Picture

Name: Dane_Youssef

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/dane.youssef

Most Recent Reviews by Dane_Youssef

Sell... or Die.

Wfam8qiwccdffoogyuaznvrpr99
Reviewed by Picture Dane_Youssef

by Dane Youssef

Well-played, well-written look at the bottom rung on society--salesman. Real-estate, exactly.

Yes, it's a "photographed play." Like just about every other play adaptation to the big screen... but it's so well done, you don't care. Like "The Odd Couple" or... "Lost In Yonkers..."

The actors thankfully move outside the office a bit (outside the building, in cars, phone booths, restaurants... and at one point, over to someone's house)

This movie could have been called "Life of A Salesman." Men who dedicate their lives to selling real estate. Land and so forth. It's not as easy and as coast-worthy as it all seems.

God, what a racket. These people are all so cynical, bitter and desperate. They're claustrophobic and turning on each other. Their whole source of income and life rely on these little cards. "Leads." Little cards with names, numbers and addresses of people who want to buy land. But some of them are so old...

A red-hot salesman from downtown (Alec Baldwin, in a role written especially for him) comes down to motivate, drill and berate everyone into bringing their numbers up. When another salesman makes the mistake of protesting against all the abuse and calling Blake on his rant, Blake decides to put him in his place.

He flashes his watch. He shows off his car. "I made $970,000 last year. How much you make? Mitch & Murray asked me to come down. To help get the numbers up. As a favor. I told them that the real favor would be to take my advice and fire you. Because a loser is a loser."

Then Baldwin shows the 'Glengarry Glen' leads. He holds them and shows them off to the other salesman like he's holding the royal crown jewels. The hope diamond. The holiest of holy grails. Well, to these guys... they are. Baldwin remarks smugly, "These are the new leads. These are the Glengarry leads. To you, these are gold... and you don't get them. Why? Because to give them to you is just throwing them away." I like when Ed Harris starts to protest of this guy's dressing-down and Baldwin snaps back. He shows no mercy. Drills right through him. This is some of the best Baldwin has ever done.

"You see this watch? You see this watch? That watch costs more than you car. I made $970,000 last year. How much you make? You see pal, that's who I am, and you're nothing." He goes on and on, but I won't spoil it here.

Then he FINALLY drops the bombshell. "We're adding a little something to this month's sales contest. As you all know, first prize is a Cadillac Eldorado. Anybody want to see second prize? Second prize is a set of steak knives. Third prize is you're fired."

And there are more than three salesman in the office. One way or another, a lot is going to be trimmed. Not necessarily fat. Just... trimmed. A lot. To save money.

The characters are sharply drawn and in a story that is intertwined and sown together with skill and surprise. The all-star cast does the best with Mamet's angry, fierce and realistic speak (the adaptation is by Mamet himself, from his Pulitzer-Prize winning play). Pacino is (as always, blistering) as the star salesman who's landed the top of the board with his fresh catch James Linsk (Alan Arkin).

Ed Harris as Dave Moss is good as an angry, self-righteous salesman who's just such a jerk. An arrogant S.O.B. A great moment is when someone finally deflates him. Pops the big bag of hot air. Shows him to be scared and insecure underneath it all. His repeated cries of "F-ck you!" just reveal how truly desperate and insecure he truly is...

The buttoned-down office manager John Williamson (Kevin Spacey) who's "by the books to the core" and has never been out there, selling it, in the sh*t a day in his life. He's just a company man. "A secretary... and white bread" as some of the salesman in the office call him.

But the true breadwinner is the touching elderly Jack Lemmon as Sheldon "The Machine" Levene. Once the office golden boy, he was ahead and selling big week after week after week... reigning the very top of the board. The owners used to say things like "That car, that trip to Bermuda... you bought that for me..." Now he just can't sell. He sounds so grandfatherly and princely on the phone... you want to trust him so much. He's like Santa Claus.

