Flypaper (2011) Poster


User Reviews

Add a Review
52 ReviewsOrdered By: Helpfulness
Clever, Humorous & Entertaining.
Matt_Layden28 March 2012
Two separate bank robberies go down at the same time, at the same bank. The hi-tech wizard robberies go for the vault and the redneck hick robbers go for the ATM machines. Things get more complicated when a Rain Man like character is stuck inside and believes that there is something else going down as well.

Flypaper is an under the radar flick that surprises those who give it a chance. It stars Patrick Dempsy in the Rain Man role, he plays a character obsessed with every little detail and he thinks that there is something more sinister going down than the two bank robberies. He enters into detective mode to figures things out, which makes for hilarious situations between the two groups of robbers and the hostages. Dempsy has a crush on one of the bank tellers, played by Ashley Judd in a pretty forgettable performance. Two comedic highlights belong to the redneck robbers played by the always reliable Tim Blake Nelson and the larger than life Pruitt Taylor Vince, better known as Otis from Walking Dead. They play well off each other and the other actors. They are the more eccentric of the characters who run into problems every turn they take.

The film plays out like a mystery, as the audience has to piece together who shot who and why. Are the bank robberies related? Coincidence? Are people who they say they are? All these questions keep us intrigued in the story and the humour keeps us entertained throughout. It kind of plays out like a modern version of the 1985 comedy Clue, as people die and characters are running around trying to figure out the who and why.

There are twists and turns and the film isn't as predictable as one would think. Just when you think you know what's going on, it pulls the rug out from under you. I managed to predict one twist before the revelation and gave myself a pat on the back for it. Others managed to surprise me. As a bank heist film, it places a nice spin on things. Usually when bank robberies go awry it turns into a hostage situation with police, yet Flypaper isn't interested in that aspect. It chooses to stay inside the bank the whole time.

Flypaper works and it never confuses the viewer despite the amount of information it throws across the screen. Dempsy is convincing as the oddball whose good with numbers and the supporting characters are seem to be having a good time. The film isn't afraid to poke fun at itself, which gives the film a light hearted tone. Flypaper is a wonderful surprise.
29 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A really fun and quite clever spin on the bank heist gone wrong
J. Davis17 September 2011
I wasn't expecting that much from this going in, but grew interested very early as we were introduced to Patrick Dempsey's character as a strange man with a very gifted, sort of neurotic mind. It does start with two sets of robbers with very different backgrounds and techniques. One a very professional veteran crew of highly skilled robbers with a well laid out plan. The other was a pair of absolute complete idiots without the slightest clue of what they are doing. One team is after the vault the others after the ATM's. So a loose pact is made between them. As for what comes next, let's say there are a lot of very entertaining high jinx between the hostages and the robbers, there is twists and turns and even more twists and turns as Dempsey's character leads viewers all around with his witty and neurotic behavior, he is the glue to the film and acts as the glue to the "flypaper" as everyone gets stuck one by one, You won't be figuring out what is happening next and the surprise ending is sure to leave you with a smirk............
72 out of 99 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
How many thieves does it take to rob a bank?
PhantomAgony24 September 2011
Warning: Spoilers

Flypaper is essentially about a bank robbery where 2 sets of thieves stumble into the same bank at the same time causing a dilemma and confusion between everyone. One group is comprised of 3 professionals that come prepared with high tech equipment and skill, Darrien, Gates & Weinstein & the other consists of 2 goofy hicks who go by the nicknames Peanut Butter & Jelly who lack the intelligence & experience that the other group possesses. Hilarity and hijinks ensue as the 2 sets of criminals need to work together to control the hostages as they simultaneously try to steal money from the bank. However, all is not as it seems as people, including the robbers end up dying & it is revealed that it's no coincidence that those 2 sets of thieves showed up at the same bank at the same time - they were set up by another bank robber who is also in the bank and there might be other robbers hidden amongst the group as well who were planning on stealing money.

