-Old Virgin. Let us imagine a different world. It is one in which comedies are treated as equals and therefore receive at least half of the Oscar nominations. Our perfect imaginary world also includes a filter that prevents tragedies or dramas with a few funny lines from stealing any of the comedy nominations, which are reserved only for pure comedies. In such a world, The 40-Year-Old Virgin would be nominated for Best Picture. It is not only a very funny movie, but it is also involving, and tremendously perceptive about human relationships. It is one of the year's two funniest comedies (with Wedding Crashers); it is also one of the two best overall movies among the comedy entries (with Wallace and Gromit); and is the only film which is a shoo-in for both the "funniest comedy" and "best overall comedy film" lists. My two younger kids are big movie buffs. My 21-year-old son opines that this is the best comedy film of the year, although perhaps not as funny as Wedding Crashers. My 19-year-old daughter says it is the funniest film of the year, period. Viewed from just about any perspective, it is the best comedy of the year, which would automatically earn an Oscar nomination in a good and just world.

The film provided Steve Carell with a chance to to come off the comedy bench and become a star. He stepped up and slugged it out of the park, but in a very unassuming way. Carell is not a crazy scene-stealer like Carrey or Ferrell or Vaughn, and he got very few opportunities to be funny in any obvious way. He just delivered his lines within his naive character and trusted the material. Fundamentally, he played the Mary Tyler Moore role in an ensemble comedy. That was the right choice, and some good acting as well. He kept the entire part well within the limits of credibility. If you watch this movie, you will never doubt for a minute that he really is a virgin. 

The basic plot is that three rowdy retail workers find out that their 40-year-old colleague is a virgin, so they resolve to get him laid. Various well-intentioned but stupid attempts fail for various reasons, but our hero does eventually find a girl on his own. Unfortunately, he is too timid to have sex with her because he has no idea what he's doing, and he's too intimidated to admit his virginal status. That's about all there is to it. Pure and simple premise. The brilliance is in the execution, the balls-to-the-wall humor, and the empathy we establish for the characters.

I liked the DVD extras just as much as I liked the film itself. Basically, there isn't a bad minute anywhere. The deleted scenes and outtakes are just as funny as the material that made it into the film. The scenes weren't deleted because they stunk, but for one of two reasons: (1) in some scenes, the guys improvised a lot of different jokes and it wouldn't make sense to keep more than one;  (2) in other cases, the material was too naughty or the lines were too hard to understand. The full-length commentary is also funny, and even some of the completely unrelated material (Seth Rogan's "My Dinner With Stormy") is a hoot!



  • Unrated version is 17 minutes longer
  • Many deleted Scenes (with Optional Commentaries)
  • Featurette "Filming the Waxing Scene"
  • Featurette: "My Dinner with Stormy"
  • Outtakes/Gag Reel
  • Feature Commentary with Co-Writers Judd Apatow and Steve Carell (who are also the director and star, respectively)


  • Kimberly Page - one nipple

  • Catherine Keener - one nipple in the deleted material only

  • Stormy Daniels - breasts in the unrated film, full frontal nudity in the deleted scenes

  • Jamie L. Mann - breasts in a deleted scene (as a topless newscaster in a Carell fantasy)

  • Laura Cottrel - topless in a flashback to Carell's first attempt to remove a bra.

  • Paul Rudd - shows his bum

The Critics Vote ...

  • Super-panel consensus out of four stars: three and a half stars. James Berardinelli 3.5/4, Roger Ebert 3.5/4

  • The AFI chose it as one of the ten best films of 2005.

  • British consensus out of four stars: two and a half stars. Mail 8/10, Telegraph 6/10, Independent 8/10, Guardian 6/10, Times 4/10, Sun 7/10, Express 6/10, Mirror 6/10, BBC 3/5.

The People Vote ...

  • Box Office Mojo. It was a hit. The opening weekend was only $21 million, but word-of mouth was great, and the next two weeks dipped only 24% and 18% respectively. Final total: $109 million. The budget was $26 million, so it was a big money-maker. It did not prove as popular overseas, with about $58 million in foreign grosses.
The meaning of the IMDb score: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence equivalent to about three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, comparable to approximately two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, equivalent to about a two star rating from the critics, or a C- from our system. Films rated below five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film - this score is roughly equivalent to one and a half stars from the critics or a D on our scale. (Possibly even less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. (C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but will be considered excellent by genre fans, while C- indicates that it we found it to be a poor movie although genre addicts find it watchable). D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well. Any film rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of film. Any film rated B- or better is recommended for just about anyone. We don't score films below C- that often, because we like movies and we think that most of them have at least a solid niche audience. Now that you know that, you should have serious reservations about any movie below C-.

Based on this description, it's a B-, a film with such a warm heart and such genuine insights that it won over many who could easily have been offended by its raunchy humor. One of the rare pictures which is popular with both critics and mainstream audiences.

Return to the Movie House home page