Grassroots is one of the many films to be scheduled in the 'Laugh' category of the newly structured London Film Festival. This would lead you to believe that the film is a comedy, no? Even LFF programmer and film critic person Michael Hayden said so in the programme:
Stephen Gyllenhaal’s adaptation of real events documented in Campbell’s book Zioncheck for President is a pertinent and hilarious political comedy. Biggs and Rhodes prove to be a terrific double act, though the Emerald City rivals them as the true star of the film.
Pertinent and hilarious? Starring Jason Biggs, the chick from that unfunny TV show and Avengers Assemble and whatisface from Avatar? Count me in, I foolishly thought on a brisk October morning. Well my friends, I can tell you that Grassroots should only be considered a comedy if the meaning of the word has been changed to "painfully awful film with no redeeming qualities or point". 97 minutes I sat there trying to uncurl my toes and stop myself from sighing while wondering why the hell anyone could conceivably consider this a comedy.
This is based on the true story of two unemployed oddballs (said with a massive dollop of disdain) who decide to run in the upcoming City Council elections because they love trains and hate Cedric the Entertainer, or something. Each character is about as interesting as some boiled vegetables and no-one changes in any way over the course of the film, not to mention the built-up plot points tossed away. Like, why did they make a big deal of Phil Campbell (Biggs) cheating on his girlfriend - although technically - only for his other half to not even find out? How did anyone consider this script to be worthy of a film? And why do I want to punch Joel David Moore so much?
Grassroots is in cinemas now if you hate your money and want to waste it.