Wow, to read the negative reviews on this site is a sad experience. (the positive ones are great of course). To realize how many people don't get the humor in this film -- it's just way over their heads, apparently (yes, even the brilliantly used "potty" humor) -- and to see how many Americans are sitting around criticizing the VERY FEW among us who are the most active, courageous, daring and funny . . . you people need to take a good look in the mirror.What are YOU doing to expose the hideous corruption and lies and power imbalances endemic in our society? What are YOU doing to entertain people, to create really damn funny films on a small budget that inspire people to get off their asses and act? (and yes, the Yes Men films inspire a LOT of people).Self proclaimed film critics are always among society's most useless and insipid, but in this case, the people griping at the Yes Men for not providing them with an activist film up to their personal standards need to seriously rethink the use of their time in this life.Thank you, Mike and Andy, for giving us some huge laughs and showing us that even two regular guys can stir up the pot for the betterment of humanity.

When I initially heard about this documentary, I thought that it would be, first and foremost, really funny. However, I felt that almost all of the humor in this movie falls as flat as their body suit prank did. If I was a member of this Yes Men group, one of the first goals would be to make an impact. With the pranks that were carried out, an impact was hardly made. Rather, the audiences were kind of lost with what the Yes Men were trying to convey. Were they joking around or kind of serious? Is their speech engaging at all or is it just a bore? Did their messages even make sense at all? I thought their first farce with the body suit was really bad and lost on everyone who viewed it. The second go with the recycled burgers was much better, but once the question and answer session began the Yes Men seemed very lost. I would think they could have thought on their feet a bit better than that. The final prank was alright again, but it seemed that with the spotlight that they were given, they really could have accomplished more. As for the documentary itself, I did not think it was put together very well. There was nothing creative about it. There was nothing added to this by it being a documentary rather than an hour long television show spotlighting what the group actually did.After I finished watching this and began reflecting upon what I just saw, I was really left wondering how much this group was really able to accomplish. It feels to me that the people who put this documentary together really tried to make it seem that the Yes Men made more of an impact than they really did.I definitely agree with what the Yes Men set out to accomplish, but I'm not sure if their story really deserved to be made into a feature length documentary.

This movie made a very important point with great humor about how corporations are destroying our country in the name of greed.Yes Men is great candidate for showing in high schools and colleges so that students can understand how harmful globalization is without boring them to tears.. Education shouldn't have to be painful.Mike Bonanno and Andy Bichlbaum, two very smart guys, spent a lot of time and energy and money to get their point across. Who cares if the audiences are not "high level"? This isn't an "in depth" documentary so if that's what you expect you will be disappointed. It's a hilarious documentary of a couple of ballsy buys who wanted to make a difference by getting their point across and having some laughs. The fact that they don't go IN DEPTH is what makes it perfect for the classroom. There is lots and lots of room for discussion and it's this discussion that raises awareness of the hypocrisy of corporations and their greed. For those writing thesis on how bad and shallow this film is, perhaps they should lighten up and not take themselves so seriously.

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.