-Awful narration and dialogue -The plot was overflowing with cliches -Most of the characters were simply stereotypes -The story had absolutely no direction (the whole bit about the land had absolutely nothing to do with the plot about the wife) -The "humor" was just plain shock value. This wasn't a dramedy; it was a drama with cussing and violence that I was apparently supposed to laugh at.
I could go into more detail, but really, I just want to know if other people also thought it was terrible. I think this is easily the worst movie I've seen this year (and I watched No Strings Attached and Gnomeo And Juliet). (EDIT: I just watched Thor. Thus, my last comment is no longer valid.) I saw this with two other friends, and when we left the theater, before I told them what I thought, I asked them what they thought, and they both said it was really bad.
How this has a higher rating on Rotten Tomatoes than The Help, Beginners, Jane Eyre, Barney's Version, etc. is beyond me.
Totally over-rated,insulting to the audience (not that they care) and I think George Clooney as much as he tried is a cold fish, even when crying. He should play a serial killer something really cold, he would be great.
So, this is a film of subtle nuance and singular experiences that is about change and our decisions. So, you find out that the person you are with has *beep* another guy and is in love with that person. And, your kids are messes and you are left with those messes your wife left you with. And, your wife was a mess who wanted to divorce you, so all of the anger and *beep* you are mad about you can't say because she's in a coma isn't being heard.
And, you want to confront the guy who never loved your wife and maybe led her on for a real-estate deal. And, you have greedy, planning-to-spend-the-money-already cousins, nephews, etc. all waiting for you to decide upon the mother-lode.
Then, there are moments of truth about who you are, who your kids are, and who everyone thinks you are and you are telling me this film had nothing to say? Really...? YAFKM. Right... That's the best you have?
Please go out and live life and experience pain, or maybe it will eventually come to you. This is a film for life's warriors, not Puss'n Boots types.
Yes, I work at a college, am underpaid, overworked, but yet have time to secretly work for the the movie industry. Reality check. I just liked the movie dullard. Try to lose the conspiracy theory jaundice. It's unbecoming for such a worthwhile expert in the history of film as you.
As, for troll in the other sense of the word, just 'spressing my rationale. So, TTLBSLI.
Was this directed at me? Because "the poster is being a troll" refers to andycycle. I was helping you out. Besides, what you wrote doesn't even pertain to anything in this thread. If another poster's response is underneath yours with an indention, non-parllel to yours, that means he/she has responded to you.
You're right, Atlas_shrugged, the basis of this movie is quite good; everything in the story, all the turmoil between characters, the questions it raises, the themes, feelings, it's all there. The real problem lies in the awkward way the movie goes about executing everything. The writing is quite bad at times. I don't mean to sound like some screenwriting *beep* a professor of scripts, but it's a shame to see a movie with such humane meaning, having been written as a melodrama, especially as a movie like this relies very heavily on the emotional peaks. But most of those fell flat for me due to such a lack of foreshadowing, build-ups, or transitioning, in other words, a classic melodrama - it just jumps into the emotions. "You have no idea, do you? *pause* Dad, mom was cheating on you."
Perhaps these sort of shocking announcements were done without any build-up cause we, like the character, are also supposed to feel the shock? That could be an interesting way of looking at it, and in a certain amount I think it could work like this, but since the movie has so much of it, there's this very noticeable feeling I had that my heartstrings were just being dicked around, especially since there are countless scenes of probably every single character in the movie crying at some point. Yes, crying's a part of life, but on screen it can be nauseating to watch repeatedly and from every angle, especially from people we barely care about (the wife's girlfriend, balling her eyes).
And come on, the wife lying in a coma looked ridiculous, mouth hanging open, face all discolored, yet there were so many cuts to it during scenes which were obviously supposed to be tear-jerking, but seeing the wife just made it feel awkward, like a horror film almost. It's not as if the movie was going for ultra-realism. It's a half-drama, half-quirky comedy, quirky because for nearly every dramatic moment, there HAD to be some comedic relief to follow it up, like when Alex is confessing her feeling to mom at her bedside, then gets too carried away and her dad smacks her, I admit, it was a genuinely dramatic moment and it indeed provoked feelings, but then there goes lil sis - "you just got served!" Lines like this completely undermined the drama everytime, the movie simply didn't know what it wanted to be more, dramatic or funny or touching.