But Shelley cannot find anyone who wants to buy. All the name and address cards ("leads," they're called) are older than Lemmon. Many have moved on and found better service elsewhere. The machine is longer up and running and Lemmon does a magnificent job of painting him a portrait of a burned-out star. A has-been. It's painful to look into those big sad dog-eyes of his...

He at one point goes to the house of someone who just doesn't want to buy. That's understandable, isn't it? Hey, how many times have you met a salesman who just won't get it. But Shelley's desperate. He bargains. He pleads. He drops his price. No sale. His heart seems to be breaking when...

There are many a great moment in "GGL." Where Baldwin drills the troops, when Harris is hoisted on his own petard, when Lemmon works his old time magic with potential customers... and when a salesman pulls a hustling con on a customer... all to have one misunderstanding--a split second blow the deal.

It would be unfair to go on with how the rest plays out. Suffice to say that it is worth watching again and again and again. The whole movie. It's a hard-boiled classic. Look for it wherever you can.

Ask for it by name... "Glengarry Glen Ross."

--For The Working Man, Dane Youssef

Rate Review
Arrow_up_light
0
Arrow_down_light
0

Don't let the title throw you. This is one to see.

Onccnxoheeu6bal7k2ylev0gtkp
Reviewed by Picture Dane_Youssef

by Dane Youssef

"COONSKIN" is a film, by the one and only Ralph Bakshi, is reportedly a satricial indictment of blaxploitation films and negative black stereotypes, as well as a look at life black in modern America (modern for the day, I mean--1975). Paramount dropped it like a hot potato that just burst into flame.

Since "political correctness" is very enforced in this country to the point of fascism--freedom of speech is being blacked-out of the Bill of Rights as I write this... the makers have re-dubbed the movie "Street Fight." It's a more family-friendly inoffensive title, yes.

Sadly, it's almost misleading as to what the film is all about. With the original "Coonskin" moniker, at least the movie makes good on it's threat.

But this is a Bakshi film, contraversal, thrilling, and a must-see almost by definition alone. Not just another random "shock-jock" of a movie which tries to shock for the sake of shock. It's by Ralph Bakshi. Anyone who knows the name knows that if HE made a movie, he has something big to say...

Although it's roots are based in cheap blaxploitation, "Street Fight" isn't just another campy knock-off of mainstream white film or any kind of throwaway flick. "Street Fight" wants to be more. It aims it's sights higher and fries some much bigger fish.

The movie doesn't just poke fun at the genre. Nor does it just indict black people, but actually seems to show love, beauty and heart in the strangest places.

"Street Fight" tells a story out of some convicts awaiting a jail-break. The fact that it's even possible to break out of a prison in the "Street Fight" world alone makes it old-fashioned.

One of the inmates tells a story about a trio of black brothers in Harlem named Brother Bear, Brother Rabbit, Preacher Fox who want respect and a piece of the action and are willing to get it by any means nessicary. The Italian mob is running all the real action.

A lot of the film is inspired by, paralleled and patterned after Walt Disney's most controversial film "Song of the South," which hasn't been released uncut in the U.S. due to political correctness and activists who still look at this as a bigger blunder than the 1992 disasterous "Newsies" musical. "Song of the South" make box-office return, even got a Special Oscar. But most of Disney Corp. still looks back on that one with shame. And as racially charged as that movie was, Bakshi takes it several quantum leaps farther... Which is exactly what he should do, what he's best at...

Big name black musicians star: Barry White and Scatman Crothers, as well as Charles Gordone, the first black playwright to take home the Pulitzer. Something big is happening here obviously.

The movie plays out like a descent into this world, this side of the racial divide. From an angry, hip, deep, soulful black man with a hate in his heart and a gun in his hand.

Bakshi's films never know the meaning of the word "subtlety." This one looks like it's never even heard of the word. But maybe a subject like this needs extremism. Real sledgehammer satire. Some subjects can't be tackled gently.

Bakshi is god dammed merciless. Here, no member or minority of the Harlem scene appears unscathed.

