annonymo

After long time of not leaving IMDb reviews, I am compelled as a public service to do so

I almost tuned out after the first excruciating minutes, but I stayed with the train wreck only to see it get worse.

I glimpsed at the IMDb reviews and was stunned to see a few glowing 20 star reviews from single entry accounts that can only be from the makers friends and family, creditors or the devil himself.

So my counter so you don't fall into the trap. The plot is a rehashed to the point of plagiarism, meet-cute, rom-col, opposites attract, road trip slip with even more stale comic elements. As Stanislavsky, Meisner and Hagen spin in their graves we are subjected to unconvincing, cardboard, unmotivated portrayals is a prissy NJ suburban bridesmaid (w a 49ers flag) who doesn't drive or fly forces to travel to a NC wedding(a 7 hour trip) with an effeminate former MD groomsman freshly single who follows his bliss as a nature photog (who we learn has stalker red flags).

There is no chemistry with tired hiking s like, mis-answered phone calls, potty humor and "shocking " sex talk.

The dialogue takes uninspired, amateurish, out-of-the hiccups that seems to stat and stop like jump cuts. Not sure if I can blame editing, acting, director but each line reading (dine as if day one of a table read ) is punctuated by a full stop while the next actor has to start their monotone, tears or unwarranted action think the opposite of HIs Girl Friend or It happened on night. Further review of IMDb shows an inexperienced cast the lead actress has a kewpie doll voice inappropriate for her age, but it could be she is playing a paper-thin stereotype of a female lead as if a source for an SNL parody. The lead male is too bland abs boring to even comment on

On the era of peak streaming how desperate is PRIME for content foe this low-budget stuff laden with plot holes. Can't give this any credit, at every turn I'm go smacked as the romance and comedy is cut short by "serious" character development it just a sad waste and the phony reviews are only a further crime. You ahod be embarrassed.

I thought this might be a remake of "Fourteen Hours," but instead it was a remake of about a thousand other movies using tired bits of dialogue, situations and artless direction.

Especially,in light of the recent magnificent skyscraper shots of MI:4; even the ledge shots are dull.

The cast is decent and good looking. But even the casting belies the plot "twists" that are supposed to surprised us. They have all done so much better elsewhere or so good-looking (Genesis Rodriquez, who just happens to strip to her undies for no good reason) they should!

I can forgive incongruous events, awkward expository dialogue and can suspend my disbelief but, when it so unimaginative as this. Also, when or when can we stop stereotyping or laughing at old hack jokes that may have been funny once, but, damn it, give it up--do audiences think its polite to laugh at at something that just alludes to something that once was funny..(no spoilers...but I would be doing you a favor). And once again a Latina is a the beautiful sassy sexualized girlfriend. I guess they wanted to toss in a little cultural diversity by using the oldest tropes in the book. I could go on and on but I don't want to run up the score. January really is the dumping ground of loser films.

Sorry, the filmmakers certainly were earnest and struggled to put together a shoe string- production that doesn't show its bare-bones roots too much. However, nobility of art,hard work, and films from made at used care prices don't necessary mean good films. Apparently not autobiographical, the movie does seem to be a friends and family production that might have done with a intervention from professionals or least some objective influence. This film might have been a little bit stronger if it indeed were an autobiographical story ( the filmmakers claimed it was not). Oddly enough, putting the film together must have been a testament to the filmmaker's friendship, struggle and dedication for art over pragmatism. However, the movie's themes run directly counterfactual to that premise. I respect their efforts, but I guess they may have been to close to the material. Alas, the whole package reminds me of a zillion other domestic drama movies i have seen at film fests. The same situations, same undercooked script, no really cinematic sophistication--which is not always a bad thing.

In brief, the movie is a coming-of-maturity struggle of Matt reconciling his responsibilities versus his dreams of becoming a musician. On one side is his Desi wife, his stereotypical un- accepting in-laws and his son. On the other is long-time friend and bandmate, Matt. The soundtrack is strewn with self-written music that is an amalgam of average jangle-pop and pseudo-John Lennon Beatles' tunes. It is all forced dialog and predictable situations, it is unoffensive yet forgettable, unpromising and nothing to really set it apart."A" for effort and all that, but you still wouldn't want to put down your cash for it or recommend it to others.

One very very minor nitpick that is a pet peeve of mine although open to debate. The filmmakers refer to Hornell and Steuben County as "Upstate," where "Southern Tier" would be more accurate and used by most natives from west of the Hudson. And some of us even resent the use of Upstate.

I saw the trailer for this film a few times recently and was quite eager to see it. Besides the pedigree of filmmakers (hilarious Pineapple Express, etc) and a trailer that really made me laugh that seemed to not use only the best material from the movie unlike most trailers these days.

So, when i picked to see an advance screening last night I stoked. But, I was sorely disappointed with what I saw. Not that the movie was a total loss and failure, it just was such a let down. Oddly enough, the best part of the movie was the non-comedic elements. It actually plays pretty well as a predictable homage to fantasy films. But other than a few chortles here and there the comedy falls flat. I am no prude, but the chief humorous device used is to have the fantastical character curse. Overused and obvious, just say the word "F**K" repeatedly and having obvious dick jokes was just tiresome and not funny. The slapstick falls flat and even the attempts at gross-out jokes a la Farrelly Brothers and Wayons brothers Scary Movie farces don't even rise ( lower?) to that level. And, Natalie Portman doesn't even show up until the second half of the movie! Sigh. What a let down.

