Black and white, table conversations (some of which you'd ignore if sitting near in real life), predictable actions, silly dialog... Who need this crap?
My own life can get boring, which is why I love film. I don't need to rent tedium.
3 out of 10 stars
A fast forward special.
I Agree, i got this film as i thought oh yeah might have some good acting and dialogue... big mistake... what rubbish turned it off 20 mins into it... there was no way i was putting up with an hour more of the same crap..
i think 3 stars is way to generous.. i gave it 1
i'm still shaking my head at how useless drivel as this could be published into a feature length movie... really the quality of media over the past years has deteriorated massively... if anyone associated with the movie happens to read this you should be ashamed of yourself for trying to profit out of something so poo like you talentless hacks.
More than a year later, I know..
but this guy gave the worst possible rating he could to a movie he's only seen twenty minutes of?
Stop it, storsnopp. You're abusing the system and screwing it up for people who rely on the ratings to *mean* something.
*sigh*
ObOnTopic:
When I first saw this movie, I thought it was kind of clever and amusing, but nothing spectacular.
Then I caught it again on cable and found myself liking it a little more, wanting to see it one more time... this continued through a couple more viewings until I finally went out and bought it. It's amusement value is very mellow and understated (like everything that happens over coffee and cigarettes), but quite definitely there.
Just like the titular substances, this movie seems to be an acquired taste, and one that you grow to find worthwhile -- relaxing, and reliably diverting.
I know this movies is supposed to have elements of the Absurd - absurdist humour and the idea of communication breakdown etc which are in tandem with the theme of the Absurd. however this movie truly is garbage plains personified. it's a banana peel parading around in gold paper lingerie. it's ultimately pretentious, totally unfunny, tedious and nothing like true Absurdism, or even mild entertainment for that reason.
you want absurdism, check out the plays of Samuel Beckett - Waiting for Godot, Endgame or Tom stoppard's Rosencrantz and Gildenstern are dead(which was also adapted to film). that's quality. this movie is utter crap and the director ought to suffer the consequences for putting such bile packets onto film. who does he think he is? The director of Catwoman?
you should watch it when you throw that word around
whether or not it was a good piece of work is always debatable, i won't go into that (because most art films, or artsy films, are not for everybody)
but a hack is someone who does something purely for the money. Someone who values profit over artistic integrity. And often churning out as much as possible; quantity over quality.
Generally catering to the mainstream (which, considering the reaction this movie got from many people, Jarmusch clearly did not)
Lucas is a hack. Speilberg is a hack. Those CNN politicos are hacks. Steven King is a hack.
Jarmusch may be pretentious, obscure, or boring. But a hack he is not. He had a concept of something and tried to make it, and made no concessions.
That's the kind of attitude artists of all types should adopt.
Love Jar Jar, but this gentleman is completely correct. Talk about a piece of *beep*. Jarmush tries to make an interesting ensemble piece with a bunch of fringe names - most of whom are personal heroes of mine - and creates the most confounded, too cool for school piece of crap I've ever seen. Not only is this wholly unlike any type of conversation you're likely to encounter in a diner, it's wholly unlike any type of conversation you're likely to encounter anywhere. More high-fallloootin than my mid-morning snack with Andre... without the halved grapefruit. And bear in mind... I absolutely love Tom Weights and Measures, except for that summer when I was broke off my ass in LA and that bastard charged minimum $50 to go see him perform... which I didn't pay. Man of the people my ass. Talk about the French being pretentious.
sharegreat fan of "tom weights" and you don't even know how to spell his name.
and why do you want to see a movie about a usual conversation you may encounter at a usual diner or just everywhere?
well, thats what many people who defend the film say they like about it. That anyone who drinks coffee and smokes cigarettes at a coffee shop can relate
shareLove Jar Jar, but this gentleman is completely correct. Talk about a piece of *beep*. Jarmush tries to make an interesting ensemble piece with a bunch of fringe names - most of whom are personal heroes of mine - and creates the most confounded, too cool for school piece of crap I've ever seen. Not only is this wholly unlike any type of conversation you're likely to encounter in a diner, it's wholly unlike any type of conversation you're likely to encounter anywhere. More high-fallloootin than my mid-morning snack with Andre... without the halved grapefruit. And bear in mind... I absolutely love Tom Weights and Measures, except for that summer when I was broke off my ass in LA and that bastard charged minimum $50 to go see him perform... which I didn't pay. Man of the people my ass. Talk about the French being pretentious.
Nobody appreciates quality over quanity anymore! If every movie was exactly the same, would that not be boring? Go back to your beloved mainstream garbage if you think that this is "so bad"!
I usually like Jim Jarmusch films, but you're right... this one blew. I can have better conversations with my cat. A total disappointment!
shareI think that many people are looking at this film in the completely wrong light. Everyone seems to be looking at it as a basic, plot driven, classic Hollywood Narrative film when its not even close to that.
I watched this film with no expectations and immedietly I got the idea of the picture. The way I looked at it was like reading poetry. Most people don't get poetry (and thusly don't like it) I think this film is trying to show realism in surreal settings. Since when does Steven Wright and Roberto Benigni meet for Coffee and Cigarettes, and when is Jack and Meg White going to talk about Tesla. Yet you get the feeling like that sort of conversation might happen. Some may think the conversations are unrealistic; but realism comes from who ever looks at it. Maybe random thoughts is normal to Iggy Pop and Tom Waits. But to be so critical and overall angry at the Jim Jarmusch for trying something different is just childish and petty in my opinion.