At one point, the two sets of robbers are arguing about who has better street cred and to settle the score go on a website that ranks the most wanted bank robbers. This is where we are shown the names of some top thieves, thieves whose profiles conveniently don't have pictures attached (just a missing photo question mark). Two top robbers, Vicellus Drum (#1) & Alexis Black (#3) are mentioned aloud which of course had me immediately assuming they were in the bank masquerading as hostages - whether I was supposed to pick up on that or not I don't know. I'll just say that I figured out right away who Alexis Black was so when that twist about her was revealed, I saw it coming a mile away. The identity of Vicellus Drum, however, was a solid mystery. By the way, why would I assume there were more robbers in the bank than the initial ones? It's revealed early on that the system was down for about 2 minutes & someone said aloud that they were surprised that more criminals didn't show up to rob the place after it was revealed that the tech man who controls the bank's security system was selling the information about it being down around. It was a big red flag.

Overall, the movie is funny and clever and most definitely entertaining but my main gripe, a huge hole I just couldn't suspend my belief for.. was the fact that no matter what went on inside the bank, no one outside seemed to be aware and certainly no one called the police. At the very beginning when the robbers first storm the bank, the silent alarm is hit but doesn't work. This is said clearly on screen by the employee trying to set it off. However, throughout the course of the movie there were numerous, loud, bombastic gun fights - no less than 200 bullets were fired from all different types of guns: rifles, shotguns, handguns, etc.. which of course incited lots of screaming. There were also four humongous blasts that created fireballs & did major structural damage to the bank (2, maybe 3 of which were detonated with C-4 / 1 a big gas explosion) yet apparently NO ONE on the street outside or in the surrounding buildings called the cops or heard anything which is just so moronic that it makes my head hurt. This was not a bank in the middle of a rural farmland in Kansas with the closest town being a mile away. This was a bank on a normal city street with a sidewalk full of people right outside the front door and neighboring businesses right next to the bank. How did no one hear the earth shattering bombs that were going off inside the bank? How did no one hear the gunfire that was booming inside? I kept waiting for someone from law enforcement to at the very least knock on the front doors & was wondering how the robbers would deal with it but that never came. I'm willing to suspend belief for a movie but this was just impossible to ignore & definitely downgraded the film for me.

6/10 It wasn't fantastic but it was worth one watch. Lastly, I want to point out that the acting is very strong from everyone in the movie especially Pruitt Taylor Vince & Tim Blake Nelson's bumbling, doofy Peanut Butter & Jelly & Patrick Dempsey's Tripp who is a neurotic, overly stimulated, gifted man with lots of quirks. The characters are fun to watch.
30 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A crime comedy that's unique and messy and nowhere near realistic
napierslogs2 January 2012
There comes a time in every criminal's life when he has to make sacrifices. "Flypaper" takes place in a bank where two criminal groups have simultaneously arrived to rob the place. But this is not a crime drama; it's a dark comedy revolving around some very unlikely characters. Namely, Tripp (Patrick Dempsey), an autistic hero of sorts who is super-observant but unable to behave appropriately.

Tripp enters the bank at closing time but calculating the movements of everyone around him he guesses what is about to occur and jumps over the counter to save the pretty teller (Ashley Judd). In the scramble that ensues, there is one dead body, a room full of huddled bank employees-turned-hostages, and then Tripp, standing there, trying to negotiate a peace accord. It should be made very clear at this point that this is a comedy and is far from realistic.

The film really does seem like it was trying to be a funny, comedic, chaotic mess. And that's exactly what it is. The characterizations, although unique in some cases, are messy. The many twists and turns, perhaps a half-dozen too many, are messy. But is it really necessary to fault a film when it accomplishes exactly what it set out to do?

