Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

ChicDragon It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Myron Clemons A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

stdoan8168 I was expecting to like this movie going in because I happen to think that Shane Dawson has some talent as a comedian. My opinion has severely dropped after this movie.Let me start with the comedy. Most of the dialogue is either cringey or uninspired and the jokes that are supposed to make me laugh because they are gross and random don't work because there is no sense of comedic timing or pacing for each joke. Each joke comes out awkward and forced and most comedies have jokes that tie in to the story but a lot of these jokes are not incorporated very well. The plot is very weak and cliché in a lot of places. The two main leads have to have a fight to propel the third act and you know they are going to end up together somehow because "true love". The screenplay does nothing to help me connect with any of the characters on the screen and most of the characters are deplorable souless beings. We could've at least gotten some funny jokes with the characters from Shane's youtube channel but he decides that these boring and cookie cutter characters are enough to propel the story.The acting is awful but I can feel that Shane is trying in some places but most of the actors need to take some acting lessons.This movie had a horrible sense of pace and the direction is equally awful. The music is some of the most shitty teen melodramatic music I've heard. I am sad that most people who gave this movie a 10/10 probably gave it just because it was Shane Dawson.Shane, I don't hate you but please never do a movie ever again

Mark Seamon-Luciani Here's the deal:I'm a fellow YouTuber with a passion for cinema and the art of film- making and I, along with a myriad of other YouTubers, make short films with our sweat, blood, and tears in the hopes of one day have film-making go from a dream hobby to a reality career. Many of us either remain stranded on YouTube or simply grow tired of film- making. However, a select few achieve the dream and make a real movie, like Shane Dawson, and Michael Gallagher before him with "Smiley". However, both of them have helped suggest to people that YouTubers deserve no position in film."Not Cool" lives up to the title; the movie is nothing but one long YouTube video devoid of humor for any audience above age 12 and a clichéd story that's been done in all possible coatings. Filled to the brink with toilet humor, there's a poop eating hobo, glory holes, public sex, and a girl using a zucchini as a dildo to lose her virginity; all in the first seven minutes mind you.I'm aware that Dawson aimed this film at his fans, who love his YouTube videos for their slapstick, toilet humor, vulgarity-ridden tones and that's perfectly fine. No harm done. The harm is done when nearly one million dollars is wasted on a film poorly written, horribly shot, terribly scored, and just absurdly put together.The actors, like "Smiley" are faces from YouTube and the web and also like "Smiley", they help suggest talents from YouTube are horrible actors. Only Keith David and Roger Bart aren't in "Not Cool" to help carry this film. The characters are either cliché-ridden or just plain annoying; Scott (Shane Dawson) is the biggest wooden actor who whines for 60% of the film, Tori (Cherami Leigh) is the most pessimistic, loathing, depressing, angry, annoying downer I've ever seen period and it's hard for me to even consider liking her, despite the fact she's the main character, Joel (Drew Monson) is the stereotypical, annoying "gonna-try-to-fuck-my-obsessive-crush-if-it's-the-last-thing-I-do" character and I had a headache every time he was on screen, and Jaine (Michelle Veintimilla) hangs around a group of promiscuous girls (one played by Dawson) and is the character than annoyed me the least...so positive?Another point to emphasize the idea of this film feeling like an hour-and-a-half long is that, mentioned above, Shane plays multiple parts in this movie from his YouTube videos (exaggerated roles of a promiscuous teenybopper girl, an outlandish bus-driver, etc.) which further proving that Dawson made no attempt to mature from YouTube onto the silver screen as he claims he wants to.Now I'm sure some reading this review will point it out being for a reality show film produced on a budget on $800,000 and that I'm being harsh on Dawson for being a young director.My response?I haven't watched "The Chair", the show financing it, nor the other competitor's film (and to be honest, I probably won't) and have only seen this one, due to it being more publicized than "Hollidaysburg". In terms of "low budget", I understand it's restricting, but numerous directors have produced American classics with a budget lower than this film. Examples include: Halloween ($300,000), Assault on Precinct 13 ($100,000), THX-1138 ($777,777.77), American Graffiti ($777,000), and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (<$300,000).I will close this review by reiterating that I hated this movie, but I fully support Shane Dawson transitioning into film and the when he does his next film, I'll go see that and the one after that, because I like seeing YouTube filmmakers accomplish their dreams of making a movie. But I suggest you avoid this pile of trash unless you're a die-hard Shane Dawson fan, or...wait, there's no "or".Shane, if you read this, take advice and make an effort to disconnect your YouTube sketches from your films; Hollywood is a newer, broader, and bloodier battlefield...prepare.

