40 Days and 40 Nights
for strong sexual content, nudity and language.
Reviewed by: Sarah Ayotte
CONTRIBUTOR
| Moral Rating: | Extremely Offensive |
| Moviemaking Quality: |
|
| Primary Audience: | Adults |
| Genre: | Romance Comedy |
| Length: | |
| Year of Release: | 2002 |
| USA Release: |
| Featuring | Josh Hartnett, Shannyn Sossamon, Vinessa Shaw, Monet Mazur, Griffin Dunne |
| Director |
Michael Lehmann |
| Producer | Tim Bevan, Eric Fellner, Michael London |
| Distributor |
 Miramax, a division of beIN Media Group |
Full of inappropriate sexual gags and obscene plot lines, “40 Days and 40 Nights” is a movie to be avoided.
In order to get over his last girlfriend, Matt (Josh Hartnett) decides to give up all sexual activities for lent (the time of year when Catholics and some other Christian groups traditionally give up a certain pleasure for 40 days, in remembrance of the time Jesus spent being tempted in the desert.) His plans backfire when he meets the girl of his dreams (Shannyn Sosamoon) who has difficulty understanding his vow. The situation becomes even more complicated when his roommate starts a world wide betting ring-via the Internet—based on Matt’s endeavor. Throw Matt’s vixen ex into the mix, and you’ve got the perfect recipe for disaster.
With many inappropriately explicit scenes and discussions, “40 Days” enters every avenue of extra-marital sex in a shockingly casual manner. The premise itself is decidedly immoral, and presents it as abnormal for anyone to go without sex for that long a period of time. Nowhere is abstaining until marriage even discussed. The willingness of all characters in the movie (including Matt’s parents) to discuss explicitly sexual matters in very immoral terms is appalling. The whole film makes sexual abstinence out to be a mistake than can only cause you problems in your relationships. In reality, this could not be further from the truth. The truth is that God created sex for marriage only, and any sexual activity outside of marriage will create problems (rather than the other way around). The film makes a mockery of all abstinence, including the vow taken by Matt’s brother, a Catholic priest-in-training. The film teaches that all attempts to remain abstinent are futile, and so should not be attempted.
Including several situations, numerous visually extensive sex scenes, and even disillusioned dreams that are completely inappropriate, the shock value of this film has no end. It should be avoided.
Whilst I agree with the main review as to what the movie’s overall message is—relationships must have sex—once you reach a certain age and can provide your own moral compass to the people portrayed in the film, they are simply pathetic. I find it difficult to believe that anyone would want to be any of the characters in the film or indeed, imitate their behaviour.
This is not even an “eye candy” film, except for the women’s bodies and much worse is immediately available in Playboy. This film fails even in its own terms—it is boring. I see this as a film that failed in the shoot, but was sought to be revived by deft editing, hence the continuity problems.
I also see it as a film that has sought to divide the Christian community on basic sexual morals. In that sense, it is an insidious film in intent, redeemed by poor execution, but presents a warning as to the Devil’s desire to foment sectarianism on core moral issues to further his cause.
[Very Offensive / 1½]
[Very Offensive / 3]
[Extremely Offensive / 1]
[Extremely Offensive / 1]
[Extremely Offensive / 1]
[Extremely Offensive / 1½]
[Extremely Offensive / 1½]
1. It could have been a bitter sweet comedy/drama about teen angst or
2. It could have been made into something to cash in at the box office. Well, you guessed it no 2 won and the result? A sick comedy in the vein of “American Pie,” “Porky’s”, etc. Pornography, homosexuality, crude language and sexual encounters fill this poor attempt of a film which I found about as tasteful as eating someone elses sick… well I watched someone elses sick!
My Ratings: [Extremely Offensive / 2]