What "Flypaper" really accomplishes is a low-budget indie version of "Ocean's Eleven" but with a "who done it" mystery angle. Sometimes slapstick, frequently zany, but also sometimes clever, it's comedy first, crime second, and realism nowhere to be found.
17 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Funny just got funnier!!
Vishal Melwani10 December 2011
The moment the fun started in the movie, I was laughing out loud till the very end. Its got intelligent, witty and sarcasm type of humor and never fails to make your belly hurt. If anyone ever actually did a ROFL, it would be while watching this movie.

Its got a plot inside a plot, which makes it a very clever piece of entertainment. Not for once, would you confused about the state of events. Its depicted in a clear manner, which would be understood to all.

I don't believe I've seen a similar plot in any movie which makes this very original and different. With all the humor, twists and the whodunit, its a definite watch.

If you haven't seen it yet, what are you waiting for..
29 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Bright,Light & Funny ... This movie was a balanced Mix & a lot of Fun
ajit-jake17 January 2012
This is a crime comedy which really delivers the comedy.Small scenes acted out perfectly and the movie had a bright feel to it which made it more interesting to watch.

Casting was nice.The actors really fit to the roles they were given and the mystery remains a mystery till the very end.Again, the humor in this movie was really good.There was all kinds of comedy based on situations that fit the style perfectly.

Very often you see a movie with such good understanding of the Characters. The plot is very simple and movie seems a bit predictable in the beginning BUT of-course its not.The story is very original and Patrick Dempsey's character "Tripp Kennedy" is which i liked the most.He's interesting,really.

So, its a bank robbery with two robbery-teams that plan to rob the same bank at the same time (this is funny already).There's a little feel of black comedy and also a bit of "Stupid-eh-ism" which really is fun.

Its a movie you can just watch (with the more the merrier) for a lot of laughs and a few great laughs and have a great time and also relax all in all.

I rate it 7.7/10

Hope This Helps. Thank You for reading my review.HAPPY VIEWING

18 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A very very funny and exciting bank robbery movie that plays like a updated action filled "Clue". Fun to watch. I say B+
Tony Heck4 October 2011
"Are you seriously suggesting that we rob the same bank?" While talking to a teller (Judd) about change (Dempsey) a bank robbery begins to take place. When signals get mixed Tripp realizes that there are two groups of robbers. After explaining to them they can rob the same bank right now he tries to figure out why two groups are there and who tipped them off. This is a very surprising movie. Full of action and very funny. The cast is great and for a little movie it pulls in some really big names. This is the most fun I've had watching a movie in a while and while it's not an amazing Oscar worthy movie it is very much worth watching. An updated action version of "Clue". Equal parts action, comedy & mystery with a great twist at the end. I recommend this highly. Overall, a very very exciting and fun way to spend an hour and a half. I give it a B+.

Would I watch again? - I think I would.

*Also try - Clue & Henry's Crime
31 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Lovely little gem
lanosiceland18 September 2011
This film is not for a lazy mind.

That the robbers, all of them, find themselves in the bank confronted with such a dilemma before thirty minutes in from a 100min film presents a great challenge for a writer, and an audience. Do not despair; the film is good. A smart audience will, with the numbers cruncher 'rain man' in the bank(Dempsey), eventually to catch on that there's more than meets the eye.

Hollywood and 'the pundits' seem to have some rigid ideology of what and how a film like this should be. They are wrong. Simply having two dumb as dirt hillbillies as the opposing robbers(vs the geniuses) is brilliant. Chaos. We become an audience, trying to piece things together, but the pieces we receive constantly lead to an entirely different twist. Sweet. We receive the answer long before the end, but again, like a piece of a puzzle.

It a who done, who is it, crime, mystery, comedy, action...the works. definitely not a big-screen flick, but absolutely for the guys and a sixpack. Good entertainment.
39 out of 67 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Relaxing comedy that will bring smile on you face
faruk_karalija3 November 2011
This movie is funny comedy. Congratulation Rob Minkoff.The story is very original, very effective scenes,actually every scene is funny on her own way,also,the scenes are short and that can be sometimes very funny.The end of the movie is unpredictable and that is the point of whole movie. For me it is excellent,end of the movie - something unpredictable, like it. From the beginning until the end of movie,there are funny talks, funny body moves, funny situations, all that with little black humor. So if you tired or bored this is excellent movie to relax and have beautiful smile on you face.

