Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

I'll tell you why so serious

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

These two guys are just the kind of political activists we need today. They show how every person can fight for justice and even go up against enormous corporations if you plan a careful and clever strategy using dark humor as your main weapon. What's really amazing is that they're small-town filmmakers from upstate NY who have pulled off a movie that's much better than most of the stuff Hollywood churns out.Though this is an older film, it's still one of the funniest and most satisfying documentaries you'll ever enjoy. You won't believe the stunts they get away with--and you'll be rooting for them every step of the way.You can even check it out for free now on Hulu.com.

Going to see this movie, I expected to disagree with its message, but I wanted to know how easily one can fool top trade negotiators, and hoped to laugh at some funny pranks. I was wrong on all three counts.First of all, there is nothing to disagree with, because the movie contains a single claim of any political relevance: apparently, trade agreements have reduced the power of governments (but how could an international agreement fail to restrain governments?). Actually, this claim is of interest for what it says about the anti-globalization movement: they take to the streets to increase the power of the State. We have come a long way since 1968! There is also a guest appearance by Michael Moore, but he does not have anything relevant to contribute, apart from a self-satisfied smirk. Not surprisingly, there is no mention of the intellectual father of anti-globalization: Benito Mussolini.Second, the Yes Men did not go anywhere near top trade negotiators. In fact, I am not sure that they went anywhere near anybody who knows what the WTO is supposed to do (not that it manages to do much, but that's another issue). More on this later.So the only thing to discuss is the entertainment value. Part of the movie is reality TV: we watch the Yes Men as they get up late, get a costume manufactured, change clothes in a toilet, etc. Eventually, we get to see the first prank at a conference in Finland. Here, the Yes Men deliver a lecture, pretending to be from the WTO. The lecture starts by addressing an academic question about slavery (note to those who never heard the question before: Adam Smith addressed it in 1776); and ends with a pathetic attempt at a visual gag. The pained expressions of members of the audience suggest that they, like me, were just hoping that it would be over as soon as possible. The Yes Men take the silence of the audience as a sign of stupidity. It does not occur to them that maybe the prank is just not funny.We are not told who were those people in Finland, but one thing is clear: they were not top trade negotiators. If they were, they would not go to a conference whose organizers confuse the Yes Men with the WTO.But there is a deeper problem: according to the Yes Men's lecture, the WTO is devoted to developing gadgets. Now here is the Catch-22: if the audience were taken in, then they do not know anything about the WTO; if they were not taken in, then the Yes Men made fools of themselves.There are a couple of other pranks. One is at the expense of a college class. This prank managed to make me smile, but I do not recommend watching it on a full stomach. This time we know for a fact that the students were taken in. They, too, believe that the WTO is devoted to technical development. Not a good advertisement for the college.Finally, the Yes Men persuade an Australian chamber of commerce (or was it a news conference in Australia? I can't remember, and the movie web site doesn't say) that the WTO is closing down. The concept is pretty bold, actually it should have been the best prank in the movie, but it falls short because we do not get to see the targets of the prank when they realize that they have been taken in.Members of the chamber of commerce (or whatever) were interviewed while still under the impression that the WTO was really closing down, and they seem to think that it is a good idea to do so. This is surprising enough for me to give an extra star to this movie. But what do they think is wrong with the WTO? Their answers do not go beyond banalities, which is a pity. So much more of a pity, since there will never be another chance to ask them.In conclusion: If you want to know more about "globalization", do not waste time on this movie. If you just want to see some funny pranks, then see "Amici Miei" (1975): too cynical for some people, but at least there is something to laugh about, and even the toilet humor manages to be funny.

"The Yes Men" co-director, Chris Smith, created possibly the funniest documentary movie I've ever seen, "American Movie" (2000), about a zany character named Mark Borchardt, himself an amateur filmmaker and world class natural slacker comedian.Smith's next (and most recent) film was "Home Movie" (2002), a disappointing study of five eccentric houses and the people who created and lived in them. That film proved it was Borchardt, not Smith, who made the earlier film so good, and that when it comes to probing the lives of unusual people, Smith is no Errol Morris. Now, with help, Smith takes a different tack, entering the fast paced, highly competitive world of "polidocs": documentaries about hot political and social issues, a burgeoning film genre these days.The Yes Men are an actual group of prankster geopolitical activists, led by Andy Bichlbaum and Mike Bonanno, who oppose the Bush Administration and the current trends in global trade regulation and the WTO, which, they and many other critics assert, exploit developing nations to make rich countries richer.The Yes Men group has maintained a website with a domain name close to that used by President Bush as his official website. On The Yes Men's site, they have posted many items that are sufficiently critical of the Administration that Bush operatives tried to bluff these fellows into removing the site. The Yes Men have also succeeded in sending representatives to speak at international trade conferences, masquerading as official representatives of the WTO and getting away with it.Actually, they always use the same man, Andy Bichlbaum, as speaker, but he uses a variety of humorous aliases. His top performance to date was one in Finland, where he removed a carefully constructed pull away business suit, to reveal a shiny gilt colored superhero suit underneath, replete with a three foot long "penis," also covered in the same shiny gold fabric, enlarged at the tip (OK, glans to be anatomically precise) to encompass a small TV screen. This suit was proposed by Andy as a useful work costume for a third world sweatshop superintendent, enabling him to efficiently watch over the work force using video. What amuses is the way that Andy gets away with making outrageous statements (always delivered in deadpan, serious mode), and even pulling off appearing in his soft porn spacesuit getup before audiences of professional accountants, corporate officers and government ministry types, who take him seriously! When he tried the same stunt with an audience of college students in Plattsburg, New York, they caught on to his artifice quickly. So, does this mean that people who attend international trade-related conferences actually don't listen to the speakers? Do language barriers get in the way? Or are those people more gullible or hip than the rest of us? Who can tell? I found this film mildly funny but crippled by its superficiality of content and sloppy editing. Not only is no effort made to elucidate the issues of world trade problems, there isn't even an attempt at coherent presentation of the anti-WTO position. To my surprise, this film was the Audience Award Winner at the 2004 International Documentary Film Festival in Amsterdam. My rating: 5.5/10 (C+). (Seen on 12/19/04). If you'd like to read more of my reviews, send me a message for directions to my websites.

Following in the footsteps of Micheal Moore come another pair of left-wing satirists taking a swipe at the corporate bigwigs who run the US: meet Mike Bonanno and Andy Bichlbaum, the Yes-Men.The film revolves around four pranks staged by these two men where they impersonate representatives of the World Trade Organisation. The first is where Andy participates an international debate as an improbably named WTO official. The second sees them approach a lecture hall full of highly educated officials and academics, and suggest a new way of monitoring employees involving a screen built into a golden phallus.The third time they lecture a roomful of idealistic college students, with a plan to cure Third World starvation using burgers made from recycled human excrement, and in the fourth they tell a conference of Australian business people the WTO is shutting down.Throughout all of this, people are disgusted, horrified, elated or outraged and yet nobody appears to notice that it's all a big con. Some of this is effective, especially the third lecture which draws a hilariously angered response from the students.However, the film is weighed down by too much exposition which slows the narrative and makes the film's point seem laboured and heavy-handed. Most of the humour is ineffective, and the situations the pair find themselves in are not utilised to full comic effect.However, I would like to see more from the Yes-Men. The concluding, sombre note of the film is a reminder of how important satire remains today. With some more developed humour and a wider range of targets, the Yes-Men could easily become a force to be reckoned with.