I am compelled to warn the world after just wasting 90 minutes watching this supposed "Big Chill" for Generation Y. It gets nothing right, the script is dull pang of exposition, there are random camera cuts merely entered to cover poor directorial decisions and each disjointed "moment" is punctuated w/ abstrusely strident violin music to say THIS IS important. AT least its low budget indicates that little money was diverted from potentially other movies. This type of thing gives independent films a bad reputation as talkfests. Stay away. I wish i could credit some actor as shining light, making do w/ this poor script, but NO. If can say something good, I guess at least the film didn't have too many product placements. ugh.

dorky guy is dumped by beautiful woman seeks solace, and surprise another stunning beautiful woman falls for him.

just no forget to include the humor this time. ..just kinda there. let's hope the cut i saw is spruced up....the female cast is game, but just treated with disrespect and as cardboard stereotypes. In fact, all the cast and characters....been there. seen that. cameos from Jonah Hill and Paul Ruud as stock characters in the Apatow can. Ruud has a few yucks. Jack McBrayer as a honeymooner is yet again the same character ... he is so funny on 30 rock. i wonder if he is one-trick pony.

and just too much male nudity. not funny and not needed.

geez what was the point, a boring (to use warner-herzog's words in the film) "artsy-fartsy," scriptless, barely storied stab a movie. maybe THAT was the point, to insult us film fest audiences to show our standards are infused w/ artifice or whatever. But, I have had my nobs twisted by so many better films and filmmakers. poor Chloe and and ewan and the cast. save them from this unitelligible dreck..

I saw this film at the NYC expecting (as billed) "a bold technologically advanced silent film." As a fan of silent cinema, I had great expectations for a re-telling of a classic tale. Sad to say this movie does not live up to the hype. set in modern times this movie tells the very typical silent movie plot of the forlorn women who ends up the prey of a white slaver. There were zillions of silent movies w/ this plot and they all were done better 80 years ago. the 3 leads are miscast, especially the female lead who is too old and not nubile enough. and the silent acting only touches upon the classic style of the genre. Almost becomes camp at points, as the audience giggled at many inappropriate moments. I see no audience for silent films fans, and certainly no audience for others.

Once again it is "revenge of the PAs" on a tired movie about movie makers and getting the movie deal. yawn.. I suspect the filmmakers thought this would be revenge on all the producers that mistreated them so. However, in the face of this drivel they should be banned from any set.

A middling story of conjoined twins as they search for their mother, one falls in love, and struggle to survive. There are a few predictable attempts at "meaning" but nothing too deep here. A very good performance by Michelle Hicks as the female lead lights up the screen, but for the most part no real surprises.

Is this what passes for satire and cutting edge in France these days? A few gross-outs here and there do not not make a black comedy, sardonic humor or even a point. Tries to shock the audience w/ s/m references, homosexuality, and rodentaphagia, but instead takes lames potshots at the easiest of marks....the nuclear family unit and their false portrayal in the media. yawn.

Too bad. Black comedy attempt that tries to mix sibling love w/ over-the-tops humor. I wish there were no subtitles, then maybe I could blame it on the idiom. Scotland is made all the more dreary. Is there one one likeable/sympethetic lead character? Not even the poor actress in the wheelchair! How could they cock that up? I don't see a US audience for this one.

One cannot deny, the clever twist, and the movie that cemented the cult of kevin spacey. But, this one really is a ponzi scheme of a movie. I am willing to except a few flaws, and even a Cabinet of Caligari misdirection, but this leaves me cheated. the house of cards falls and tosses the suspension of disbelief out, and goes for sleight of hand. oh well. at least this one gave the teen male audiences, something else to rave about other than tarantino movies.

I went to a screening of this film w/ expectations of another teen-flick. I was quite pleasantly surprised. I found the movie rife w/ unexpected humour, twists and a great dark sense of the high school experience as it touches on the themes of ethics vs. morals. In the false world of the new spate of teen movies like "Can't Hardly Wait" the wretched Araki and Korine movies etc. (w/ the exception of some films like the the solid but unspectatular Varsity Blues) this movie is such a breath of fresh air. It refuses to attach itself to the conventional portrait of teens, yet it does not take itself as seriously.

A key to the film's success is the brilliant casting of Matthew Broderick as the high school teacher at a life's cross-roads who manipulates a student election. In the shadow of his past as "Ferris Beuller" this movie comes as a sharp response to the legacy of Ferris as the ur-slacker. Reese Witherspoon is spot-on as the "anti-Ferris'" the overachieving student who must succeed at all costs. Many other great performances.

In the wake of such films as The Truman Show (a more meaningful film), Real Life (a funnier film) and Guy (an edgier film) this film is quite a let-down. In particular the Mandel-Ganz trademark script devise of sibling rivalry/redemption is wearing quite thin. The Rob Reiner bad-media guy stock character is trite (maybe he should devote some of the brain research money he admirably raises to the writers). The rest of the cast is perfunctory, especially Jenna Elfman, who looks like a surprised Bert Lahr throughout the enire movie.The direction appears to be on auto-pilot, but there are a few laughs.

A fun, non-condescending view of Star Trek fans. Fan culture is treated with respect and only a hint of irony, as we see profiles of star trek conventions. Included are fans who wear regalia on the job, and a Star Trek dentist's office! There is even a bit on the academic nature of fan culture and "cultural-poaching" Although, a word from an "expert" or two would have been more enlightening, rather than the comments from the Psychotherapist who uses Trek for therapeutic metaphors (!) Even enjoyable to the non-Trek fan, and shows these folk to be no more freak than your average rowdy or football fan.