"Flyparer" - great 87 min.
25 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Brilliant all-in-one entertainer
whytryharder14 October 2011
This movie is severely underrated and for me, its one of the best crime comedies of decade.


At a bank heist, two groups accidentally choose the same bank with multiple hostages. The thing is, hostages have got the gun, robbers haven't albeit both are too dumb to realize it. But wait, there's more to it than this froth sounding storyline, there is a third robbery secretively going on! I assure you I haven't give out even nanograms of details. Another thing, the cast is amazing, acting of dumb robbers, is best of all. And this movie has so many twists and turns, surprising ones, not those which will let you bang your fist at seat in sheer frustration, that it keeps your nail chewed out by the time it ends. Though there is a great clue in the mid of the movie, about the culprit, but nonetheless, director has done well to bind the tits and bits of movies all together and present it as a crime caper. And last thing I expected, laughing while watching a heist movie. Dialogues are witty, clever and Dripsey as Sherlock Holmes to this Agatha Christie style movie is brilliant with his role. Ashley judds is getting older but she plays a nice role. Rest assured you'll scarcely find such an entertaining package at one place

9/10 for me!
25 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An entertaining game of "Clue".
Dory_Darko19 February 2012
Flypaper is an unconventional 'whodunit' in the form of a screwball comedy. It starts off with a guy named Tripp (played by Patrick Dempsey) who walks into a bank to get some change and ends up in the middle of two simultaneous bank robberies, executed by two different gangs, one of whom highly professional, the other one very much the opposite. What follows is an idiotic muddle of story lines and plot twists, which overall is pretty funny and at times even hilarious.

Flypaper's biggest asset is its wild array of stereotype characters, which certainly doesn't always work out, but in this case does so very well, mostly because of the clever writing. The dialogue is sharp and witty, and the way the characters are played out against one another is really the stuff of great comedies. One of the best characters is one called Peanut Butter, played by the great Tim Blake Nelson, who, together with his buddy Jelly forms a duo of laughably amateurish hillbilly bank robbers. The other team of (professional) bank robbers is set together of another great group of stereotypes, namely The Black Guy, The Jewish Guy and The British Guy (not their actual character names, just pointing it out), which in itself sounds like a "three guys walk into a bar" joke, and it actually works out funnier than you might expect. And then there's the group of hostages (all bank employees), all with their own crazy little character traits, paranoia and strange ulterior motives, more afraid of each other than of the people robbing their bank.

I must admit, I didn't have great expectations for Patrick Dempsey, but he pleasantly surprised me with his knack for timing and delivery. His character is a completely hyper-active genius, brilliant with numbers and facts, dead-set on solving the strange mysteries that keep piling up in the bank as the robberies go on, and Mr Dempsey plays his role convincingly. Who knew McDreamy had a serious sense of humour. Ashley Judd is a reliable actress, and she can really deliver some good comedy too. But I have to mention one thing: it's really such a shame that all these actresses (who were never bad looking to begin with) have succumbed to the pressures of botox and fillers. She has a really pretty face, but now that she's obviously had some work done, her eyes look puffy and something overall just doesn't look right. The reason I say this is because it gets in the way of her acting, making her expressions a little screwy a times, and this somewhat ruins the experience when she's trying to deliver a certain emotion. And even in a light-hearted comedy, this can work against the quality of someone's performance. It's too bad, but fortunately Ms Judd still has plenty of talent to make up for it. Actually, all the actors are really good in their roles, they're none of them really big names, but obviously, that's not saying anything. There's only one case of miscasting, and that's Mekhi Phifer. He's a very fine actor, but obviously more suited for serious roles. He took his role way too seriously, maintaining a poker face even when everybody around him was acting like a goon. And even when he was seemingly trying to be funny, he didn't really deliver. So, no more comedies for you, Mekhi.

