Misunderstood
I understand this film was a massive flop, and I can see why. That doesn't mean that I didn't enjoy it though - it was right up my street. As a parody / homage of low-budget sci-fi combined with Jared Hess' deeply weird characters (only the lead...
- 13.September.2010
- |
- by: Tom Morton
- Tom Morton rated this movie7/10Good
Misunderstood
I understand this film was a massive flop, and I can see why. That doesn't mean that I didn't enjoy it though - it was right up my street. As a parody / homage of low-budget sci-fi combined with Jared Hess' deeply weird characters (only the lead character is remotely believable as a human being), I can see that this film would only appeal to a certain niche. But I'm sat in that niche, watching this film, and grinning my face off.
- 13.September.2010
- |
- by: Tom Morton
What did you think about this review?
Thank you for voting.
Abuse report sent
Report abuse
Close
|
Pink vomit...
The movie got horrible reviews, and I can understand why. Pink vomit coming out of Sam rockwell’s mouth is not something that will make everybody laugh. Jemaine Clement speaking in an awkward voice might also not appeal to everyone. It did make me...
- 21.April.2010
- |
- by: barak gilon
- barak gilon rated this movie7/10Good
Pink vomit...
The movie got horrible reviews, and I can understand why. Pink vomit coming out of Sam rockwell’s mouth is not something that will make everybody laugh. Jemaine Clement speaking in an awkward voice might also not appeal to everyone. It did make me laugh though. Suitable for fans of silly humor - devoted fans. Why can't movies that show pink vomit and people with bizarre haircuts get critical acclaim?
- 21.April.2010
- |
- by: barak gilon
What did you think about this review?
Thank you for voting.
Abuse report sent
Report abuse
Close
|
Very sly, very understated, and very, very funny. The mental world (i.e the director & writer) is that of paperback science fiction novels of the 1970s, telegraphed by the great opening titles, even if the story is set in more...
- 29.March.2010
- |
- by: Democritus
- Democritus rated this movie
0/10
Very sly, very understated, and very, very funny. The mental world (i.e the director & writer) is that of paperback science fiction novels of the 1970s, telegraphed by the great opening titles, even if the story is set in more or less the present day. This is the sort of story that can be merely vapid and patronizing, but it's endlessly kind and generous to the characters and their all-too-evident limitations. And there is an irresistible humor in contrasting the genuine goodness (worldly innocence--the only way to stay good?) against the realities of fame, fortune, and a bit of local sex, too. The young man and his mother are done to perfection by the actors. And as the over-weening, self-adoring older author the youth idolizes (but wakes him up to reality, at least in part), Jemain Clement delivers an absolutely classic comic performance. He allowed himself to really become that person. So "Gentlemen" toys just a bit with elements of the weird and gross but mostly strikes the perfect poker-faced balance between nice inferred Mormonism and an adolescent's bad imaginary movie PLUS an actual locally-made set of bad movies. (A textbook formula for funny: unexpected juxtapositions. This is the first time I have seen this director's work, so maybe this is his way.) For comedy in the modern, slightly off-kilter mode (non gross-out section), I would definitely recommend it. 3.10 ________ By the way, you *can* still leave Movie Notes, but they are harder to find under the new layout. Go to your Friends' thumbnails slide sets of titles, and underneath each mini-poster in your own set there is a tiny purple Leave Note button. (I, too, thought it had been lost and had to search.) I also bemoan the loss of Friends ratings on the review page. I fear that Netfl:x is slowly inching away from the Friends and participatory model of its original business. Can it really be such a burden or expense?
- 29.March.2010
- |
- by: Democritus
What did you think about this review?
Thank you for voting.
Abuse report sent
Report abuse
Close
|
Saw this at Fantastic Fest 2009. As a fan of sci-fi, Jermaine Clement, and Sam Rockwell, I really wanted to enjoy this movie, but I found it quite disappointing.
First, the bright spots: Jermaine Clement shined as Ronald Chevalier, the famous...
- 07.October.2009
- |
- by: Austin Mills
- Austin Mills rated this movie
2/10Bad
Saw this at Fantastic Fest 2009. As a fan of sci-fi, Jermaine Clement, and Sam Rockwell, I really wanted to enjoy this movie, but I found it quite disappointing.
First, the bright spots: Jermaine Clement shined as Ronald Chevalier, the famous sci-fi author in the twilight of his career. The writing was also occasionally funny. Unfortunately, it was only occasionally funny. What could have been an excellent device for parody, the visualization of the snippets of the young hopeful's sci-fi story as it goes through several rounds of changes, passes parody on its way to stupidity. Several of the moments in the movie fall flat when they could have been great, just because they are pushed too far, trading wry humor into moronic sight gags. I place the blame for that at the feet of writer/director Jared Hess, who did something similar but much better with Napoleon Dynamite. The rest of the supporting cast was good, but limited by their one-note characters.
- 07.October.2009
- |
- by: Austin Mills
What did you think about this review?
Thank you for voting.
Abuse report sent
Report abuse
Close
|