The connivery is also evident in the use of music. I hated those Hawaiian jingles ALWAYS being there. I admit, when Matt is on the beach jogging and then begins stalking Bryan, the peacefulness of it was great, just the sound of the ocean waves as he stalked, it was actually very suspenseful, but then the closer he got to the house, here comes the jingly music, completely ruining the suspense, Matt peaking his head up over the bush, bug-eyed, here we go with the unnecessary laughter again... Good grief.
I just thought the direction was very sloppy and unimaginative, the movie feeling like it was tailor made to please audiences, therefore to me it just lost any credibility as being genuine. There were a few genuine, nice moments, like Matt telling the mom's girlfriend she was "putting lipstick on a corpse," and him talking to Bryan in the house and then kissing the wife upon his exit, but these are only small moments. My god, Bryan's wife, don't get me started, when she came into the hospital at the end - was that supposed to be funny? I mean, was Matt straight up kicking her out of the hospital room cause he was annoyed? I sure was. Judy Greer is a comedy actress, you can't expect me to take her seriously in that moment. Too many familiar faces. Laird Hamilton?
You know I could just go on for days about this movie
Just one point, and I don't want to go into this too deeply, but I have to disagree with your assertion about the "the wife lying in a coma looked ridiculous" As someone who has gone through a very similar situation with a loved one, I can unfortunately attest to the fact that these scenes were most disturbingly realistic. Who ever staged these scenes has obviously gone through the scenario for real. I hope you never have to.
atlas that shrugged(or something) said the below...
"So, this is a film of subtle nuance and singular experiences that is about change and our decisions. So, you find out that the person you are with has *beep* another guy and is in love with that person. And, your kids are messes and you are left with those messes your wife left you with. And, your wife was a mess who wanted to divorce you, so all of the anger and *beep* you are mad about you can't say because she's in a coma isn't being heard.
And, you want to confront the guy who never loved your wife and maybe led her on for a real-estate deal. And, you have greedy, planning-to-spend-the-money-already cousins, nephews, etc. all waiting for you to decide upon the mother-lode.
Then, there are moments of truth about who you are, who your kids are, and who everyone thinks you are and you are telling me this film had nothing to say? Really...? YAFKM. Right... That's the best you have?
Please go out and live life and experience pain, or maybe it will eventually come to you. This is a film for life's warriors, not Puss'n Boots types.
Cheers."
Amen to that... very well put...
Not sure what people want if this story doesn't have a plot... seems many people accuse films of not being about anything when it wasn't about anything for THEM. If you go to see a Payne film you know it's going to be about ordinary people fighting extraordinary circumstances in a nuanced, honest way. His best one so far I reckon...
The plot with the family's land was supposed to be a parallel to the main plot with his dying wife. I'm not saying it necessarily worked that well, but they were pretty clearly trying to draw parallels between his decision to give up the land and giving up his wife. There were several scene changes that cut straight from one plot to the other with a similar screen set up - particularly at the end of the movie, when he announces that he won't sign over the land and the camera pans to the back of his head, then cuts to the same shot of the back of his head in the hospital after unhooking his wife from life support.
Basically, they were trying to show that refusing to sell the land was his way of hanging onto his wife's memory.
That's true. I think I wasn't clear: I understood how they were parallel plots, but at the same time they were independent and for the most part, unrelated stories that were connected by filmmaking gimmicks. There was a small amount of relevance, yes, but the movie tried to make them seem much more related than they actually were. That's my interpretation, anyway.
It had to be the worst movie I've seen in years. Inane plot, horrible acting...too awful for words. I would have rather been in the dentist's chair, enduring a root canal.
I totally agree, this is a terrible movie, i just don't get how this movie get good reviews! The dialogue are plain and predictable, the ending sequences is just too long and too cheesy. This movie would be so much better if it were 45 mins shorter!!!!! It would be even better if it change the director!!!