Story wise, Flypaper basically unfolds as an increasingly intricate game of "Clue", at one point even bearing some resemblance to a funny version of The Usual Suspects. The plot starts out pretty much literally thin as flypaper, but thickens throughout, without getting ridiculously over thought. The story has some inconsistencies throughout, but they're hardly any bother. And the ending is kind of a cliché, but let's face it, have you ever played "Clue" without saying 'I knew it all along!' at the end? Right. There's nothing that actually spoils the fun at any point. This is a semi-dark, adult comedy, with a healthy dose of profanity and crude humour, though innocent like a baby compared to Tarantino or Ritchie. Speaking of which, I sometimes got the feeling that director Rob Minkoff watched these two very closely and took notes, considering some camera techniques and directorial gimmicks he threw in here and there, which is OK up to some level, but not when your film starts to look like a silly rip-off (Snatch comes to mind...). Fortunately, Flypaper manages to keep true to a style of its own, simply 'borrowing' some inspiration from other great crime comedies. And there's nothing wrong with that.

Overall, Flypaper is an entertaining Sunday evening-filler, somewhere in between indie and low-budget Hollywood. It may be somewhat forgettable but it's surely good enough to keep you in your seat from start to finish, and I would certainly recommend it for an evening of good fun.
11 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A waste of time
larc0221 November 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I really don't understand the positive reviews. Really, did we all see the same movie? What a waste of time. The whole plot was unbelievable, the characters behave stupid and retarded, and Patrick plays something like a little Sherlock on steroids who became utterly annoying soon after the first ten minutes. I get mad when a movie wants to play the audience for a fool. Are we really to believe that anyone, anyone, would behave that way? A team of Pro's? There are explosions and nobody on the outside would hear? And in the end the police simply forgets the whole thing and lets them go just like that? And this gets a rating of 6.3 from over 5000 users on IMDb? Come on people, raise your standards!
24 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
DrTeeth0072 March 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This is one of those films that I will be watching again and again.

The story is very good - I have just dropped one star as I do not feel that the skills Patrick Dempsey's character has are explained well. Though the story is not complicated, it is one of those that will benefit from a second viewing

All the bad guys' characters are played very well and with depth - my favourites being 'Peanut Butter' and 'Jelly'. The Jewish bad dude's dialogue is a hoot.

This is something I can watch with my wife that is not schmaltzy.

Nice twist at the end too.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
thank Goodness for the internet
spamzz17 July 2012
its a shame that gems like this are not given any promotion, and sent straight to DVD. if it weren't for the internet and services like netflix or which ever medium chosen to find movies i would have missed out on a lot of great entertainment. and that is exactly what this movie does, it entertains.

this movie was hilarious. the dialog was great, and the silly moments just pulled me into the movie even more. there were even some "holy carp" moments where i had to ask myself while laughing... did that just happen?. its like a murder mystery. like the game "who dun it" with guns and explosions, silly characters, and plot twists. all i can say is it was a fun ride.

i thoroughly enjoyed this movie, and am planning on buying it to watch with friends, family, whoever.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Andreas Zeller21 June 2012 least so far it's underrated. 6.3 at the moment. I don't want to give anything away, so I'll try and keep it short.

It's fast-paced, it's twisted and it's very funny, not to mention unusual. I was actually just checking it out because of the great cast. Didn't really give a damn about the 6.3 - thought 'Eh... It's a comedy, just give it a shot." It's the best action comedy I've seen in a few years, and I watch A LOT of movies. It's totally underrated and I don't really see, why.