The characters here are "animated" to "real" all depending on what the mood and situation are. The animated characters and the human ones all share the same reality and are meant to be taken just as literally.

Bakshi never just shows ugly caricatures just for shock value. He always has something to say. Nor is blackface is gratutiously. Here, unlike in Spike Lee's "Bamboozled," he seems to be using it to try and really say something.

Like 99.9% of all of Bakshi's films, this one incorporates animation and live-action. Usually at the same time. Bakshki isn't just being gimmicky here. All of this technique is all intertwined, meshing together while saying something.

Somehow, this one feels inevitably dated. Many of these types of films (Bakshi's included) are very topical, very spur of the moment. They reflect the certain trend for the day, but looking back of them years later, there's just an unmistakable feeling of nostalgia (as well as timeless truth).

Even though the music, clothes, slang and the city clearly looks like photos that belong in a time capsule, the attitude, the spirit and the heart remain the same no matter era. Anyone who's really seen the movies, the state of things and has been in company of the people know what I'm talking about.

Even some of the of the black characters are a bunny (jungle-bunny), a big ol' bear and a fox. One of the most sour and unsavory racist characters is a dirty Harlem cop who's hot on the trail of these

"n----ers" after the death of a cop. But for him, it's not just business. Nor is it for the rest of the brothers who wear the shield. It's just pure sadistic racist pleasure of hurting blacks.

The sequence involving the Godfather and his lady is one of the most moving pieces in the whole film, of which there are many. It plays out like an opera or a ballet.

The promo line: WARNING: "This film offends everybody!" This is not just hype. Proceed with extreme caution.

--In The Name of Bakshi and The Now "African-American" Folk, Dane Youssef

danessf@yahoo.com

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=58175682

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/User:DANE_YOUSSEF

http://www.epinions.com/user-surfur

http://www.youtube.com/SURFUR

Rate Review
Arrow_up_light
0
Arrow_down_light
0

The Truth About Dogs And... People. Hmmmm.... Might Have Been Nice

Odsimu9j5nogbg0vz8unqpn7cy2
Reviewed by Picture Dane_Youssef

by Dane Youssef

ONCE-time "KID-IN-THE-HALL" Bruce McCulloch has one good-as-gold nugget of an idea here. 'Cause speaking from personal first-hand experience, the dog park is one special, magical place. The true place for any dog, dog owner and dog lover.

The dogs are given some amount of room to roam and socialize, good or bad. And so are their owners.

And you know.... movies are filmed all the time in Canada, American movies even! For the sake of wide roaming space and less cost. There are Canadian movies... made in Canada. But so very, very few.... But... this does.

Ah, at last! A movie shot in Toronto that takes place in Toronto. In Canada, even.

Bruce McCulloch has been a of the Canadian talent-troupe "The Kids In The Hall," helping define the term "big-name popular Canadian humor." He's cut out two very inspired albums. He made sketch comedy to be what it is in his native country. He's done several big-selling one man shows.

And here, he makes his debut as a filmmaker. In this pittance-budgeted, largely self-reliant feature. Here, he's screenwriter, director and co-star telling a story that's very near, dear and personal to his heart. In the tradition of such as "Joe the King," "Nil By Mouth," "The Kid & I" and "Hollywood Shuffle." Bruce has made short films. Can he hold his own for 80 minutes?

No.

Well, not here at least.

Bruce's "Dog Park" wants to be a relationship comedy about people and their desire to just love and be loved. And they begin smothering their dogs when they just can't to seem to connect with their fellow man.

"Dog Park" tells us a tale, or rather a shaggy dog story of several different people who are having trouble finding love, or keeping it.

Andy is a 30-something who writes classified ads. His girlfriend has moved out, left him and taken the dog with her. She's dating a flashy guy who, looking at his hair--you hope he's in a band.

After the break-up, Andy goes back and rather than try to put his life back in order, looks to just hook up with someone new. This is what he's been doing his whole life. He meets a new woman, she's likewise just been dumped--and is very vulnerable and defensive. With some drinks in 'em, they go back to her place and wind up doing more than they both should.