See, I thought the problem with this is that the movie really isn't different. There is nothing new here. Rock stars being "brainy"? HELLO! already done to death by Wayne's World. Elvis ripped off black artists? who hasn't heard that said a million times. I could go on... This movie doesn't challenge anything. It is like a string of *beep* student films, amateurishly awkward, terribly acted, full of lame clichés and extremely full of it's image as an "artsy" film. I mean, the excessive use of conventionally "unconventional" camera angles made me wanna puke! And the worst thing is, the entertainment value of this film was zero. Oh, and by the way, even if "most people don't get poetry" there is still good, bad and yes, even extremely *beep* poetry.
shareHello,
Think the movie is about the impossibility of communication and undertsanding between people. It wasn't about what they said, but what they couldn't get through. The point is not what Tom Waits and Iggy Pop say to each other, but the fact that two musicians like them have nothinbg to say to each other. yes, it was boring in the meaning that it didn't tell you anything straight ahead. But you felt bored and frustrated, well so did most of the characters. JJ made you get the feeling - if that is not poetry than nothing is.
Yeah but why would you want to charge people money to feel bored and frustrated? Especially when the trailer made it look like there would be much more dialogue.... and much funnier dialogue.
shareI'd heard a lot of good things about it, but I don't know what those people were thinking. It was boring and pretentious.
shareIt wasn't so much that it was garbage, it was just executed very poorly. It was a good concept, and I was fairly excited to see it. I thought it was just going to be some random conversations between celebrities that wouldn't meet in real life, like Bill Murray sitting with RZA and GZA. And it was, kind of. It tried to much to be an actual movie, and I couldn't take that same damn overhead shot of the table and each person blabbering about more coffee and cigarettes. I thought the title was going to be much more metaphoric, and almost like a long talk show. Too bad.
shareTedious, over-hyped, exhausting garbage. I found myself skipping chapters to find the real depth or message behind this “film” but disappointingly found none. The sad thing is that the premise here could’ve been a great project. The performances of each of the actors (yes, even RZA , GZA., and the bland appeal of an ancient looking Iggy Pop) are fantastically driven and expertly executed. The spoiler is definitely the writing and directing (or lack there of). If I had to sit down and dedicate an hour or so to a bunch of poorly clipped screen-tests of actors chatting over coffee and cigarettes I would’ve actually preferred to watch their real-life dialog, not the mindless crap he had the crew spewing. This could’ve been quite interesting had it not been directed by the “master-mind” behind a movie like Ghost Dog: Way of the Samurai....Goes to show what you can end up with when you’re herded towards a star-studded underground Hollywood hype like this steaming pile.
there's a real problem here- it can be summed up by saying-"deadman, ghost dog, down by law, night on earth, mystery train"... Jim Jarmusch had one hell of an act/set of acts to follow in his own back catalogue! Yes- C&C is pretty weak in places- well, a lot of places- but I've seen worse, a lot worse. however, any of his fans- myself included- seeing this grab bag of mildly diverting set pieces are bound to put it up against his other works.. and that does look good. Five works of genius... I'm tempted to cut the guy some slack and accept that he was bound to get it wrong sooner or later... we all do!
share[deleted]
the movie had some potential, but the more i watched it, the sicker i felt.
the thought of the combination of cigarettes and coffee made me nauseated, but i have a feeling it might have had something to do with the hangover i had when i started watching it :-p
[deleted]
[deleted]
Agreed.
I just saw this movie and it seemed like a nice long ensemble list of actors on the cover duped me into making a bonehead decision at the rental store.
I don't mind something lower budget, gritty, or real, except if that is all the movie has. I did laugh a little at some of the later vignettes, but was very close to taking a permanent pause to go brush my teeth or, better yet, to sit at the coffee shop alone until someone came and tried to fill my coffee... too bad I'm not so famous and interesting.
The scene in which Cate played opposite herself could be accused of choppiness and bad editing except that all the scenes with live action and no cuts were played the same way... (pregnant pause).
I should see Jarmusch's other movies then, I guess, because this one looked like it was pushed out on the merit of his other work.
"Leave my coffee alone!"
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
I wasn't talking to you, redeleven. My replies tend to have a habit of going to the wrong person as of late. I was talking to the person who stated this post, who listed amongst his reasons for disliking this film, the fact thats it's in black and white. I haven't read your post, nor am I really interested in the film, or what people have to say about it, other than people saying it's crap for being black and white. I'm just pointing out that Schindlers List, Raging Bull and Casablanca (amongst many others) are far superior to over 95% of movies anybody could list if they listed a thousand films.
shareI totally disagree, I thought this was an incredible film, Jarmusch's best work yet. I thought each (well, most) of the conversations was very original, very engrossing and thoroughly riviting. I thought the little nuances of it, lines repeated in different vignettes, the different types of coffee (and tea) and the geometrical arrangements of the table-tops was fantastic. Alright, one or two of the vignettes were a bit pointless and would have been better left out (esp Renee which I thought was a total waste of time) but all in all it was amazingly good, with such a range. I think the crispness of the Black and White photography was really, really good, esp manipulated in the way it was. 8 or 9 out of 10 from me for sure.
shareif this film wasn,t in colour(which made it more "sophisticated" than I feel it really was) and some of the actors were unknown("oh,it must be good,they,re in it."),it would be zero.
So many of the lines,especially at the beginning sounded so scripted.It,s the stuff of film school(you each have 10 minutes,theme :cigatettes and coffee,GO!).
Apart from 2 of the scenes,I,ve never heard such bad scripting in a long time.
It, the most dissapointed I,ve been at an arthouse movie(if it is one) in a long time.
[deleted]
whats the matter with you? renee's scene was the best one. mostly cause she was a fox. rule no 1 about movie making, bad or good ones: cast attractive ladies. and you say you were blown away with the tables, whats the matter with you? good luck and good bye.
share