July Smith A movie like this to me can be almost completely described by the words minimized comedy. The movie can be minimized, and you doing another task completely while it is playing, and you won't miss too much. You will still get the same giggles, from off colored remarks, as you probably would anyway with watching. As for missing any plot relevant information, because you aren't paying full attention, there is no worry. The writing is laughable. The most typical of typical bollywood comedy love stories. The female lead actress was the most entertaining in the group, while she was still lacking. I believe this was much due to the poor writing though. Even, Drew Monson, the person whom I was enlightened to this movie because of, done quite poor in my opinion. Once again I believe much in due to poor writing, but much more due to lack of experience acting in this case. Shawn Dawson is just a bad actor, I believe, and not near as pretty as he thinks he is. Some of the jokes in this film were just childish, or nothing aside from offensive. Things I would have laughed at, at around the age of 12 and maybe not then some of the time.

defconmusic First let me say this, I had no idea who Shane Dawson was prior to watching The Chair on Starz. I very much enjoyed the entire series and watching how these films actually come together and get made. I respect Shane Dawson and the fact that he stayed true to his goal of targeting a certain demographic and making no apologies about making a movie for his target fans. This "vision" he had for this movie and his target audience both helped and hurt him. It held him back in the holly wood aspect, but helped him in the actual theaters because his fans showed up for him (only when he was actually making a personal appearance),and helped him win the grand prize. Lets be clear, I've seen both movies, and Hollidaysburg is definitely the better movie in every way. Hollidaysburg has mass appeal where as Shanes movie will have a much more difficult time finding an audience that likes it outside the 12-17 y.o girl demographic.The first mistake of this movie (which sinks it from jump street) is the total miscasting of the Lead Character. Shane decided he would be the lead for this movie and play a character that's suppose to have been the really cool popular guy in his high school. Prom King and all around ladies man that every girl had a crush on. REALLY? This was a HUGE ego driven mistake that really affected the movie. Shane is in no way believable as the "cool guy". He's not good looking or masculine enough, he certainly doesn't have the voice or the style to pull this off ,and his energy is just kind of feminine IMO. The whole cutting the hair storyline only works if your hair is cool to begin with. I guess in the teen world a red haired Beiber cut is cool? So Because Shane's role as the cool guy is in no way convincing it takes away from the Chemistry between him and the female Lead(Cherami Leigh) Tori. This makes the main storyline between Scott and Tori not very believable from jump street.The second miscasting is Drew Monson as Joel. Although I believe Drew is immensely talented as an actor he's in no way right for this role. He's supposed to be the guy that went away to college and became a kind of a pimp with lots of action from the women in college. He comes back to the burg and wants to land his high school crush Janie(Michelle Veintimilla) as his girl.The problem again lies in the fact that Joel (Drew Monson) has very little if any Masculine energy AT ALL. Maybe its just me, but from his energy and presence I find it hard to believe that Joel (Drew Monson)is not gay. He's putting his hair behind his ear with two fingers every ten seconds in the movie, and his hanging hand gestures just read feminine/gay all day long. So even though the interactions between Joel and Janie are hilarious at times , its just not believable because of the Chemistry, or lack of.Cherami Leigh as Tori is brilliant, as are the rest of the cast in the female roles.Lisa Schwartz's role as Tori's blind sister Marissa was AWESOME. She really brought her A game to her role and I was left wanting more from her and Tori's interactions. As for the humor in the movie and all the talk about offensive material and politically incorrect , blah blah blah. The humor is no more offensive then any other film with this type of humor. Its blatant in your face over the top slapstick comedy with stereotypes and politically incorrect overly sexual information technology driven satire. This kind of humor resonates with today's youth and even managed to get a few chuckles out of me.The bottom line is this, If it not for the miscasting of the main characters Shane actually could have this movie much better. His off the wall you tube characters were pretty funny and the actual storyline or plot of the movie were not bad. Its the execution that came out bad. Wrong casting, not enough character development between Scott and Tori. We get no real vested insight into to Scott's Psyche besides the fact that you GET NO idea who Scott's original girlfriend is that broke up with him at the start of the movie. Why would "The most popular cool guy in high school" have ever wanted to be with a total psycho dumb over top type chick. Remember that the premise here is that Scott is supposed to be hurt from the breakup and Discovers Tori by accident Literally. The comparisons to 16 candles and other teen comedies that were hugely popular really don't have any place here. Those movies were cast perfectly and all had a very clear and defined storyline with really great character development that helped you buy in. NOT-COOL has none of that going for it with exception to some of the less important female roles.Shane stuck to his vision and demographic, and came out with a seriously flawed movie that only appeals to his core fans. Although talented He missed a real opportunity to gain some mass appeal and make a teen comedy that could have gained him some real recognition as a filmmaker who is serious about telling stories to a broad audience.