Andy's smitten. The woman--Lorna is embarrassed. She blows him off. He looks elsewhere. She's always alone 'cause love doesn't like her. He's always with someone who's a stranger to him 'cause he needs the company. Andy and Lorna's ex's are now dating each other. Huh. Toronto is a small town.

Andy and Lorna clearly belong together. But do we pine for them as they do for one another?

Well, I didn't. I wasn't on edge for this love connection. There is no real reason for us to root for him or her. Or believe in them as anything. They never even comes across as any kind of real character.

I like Luke Wilson, seriously. He has the look and charm of a love interest, but this role poisons him. He has that young modern Jimmy Stewart way about him, but no Frank Capra director way has tossed any work his way.

The man's boyish charm to spare, but that's not enough to help as Andy is less interesting as plain white bread. Not terribly charismatic, or especially witty. And in a romantic comedy, that's dead-serious.

Poor Andy, he's a dull droopy hangdog. He's just broken up with someone. He's the "nice guy who gets taken advantage of." And worst of all, he's given nothing of interest to say or to really do. But he's so boring and without merit, why get behind him or this movie? But... the same can be said of a lot of these people. And their dogs.

Henstridge--capable of acting. But you'd not know it from looking at this. She's so bad here, she comes across as the definitive example of the belief that models cannot act and should never even try. Henstridge's Lorna--so bland, without personality; if not for Henstridge's beauty, she would just disintegrate from the screen.

God Help us all, Natasha's character--even less interesting than Wilson's.

Other Canadian folk like Harland Williams isn't anything special and is especially awful. He plays the neo-weirdo Lorna goes out with after she reaches that point when a woman gets so lonely and dying from cabin-fever, she rushes to go out with the first guy she sees. But after the date... he calls her back with a message she desperately, desperately needs.

But yes, Bruce and co. I agree wholly that Andy 'n' Lorna are made for each one another. These two, so boring--without any personality or interest--that you'd have to go the morgue to find people who are less alive. These two were made for each other. Two big fat empty non-existent zeroes.

Janeane Garofolo pretty much just phones in the stock-type Janeane Garofolo role, knowledgeable about relationships and life with the usual sardonic wit. Except her usual genuine humor here is gone, thanks to her un-character and lines due to the "script" courtesy of McCulloch. She might have been better cast in the Lorna role. But no, Janeane has too much of a pulse.

Bruce actually gives himself a substantial supporting role as the "his" of a pathologically married "His and Hers" couple with Garofolo. She still seems almost human, almost possible. She seems to persevere through this incompetence.

He's always been a bad actor, but in his skits, it's easier to forgive. And with this unfinished first draft of a script and butterfingers monotone direction, all the actors more or less sink. These actors can act. But his movie manages to convince you they can't. So really, Bruce's horrible thespian attempts actually fit right in.

They're all good actors and we know they can do better--we've seen it. But they're all bound by rough draft outline and direction that could have done better by a first-year film student at a community college.

Every ounce of blame goes to the man who half-conceived this big ball of half-considered, unfunny awkwardness-- McCulloch. The characters, duller than dullest. Nearly every single line of dialogue and scene feels awkward and mishandled.

Not one person in this whole damn thing... comes off as believable. Or really all that insightful.

All throughout, McCulloch seems to lack the ability to write a decent romantic scene, a full-fledged written character or a line of dialouge that hears well. When it comes to writing personally, he should well-stick to skits.

Or maybe just checks--if any of them are any good. Better than this thing.

"Dog Park" has no mood to it. Every scene is badly staged. It was so bad, I damn near expected this thing to have a laugh track.

While many of these types exist out there in the world (the sad-sack jilted lover, the cynical sage advisors, the seemingly perfect couple, the superficial couple, the weird oddball, the nypho and the love-scorn pessimist), the movie takes these stock-types and injects no humanity into them whatsoever. No one feels authentic, or even interesting.

