Wow, I can't believe I let my friend drag me in to see this movie. Acting terrible, plot was confusing, editing terrible, I mean you could see the mike in a few scenes and it was very noticeable. definitely not John Cusacks best work.
shareThe 'mic' in a few scenes was probably because of the projectionist misaligning the projector or something along those lines not really sure.
I thought the acting was great and the plot was easy to follow as long as you don't expect the movie to explain every scene as it's happening, some things unravel later but on the whole it was a simple story done well.
I would say it was a good film noir, maybe you just don't like this kind of movie and thats not a good reason to say it's terrible.
If you are a pastafarian and are 100% proud of it, then put this as your signature.
[deleted]
I bought this on DVD before actually seeing. Absolutely loved it. Just because you didn't like it, doesn't mean it's terrible. Just not your type of movie.
I think it's funny that a lot of people compare this to Coen brothers' movies. I just watched Burn After Reading yesterday and it reminded my very much of Ice Harvest. Not that that's a bad thing, I really liked Burn also.
---
If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times....who are all you people?
You consider two of the best working actors (Thornton, Cusack) to be bad at their jobs. . . they're not.
You were too dumb to understand a well explained plot. . . your fault.
Editing wasn't terrible, explain it if you can.
And the mics that were visible were not the film's fault. Re-watch on DVD. They're not there. It was the projectionist's fault, not the film's.
-AP3-
'These muffins taste bad.'
[deleted]
"definately mediocre"-coming from somebody who can't spell the word definitely. Which is funny because IMDB underlines misspelled words. This movie was very good and you should not call it mediocre just because it did not entertain you. I thought many scenes were brilliantly directed as can be expected from Ramis. Do I think it had some faults? Yes, most movies do. Overall though I thought he did a good job. I thought the movie was funny and fit perfectly in the neo-noir category. Also to call the movie a huge disappointment is tantamount to a slap in the face for a director as brilliant as Harold Ramis. I'd like to see you do better.
shareOh, I love it when people dare people to "do better." It's funny because it's not like Harold Ramis has a bit more of a budget than some stranger on the Internet but no. No, you keep using that as a "legitimate" argument for your case.
The knack to flying lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
Agreed, this movie blows. Cant believe Ramis directed it. What a shame....
sharei know, i was banking on it being great because of the cast and ramis directing... but then again year one looked bad as well... maybe he is losing his touch.
not that i am a coen brothers fanboy, but i rented and watched miller's crossing before this, and that was a great show... i can see what people mean in terms of feeling like one of their movies... i still have "the cooler" and "barton fink" to watch on my week of being snowed in, so hopefully they don't disappoint.