I didn't know what to expect, didn't read any plot summary or tagline and neither should you. So forget this review (and any other you might have read) and just watch the movie :)
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
One of those movies
rdbrown-zeteo2 October 2011
That you're not sure about but decide to go for it and came out of it satisfied and mystified as to why you hesitated in the first place.

It was loads of fun! Great acting! Funny! Witty! Exciting! Stylistic! Unique! And in the end, satisfying. What makes this movie more interesting than a lot of the heist movies is that the twist in the movie is not really a twist in the plot... but rather twist the the genre of the heist/crime films. While the movie is about two different groups of robbers attempting to rob the same bank... something else is going on that adds to the chaos. Its like the movie "clue" (based on the board game), a wacky version of Sherlock Holmes, Columbo and the Monk mixed with a crazy bank robbery.

You won't go wrong if you decide to watch this. If you are thinking about it, but are not totally sold on how it looks from the commercials or what it sounds like from the description... then you've put yourself in a great position to be completely surprised. I watched the trailer... I felt that there was a strange and uneasy chemistry from Judd and Dempsey... and it also seemed like a comedy that was trying too hard to be funny... but I watched it cause I couldn't think of anything else to watch. And now I'm writing a review the few moments after watching it... telling you how satisfied with my decision and how satisfied you will be with your decision.
18 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Sometimes the best films are ones you know nothing about
bowmanblue24 May 2014
All the way through Flypaper I couldn't help but think of another film - Botched. I knew nothing about it before I saw it and only watched it because there was nothing else. It was one of the most amusingly entertainingly silly films I've seen - until now.

I also didn't know anything about Flypaper, but watched it anyway. Like Botched, it's about a bank robbery that goes wrong. This time, two sets of gangs try to rob a bank. That, in itself, is a recipe for disaster. However, the hostages are a bunch of misfits and there might even be a deeper conspiracy going on here.

I'm not going to say too much about it as I don't want to give anything away. All I'll say is that Flypaper has more humour than most comedies. More twists than most thrillers and a better story than most high-budget blockbusters (oh, and it does all that with less famous faces than the majority of Hollywood's output).

Flypaper is not to be taken seriously. It certainly doesn't set out to be so. It is, however, a great chuckle. A rare and cheap gem among faceless giants of films.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Fun Movie,
pradhyoth22 September 2011
If the other reviews dint convince you to watch the movie then I would strongly suggest you go ahead and watch this movie, its a fun movie, not the kind of high rated mystery thriller movie. I was kinda reluctant to watch it at first as it wasn't really high rated but once I started watching, I couldn't stop. It was very engrossing and felt like it was going to be a great movie, even though the ending does fall down a little but still it was good. May be with all the twist and all I expected more from the ending nevertheless it was one of those absorbing movies which you get completely involved into. The acting was decent. I was kinda expecting the characters would have more involvement at the end but they weren't really much involved. At the end I thought something was not smart about this movie, the way it ended and all perhaps. Anyway its a good watch with friends, family etc.
17 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
As dumb as the "Dumb" crew in the movie
Farangkor28 January 2012
A week ago I was pleasantly surprised by the underrated "Bad Teacher". Flypaper being rated 6+ (my cut-off point to decide whether or not to watch a movie hovers between 5.5 and 6.5), having read many positive IMDb reviews, and really liking the idea of 2 heists at the same time, I thought I was all set for solid entertainment. This is the kind of funny that isolated farmers in the 1950's would have laughed with, on one of their rare opportunities to see a moving picture in the city. If they would have let the "Smart" crew slip on a banana peel accidentally dropped by the "Dumb" crew, it would have blended perfectly with the rest of the stupid jokes.

It's a shame for the waste of the idea though. They could have used it to make a good fun entertaining movie with it, or make an interesting crime-thriller-action out of it.

