A failed attempt at an arthouse movie?


This looks like an arthouse movie with its obvious Wes Anderson influences (I consider Anderson to be at least borderline arthouse, if not fully blown), cast and unconventional quirky indie type plot. However it's rare to see a would be art movie get such overwhelming negative reviews, maybe it was the casting of Sheen, although the impression I get is that this is a mess which nobody would have been able to save. Too bad, it looked like a fun sophisticated sort of comedy but I trust the reviewers on this one. In terms of critically bashed "art" movies the other one that comes to mind is the remake of All the Kings Men.

reply

I was under the same impression. Though I LOVE most of what Wes Anderson has done, I was curious abouut this. Until I saw it last night and WOW. It is un-watchable. Really. It's not the casting. Lame story (or lack there of), don't care about boo hoo insecure damaged rich people characters that sabatoge their own lives, it looked cheap (yes I get it's supposed to be kitchy, but ugh), directing ALL OVER THE PLACE... the list goes on. You're not missing a thing.

reply

Written and directed by Roman Coppola not Wes Anderson. Has an Anderson feel to it because they've collaborated on past stories, but definitely not shot as beautifully or as specific as an Anderson flick. I do like the movie though and thought Charlie Sheen was surprisingly good.



selmablairstyle.com

reply

Total waste of a good cast. Good soundtrack just like wes anderson's movies but that's all. The ending of the movie is really bad and as about arthouse attemping te last scene of the movie is copied from a scene the ending of 'Persona'.

reply