Over the years, McCulloch has developed one tin cauliflower ear for dialogue. It seems at times like somewhere between a rough draft and someone random guy off the street trying to improv movie scenes half-heartedly.

Well, this is a Canadian-based film. Maybe the humor just doesn't travel well.

As been said by pretty much every other on the planet who saw this, the only performance, character and scene of fellow "Kids In The Hall" brethren Mark McKinney as Dr. Cavan, an insightful and bizarre dog psychiatrist who is fluent in dog tongue. There's even a brilliant monologue about how and why people treat their pets like their children and where canines truly do and should stand in the natural order of things.

Some sparse insights here and there, but nothing too entertaining. Which could be said about the movie overall. There's just no reason to make a real effort. No special insights about dating, relationships, nature--human or canine. Lacking interesting people, philosophies about relationships or anything resembling a good movie-going experience.

Go to your own local dog park with your dog, make small talk with your own local dog wielding folk, your own friends at work and at the end of day, rent something like "The Truth About Cats and Dogs" or a "Lassie" movie.

Now if you'll excuse me, as I write this, it's 7:30 on the dot. The dogs are at the door, with Christmas morning-like anticipation. Tails wagging, eyes fixated on the door. Why?

It's time for our evening constitutional, the high point of our day. Why?

Why, as we dog owners know, the local dog park is a treat. They're like late-night singles night clubs up in the city after hours. Anything goes, and often does...

--A Long-Time, Long-Term, Life-Long Dog-Lover, Dane Youssef

danessf@yahoo.com

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=58175682

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/User:DANE_YOUSSEF

http://www.epinions.com/user-surfur

http://www.youtube.com/SURFUR

Rate Review
Arrow_up_light
0
Arrow_down_light
0

WHAT'S ELSE IS THERE TO SAY?

Hsychavbdjy9qk3h5b4oxwteqp1
Reviewed by Picture Dane_Youssef

by Dane Youssef

Well... what is there?

Gee... What can I say?

What can be said that hasn't been said a zillion times about this movie before? By film critics, film buffs, the other user posters on IMDb and every other person who saw this one?

But you know what? I'm not here to really promote this movie, or analyze it... I'm here to write my love letter for it. We're all here to share our movie-going experiences, aren't we? Well, f*ck it, here's mine.

I still remember being a little prepubescent boy sitting in the theater watching this movie, totally amazed and astounded by what I saw. Seeing this wacky cartoons going through a routine Tom-and-Jerry-type episode... and then... it was amazing how these movie actually tricked you, convinced you to believe that human and cartoons can exist in the same universe and dimension of reality.

There are many a great pleasures and moments in this movie, one of them is the duet at a "toon" night club called "The Ink & Paint Club" where Eddie goes to get information about Roger's wife, and the opening act is a dueling duet on the piano featuring two great legends, Daffy Duck and Donald Duck (I doubt there's any biological relation there) together at last. Why did it take so long for these two to get together? Well, they are rival entertainers for rival studios, so...

But of course, the dueling duet ends in an all-out war. Come on, we both know the hatchet wasn't going to stay buried very long.

The whole movie is worth renting just to see the two great legends, Daffy and Donald, put their differences aside for one memorable dueling piano duet ALONE.

"Roger Rabbit" pioneered not only animation and film-making style, but acting, writing, directing and a meshing together of different genres.

Imagination, luck, brilliance, skill... it's all been blended so perfectly here... just like the animation and live-action.

Funny, sharp, satirical, smart, thrilling, skillful, bright, bold, hard-boiled, colorful... at even at times, a little scary.

It one three Oscars, not to mention an Honorary Award for it's Technical Advancements.

Hell, it deserved every single Oscar it got! And a few it didn't. It should've won every single Oscar that year. Maybe some from others...

God, you know, I still remember finding my little Rescue Ranger toy in my pocket and running in back-and-forth through my fingers... I remember being very careful not to loose it as I watched this. And it was hard, damn it, all of what was going up there on the screen.