I gave it a solid 3, because to be honest, there is a lot worse out there (like Hangover 2, Johnny English) . And I was able to watch it out, partly because I was watching this with a friend from another culture which is more into this kind of "humour"

Reference : Funny is : Hangover 1, Bad Teacher,..
9 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Flypaper, good movie? hardly possible
samc199415 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I had some high hope for this film. What's not to like about Patrick Dempsy in a bank robbery movie? I mean when i read the plot summary, i thought it seemed cunning and ingenious, but much to my despair, it didn't live up to anything I had hoped for.

Unrealistic, crappy acting from some of the characters, and an ongoing obsession with..


.... The guy killed at the very start. I mean, who cares who killed him? Patrick Dempsy was obsessed with finding the culprit to his death, when really, the main moral of the movie was to rob a bank. He was too much of a wannabe Sherlock Holmes.

Realistically, the explosives would've had to have been heard out side of the bank right? What, there was really no-one who was intrigued to why the bank's windows and doors were padlocked and spray painted black?

A poor movie for the dull and easily-amused viewer. I really don't see why people are rating this 10/10, it barely scrapes past a 3/10 for me......
7 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
More silly than dumb, but not exactly a smart caper comedy. Some good laughs.
secondtake28 September 2013
Flypaper (2011)

Rather than a spoof of a bank heist, this is pure silly comedy that uses bank heist clichés for its main jokes. And by silly I mean zany and childish--which is often very funny, if not exactly making it a great movie.

In fact, this is sometimes a really bad movie, or it will be to anyone who doesn't get into the humor and the characters. Even the end, which is meant to be a huge twisty (and typical heist comedy) surprise ends up a bit of a dud. While still being fun.

There are a lot of well known if not legendary actors here, including the attractive and fun leading man, Patrick Dempsey and the apparently leading woman (whose role is small at first), Ashley Judd. But it is the whole array of character actors who make this movie what it is, types and stereotypes playing clichés and counter-clichés. Most fun of all is the fact that two separate teams of bank robbers swoop in at closing time on the same bank. And with very different styles, to say the least.

It gets silly from here--and I mean comic book kind of silly, though people really do get hurt and die as it carries merrily along.

Don't expect much except some high energy escapism--and then you might enjoy the ride. I managed to watch it to the end without flagging. For the final big twist.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Watchable exactly one time
Maleplatypus5 October 2011
It is really a tough task to review a movie that actually should be a classic theater performance. Not a movie. Ever. It has all the elements of a classic "who dunnit?" crime/comedy plot, perfect for theater stages. It's really funny, too, but not movie-sort-of-funny (like, for instance, "Hangover"). These are classic theater dialogue/situation comedy and should be treated as such. Therefore, making a movie out of it was a total miss. Give it to a good theater director and you'll have a hit. Nobody there will wonder how come no police is involved (or alarmed, for that matter), everybody is suspicious and has something to hide, and it should all end as a classic Poirot: everybody gathered in a room where a good detective deducts who's the "criminal mastermind". Five stars for trying to transfer this into a movie. Next time leave theater shows where they belong.
10 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Neither funny nor clever
estebangonzalez1020 February 2013
¨It's like extra sad when a hot chick dies. When an ugly chick dies, it 's like, their life probably sucked anyway, so it's no big deal.¨

The only thing Flypaper had going for it (beside my love for Ashley Judd) was that it was written by the screenwriters who brought us The Hangover, Jon Lucas and Scott Moore. Despite my love for The Hangover, I really hated the script here. I found the film incredibly stupid; the performances extremely over the top and the jokes didn't really work. Flypaper is a terrible comedy that makes any Adam Sandler movie look like a masterpiece. I thought the entire film was ridiculous and a mess from the very opening scene. The comedy just felt too forced and it was a shame because the premise was kind of interesting on paper. You have these characters assembled inside a closed space with several twists and surprises, but none of them ever feel authentic or funny. In trying to be clever Flypaper ends up being pretty stupid. I really couldn't understand how such a talented cast would accept to work in a movie like this. Ashley Judd and Patrick Dempsey can do much better than this. The jokes and gags were absolutely terrible and I didn't even smile during any moment of the movie. Rob Mincoff's (The Haunted Mansion and The Forbidden Kingdom) film failed tremendously. I wasn't expecting much from this film, but it was way worse than I thought it would be. Lucas and Moore proved with The Hangover that they can write clever and funny comedies, but I don't know what happened to them here.