This is how I interpret what this movie is about, and its message:
Matt's wife, Elizabeth, was a metaphor for Hawaii. A land of great beauty and exhilaration. A free spirit. But, spoiled by the beauty and free spirit lifestyle. Deflowered by land development. Indeed, the inheritors went "wh_ring" after the money created by land development. (See book of Hosea, who married a prostitute as a metaphor for the unfaithfulness of the Israelite people. (I bring this up for for literary purposes, nothing else.) Her comatose condition is a metaphor for Hawaiian land owners who are "comatose" in their lack of awareness of the damage they cause to a beautiful place by "cavorting" with land development. Her father wanted for her (and probably himself) only the good life that money could buy, and criticized Matt for failing to unlock the treasure. Indeed, Elizabeth's affair was with a real estate broker who was going to profit by reason of the land development.
Note the opening sequence (and others) with the focus on traffic and high rise buildings.
The irony is that Matt was, himself, a real estate transactional lawyer, who made his (very good) living off of sale and purchase (and probably development) of real estate.
Note the point that Elizabeth suffered her injury on a power boat, not a sail boat.
Matt, still sensitive to the old ways, still loved his wife (i.e., loved "old Hawaii"). Oldest daughter Alex hated her mother for her ways (i.e., hated the loss of respect for the old ways; nostalgic for the time spent camping on the family's property). Indeed, Matt was concerned whether his daughters would appreciate/value old Hawaii.
As the saying goes, there is "nothing new under the sun." The theme of the comatose/dead person appearing at the beginning of a movie was used in "The Big Chill" (the character the friends come to bury is a metaphor for the idealism of the 60s). The metaphor of a person on their death bed being nostalgic for the innocent past goes back at least to Citizen Kane (probably much earlier in literature.)
Anyhow, I view the movie as a vehicle for a rebuke of those who inherit much land in Hawaii for selling it off for land development.
I loved the faint chirp of the crickets that seemed to permeate the movie...kept me remembering the land, like the land was calling out to us all through the movie.
The thing is, I actually noticed most of those points. I noticed the similarities between Elizabeth and Hawaii, but I don't feel it justifies the two otherwise unrelated plots. I think this movie WANTED to be considered from an analytical perspective, but on the surface, I thought most of the characters seemed flat, and most of the dialogue was trite, so I didn't care to explore. There are metaphors in this movie, but they couldn't make me care about the story. And you even admitted that some (I would say most) of the ideas used are hardly anything new.
Overrated? Most definitely. 2011 was painfully mediocre for movies. People are searching for something that is even remotely good for Oscar contention. "Plain terrible?" No. I agree that it felt as if it was too long. Most of your criticisms are valid, and we knew that the mom was going to die almost at the beginning, so by the time they were saying their last goodbyes I was almost asleep.
I think I thought it was terrible because I think there's not much worse than a mediocre drama. Watching a mediocre action movie, let's face it--there's still action, so you can enjoy yourself. A mediocre comedy can still make you laugh occasionally. But a drama that doesn't move you? That's just a derp, plain and simple.
You reminded me of a saying I heard a few years ago: "there is nothing more embarassing than being a one-hit wonder in the '90s." Different genres and eras have different standards. You're right.
Just saw the movie this weekend and couldn't agree more. I generally love Clooney and thought Payne's Sideways was excellent. This was simply awful. Boring, tired, depressing, unfunny, etc. The only redeeming point was the performance of Woodley as the daughter. I think she was great. Not Clooney's best work - he was far better in Up in the Air.
Reading all of your dull responses, without specificity to as why it was bad or unrealistic, is like washing dirty dishes. You keep waiting for a moment of clarity in a pool of muck and murkiness, but you never really get to the heart of it. The fact that so many of you don't "get" this movie, is a testament to the movie watchers of America. I bet most of you loved Transformers, Captain America, Twilight or whatever the vamp movie is called, Jack and Jill, X-Man, or "Hold the F*ng train" you are only just now posting to IMDB, right.
So, until I see either a) a substantial review of movies indicating some type of substantive review of film as a decade collective of views or b) something that takes you above gen-x froth, I discount all of these brain-light comments as they are meaningless.
The comments I read, from the ilk I read, are mediocre, non-substantive, and since you don't indicate specificity, you haven't seen the film. Check and mate dullards and the mediocre 99%.