There's the best of the everything here. Everyone should see it, pure and simple. It's a movie... for pretty much everybody. A masterpiece in more ways than one.

So help me God, I cannot think of a better actor for the role of the classic, hard-boiled, rock-bottom, not-too-smooth P.I. than Bob Hoskins. I don't think he's ever played a better role in his whole life. He seems to be a strange collision of Sam Spade and W.C. Fields, in some strange way.

Christopher Lloyd proves yet again (as he does in all his roles) that he's one of the most underrated actors in the business. He's known for playing the bizarre, the crazy, the wired. But his ability to play villains, particularly more sedate and low-key ones, is overlooked so much, it's grounds for a discrimination lawsuit.

Kathleen Turner is damn perfect as Roger's Mrs; especially considering that all she does here is a voice.

"Roger Rabbit" pioneered not only animation and film-making style, but acting, writing, directing and a meshing together of different genres. Literature purists and scholars (yes, I mean geeks) will note that this movie is adapted from a novel by Gary K. Wolf, who specializes in science-fiction.

For those of you who are enamored with this movie and just learning this, are actively considering dropping this review right this instant and running to your nearest library and bookstore to pick up a copy to read as an addition to the movie or just out of curiosity, I should warn you that the movie is completely unfaithful to the novel.

Oh, both are clever and well-written spoofs of the whole "hard-boiled private-detective mystery noir genre," but the two are so completely different, in writing-style, character dialouge, plot, theme, even ending, you wonder why they even bothered to get Wolf's permission and pay him a royalty. Gee, usually these Hollywood types are a little more snaky and know how to exploit all these loopholes.

You've no doubt heard the old saying, "You can't please everyone, so don't even bother." Because when you try, you wind up ultimately pleasing no one. Least of all, yourself. It's strange, this movie seems like an exception to that one little rule. I mean, I know there's an exception to every rule, but this is one you're sure is completely iron-clad. This is a movie for everyone. This is a movie that will please everyone. And you know what else? It never got the credit for that. Think about what a big train-wreck this movie could have been. How many things could have gone wrong.

How many years Disney and Warner have been at war, all this time, money for a experiment that could have gone worse than than the killer bees and the atomic bomb. And yet, glory be, it didn't. We all live for days like this, filmmakers, film critics... and film lovers.

The best part? After it was all over... Roger and Baby Herman went on to star in several of their own cartoon shorts before the movie for real ("Dick Tracy" and "Honey, I Shrunk The Kids").

Good for them.

--Looking Forword To Roger's Next Film, Dane Youssef

danessf@yahoo.com

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=58175682

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/User:DANE_YOUSSEF

http://www.epinions.com/user-surfur

http://www.youtube.com/SURFUR

Rate Review
Arrow_up_light
0
Arrow_down_light
0

WATCHING A BORING BUNCH OF FOOLS

Gryqldfyo9edpksihsojgabperi
Reviewed by Picture Dane_Youssef

by Dane Youssef

Now here is a movie that wants to be something successful by combining everything successful.

"Kissing A Fool" wants to be too many things. Can you mix successful ingredients and get the best of every world? "Kissing..." tries to be a '40's-style romantic comedy, a modern sex comedy and a sit-com at the same time.

Co-writer/Director Doug Ellin is a friend of Schwimmer's and Schwimmer has gone on and on about exactly how great it feels to shed his Ross-image and play the complete anti-Ross.

Jason Lee stars as Jay Murphy, a sensitive nice guy who's a romance novelist and is recovering from his latest breakup with a model named Natasha (played by TV's "Weird Science" Vanessa Angel). He has a sweet boy-next-door demeanor about him and his real problem is he's too nice and sensitive for his own good.

The worst part about being sensitive is that the world is so full of

sh*t and garbage, people are such *ssholes that your feelings get hurt too often, too easy, too much. Better to be as cruel as the world or even more so and give worse than you get.

Believe me, I know of what I speak of.

David Schwimmer co-stars as Jay's best friend Max Abbitt, a sportscaster who's a womanizer who plays the field more than the teams reports on. A total creep and always with a dumb expression of his face, a self-satisfied drawl and his own cool-guy salutation: "What' up?" Always a toothpick and a "too cool" drawl dangling from his lip.

Mili Avital is unfortunately given the second-to-weakest developed character in the whole film. She's sweet, perky and photogenic... but nothing else, really. She and Lee could have some great chemistry if only the film allowed it. But this movie is written in a way that's so made-to-order, it's embarrassing.

Bonnie Hunt plays the narrator that is publishing Lee's book. She's also the narrator. Why does this movie need a narrator? The narration actually manages to make the movie even less suspenseful, if that's possible.

And Vanessa Angel, who broke through in TV's "Weird Science" and almost stole "Kingpin," is given the least interesting character. She plays a model and Jay's heartless ex-girlfriend who has dumped him and left him a pathetic neurotic mess. Hers is not a character, but a plot device. The heartless b---h who is so cruel and horrible to the sweet-hearted hero so more of our sympathy goes to him. I groaned at her scenes.

The movie's dialouge is not always plot-driven or cutesy-poo, like most romantic comedies are (although there are sometimes when it is).

Most of the script is written in an observational sit-com kind of way. Like "Seinfeld" or "Mad About You" (or yes, even "Friends"). But the dramatic/romantic scenes are embarrassingly maudlin.

Is it just me or has the entire cast of "Friends" been in movies that were all trying to mimic Kevin Smith's highmark rom-com "Chasing Amy?"

* The Object of My Affection

* Kissing A Fool

* Three To Tango

Smith's groundbreaking romantic comedy "Chasing Amy" was revolutionary, insightful... and made big waves for Ben Affleck, Joey Lauren Adams, Lee and Smith himself. A romantic comedy, a sex comedy and a relationship story. Not merely a love story, but a life story.

Lately, Hollywood has been trying to make Smith-like slick Hollywood movies. So far, they failed terribly. Smith's movies are great because they are daring and avoid formulas. And they master the art of sparkling conversation. This film does neither.

Nor did any of the other Kevin Smith-wannabes.

Lee's character has been through the ringer and things are looking bleaker. I really liked him here and felt for him. And identified with him more than I wanted to.

I knew guys like Max in high school, but in the outside world? Who knows? I was kind of like the Lee character myself. In a way, I still am. Too sensitive. Too easily vulnerable. Such a whipping boy. I did understand what Jay meant when he said, "You know, I wish I had your heart. Then I wouldn't have spent so many sleepless nights...."

The plot seems cruel and creepy, yet too sit-com-like at the same time. "Test my fiancée''s fidelity?" Almost seems like a sick ploy to throw Jay & Samantha together, doesn't it?

Oh wait, it is...

Anyone who has ever seen a movie will know what the ending will be. It's almost like waiting for the coyote to fall off the cliff.

Schwimmer's Max Abbit character seems to dumb and dull and annoying to be interesting. He must be sick of playing the same type ("The Pallbearer," "Six Days, Seven Nights" and TV's "Friends"), but this movie will do nothing for him. Still, at least he tried.

I kept (back in 1999 when I first saw this movie) seeing a mad Ross trying to be bad whenever I looked at him, but now looking back on it and putting Ross out of my head (I really dislike the show anyway), Schwimmer does an effective job... however he doesn't really have dimensions and depth.

He's just not an interesting womanizer. Apparently, a lot of Schwimmer fans felt confused by his role here.

It feels like Schwimmer wants to play someone completely different without risking losing his hard-core audience.

Schwimmer does do a much better job breaking typecasting in the forgettable "Since You've Been Gone" and the memorable "Band of Brothers."

MEMO TO Hollywood: If you're gonna keep making bad Kevin Smith-knockoffs, at lest quit putting "Friends" actors in them.

--Forget This Attempt At Romance and Comedy, Dane Youssef

Rate Review
Arrow_up_light
0
Arrow_down_light
0