The film takes place almost entirely inside a bank where we are introduced to Tripp (Patrick Dempsey) who happens to be there changing a hundred dollar bill. He begins hitting on the teller, Kaitlin (Ashley Judd), but she's engaged and not amused. When Tripp is about to exit the bank he realizes that a heist is about to take place as two red necks nicknamed Peanut Butter (Tim Blake Nelson) and Jelly (Pruitt Taylor Vince) begin pulling out their guns. Tripp jumps over the counter and protects Kaitlin from the robbers, but almost at the same exact time another bank robber team is present. Darrien (Mekhi Phifer), Gates (Matt Ryan), and Weinstein (John Ventimiglia) seem to have planned out their heist with much more professionalism than the red neck Peanut Butter and Jelly duo. In middle of the confrontation the two teams open gunfire until Tripp convinces them to stop as they both seem to have come for different heists, the pros for the vault and the amateurs for the ATM machines. Several twists begin to take place from this point on as Tripp tries to solve the mystery as to why two heist teams happened to arrive at the exact time. Could there be an informant inside the bank?

The premise might look interesting on paper because the concept is pretty interesting and original, but the execution is just terrible. From the very opening scene I didn't buy any of the characters or could take any of them seriously because the performances were really over the top. The script was terribly delivered and the actors had nothing to work with really. The entire detective story seemed pretty pointless and I really didn't care whether or not the mystery would be solved. At times I felt like I was watching a quirky staged play. I really hated this movie despite the fact that Ashley Judd had a lead role here. The only good thing I can say about this movie is that it only lasted about 85 minutes so it was over pretty quickly. By any means possible please stay away from this movie.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Very good movie. Underrated!
Parris_AL14 December 2011
This movie truly surprised me. The acting was excellent. Patrick Dempsey and Ashley Judd go well together.Flypaper is an underrated movie.All of the actors in this film did a wonderful job. I think people should have a look at Flypaper, it is definitely worth the time. If you're looking for a comedy/action/mystery/crime, flypaper is the movie for you.This movie will have you thinking from the start and just when you think you have everything figured out you're going to be in for another surprise.Dempsey's role as a Sherlock Holmes on sugar is very entertaining and keeps the audience interested throughout.I haven't seen a good movie like this in a while.

This film truly deserves a lot more respect. Truly a fun movie to watch.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
One of those really good indie films you're glad you watched...
MovieSonic12 October 2013
I can't remember why I decided to give this a go, I think it was a review on IMDb so I'll return the favour:

I feel that the description of the film on IMDb is off-putting: "A man caught in the middle of two simultaneous robberies at the same bank desperately tries to protect the teller with whom he's secretly in love."

That makes it sound like this is just a film about a guy trying to save a girl when it's so much more than that. To describe the plot any other way would reveal an important twist though so I can understand why the description is a bit vague.

What I liked about the film was that the script was really good with realistic dialogue between the characters, it was very frequently funny and often laugh-out-loud funny (especially the security guard) and all of the actors fully committed to every scene.

Whilst it's an indie film, they've done the clever thing of keeping costs down by having one location but enough action, humour and occasional explosions to keep you interested as well as a mystery element to the story which you are genuinely interested in.

If you liked "Foolproof" (2003) with Ryan Reynolds then you will likely really enjoy this.

There are slapstick elements, clever plot devices, and some creepy humour and although I did have to ask myself a few times 'why hasn't he killed this person/these people yet', it didn't bother me too much because by then the film had already established that it wasn't going for realism but just really fun entertainment.

I would recommend watching this and give it 8/10.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews