|Page 1 of 9:||        |
|Index||85 reviews in total|
153 out of 181 people found the following review useful:
Embarrassing bastardized version of a French classic, 15 April 2012
Author: Farid_Hijab_Nadweed from Lapjat
Wow, how low can we go" Since this movie was (improperly) advertised as
the "English (USA) version of the award-winning French comedy", let me
inform readers about the original.
The original award-winning comedy classic quickly became an international success both artistically as financially. Receivinh numerous honors including six Cesar nominations winning three: best script, best actor, and best supporting actor. The "Cesar du cinema Francais" is similar to our (USA) Oscar Academy Awards and annually rewards the best performance in the various cinema-related specialties from acting to production. It has been used as a teaching model for writing intelligent humorous scripts, inventive editing, and acting in some cinema schools. Thhe French adapted their script from his play of the same title which premiered in 1997 and has been playing ever since in Europe. It is a masterpiece worth discovering. The script was intelligently written, the quick paced dialog flowed harmoniously as the protagonist's situation deteriorated. The interpretation was sensitive, expressive and flawless.
Back to LOL: As an American, I found the Hollywood version insulting and demeaning. Trying to bank on the success of the original as is often the case with remakes, you take whatever worked in the first presentation, recycle it, repeat it over, amplify it, mass produce it, etc In LOL, you steal an original premise, bastardize a bullet-proof script, exaggerate the humorous moments to absurdity, add profanity and obscenity to the dialogue, mix in some scenes, sanitize to ensure (American) political correctness, include most ethnic groups to maximize distribution (i.e. profit margin), the only thing missing may have been to add some farts and burps You get the picture.
157 out of 192 people found the following review useful:
Painful., 26 April 2012
Author: johnnymacbest from United States
If there's one way to describe this movie, it would be utterly
atrocious, execrable trash. In no way are there any redeeming qualities
in this "film" as it is filled with a moronic plot, hideous dialog(if
you can call it that)banal acting and overall crap. The whole thing is
a ruse; it looks like a low-budget made-for-TV film that ironically
enough SHOULD HAVE BEEN A MADE-FOR-TV FILM IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! I'm
sorry, but after Hanna Montana and the atrocious film that followed it,
Miley Cyrus's career as an actress is pretty much in the toilet. Only a
wickedly hardcore Miley Cyrus fan would watch this because any
self-respecting movie-lover would stay clear away from this hell-hole
of a movie.
1 out of 5 stars. That's how bad this piece of sh*t is.
139 out of 178 people found the following review useful:
An awful remake of an already awful movie, 20 April 2012
Author: HighJunk Reviews from United Kingdom
Okay first things first, you should know that this movie is a remake of
a crappy French movie of the same name. If that doesn't deter you from
watching, then maybe knowing that Miley Cyrus is starring as the lead
I never had high hopes for this movie especially since Lionsgate completely shunned the marketing team and had no effort in making sure that this movie gets some much needed publicity. But aside from that, this movie isn't really targeted for people like me. It seems to focus on its teen demographic, hell the title says it all...LOL.
Now I'm not hating on Miley Cyrus or anything but God that girl really brought down the movie. I thought that she could maybe prove that she can act and switch away from that Hannah Montana crap, but no, she cannot. And having Demi Moore didn't help either. It's like the cast had every intention to make a god-awful movie that only teenage girls would barely like.
Overall, the movie was your average run of the mill, teenage love affair crap. If you're a guy then stay the hell away from this movie, but if you're a girl then...no, you should also stay away from this movie.
106 out of 133 people found the following review useful:
Waste of Film Reels, 19 April 2012
Author: renethewizard from United States
A monotonous, dreadful film that follows the gimmicks of social networking and text messaging. I wouldn't classify this as a movie; it falls along the lines of high school trauma and the depressing pokes of a Facebook page. The acting was sub-par and the love story was the equivalent of rusty nails while it focuses on the redundant internet slang we constantly see today. The whole feeling of the film was basically like looking at a Facebook page. Very dull and asinine with the sense of delusional romance forever reminding us how little hope remains for todays youth. If this is what you call quality entertainment then I fear for the sanctity of our Media. Major waste of filming resources and should be shot into the sun for the sake of humanity.
117 out of 155 people found the following review useful:
I'd rather watch paint dry. Really., 14 April 2012
Author: Dioz Roment from Moon, Space
I regret going to see this movie. Says it all. I was dragged along to
it by an overly excited friend who wanted to see it. I couldn't of
despised this movie more if I tried. The only difficulty about this now
is trying to reach the minimum requirements for the length of this
Right, so I expect people seem like they know what to expect with this movie. Otherwise, why go see it. Miley plays nothing more than how she does on her TV series. A ditsy girl with poor use of English. Which isn't surprising.
If I had to recommend this to someone, it would be those under 11 years of age.
One good thing about the experience of seeing this.. "movie" was that I felt relief when it was over.
But hey, if you want to waste some cash with minimal physical and, let's face it.. mental effort, then see this wasted reel of film. 1/10.
107 out of 137 people found the following review useful:
I've got a Juno poster in my room. There! I'm smart now., 24 April 2012
Author: Organic_6 from US, Pennsylvania
In the movie, LOL, the character, Lola, has a poster for the smash-hit,
Juno, hanging in her bedroom. I know, I know. Analyzing a detail as
small as this might sound nitpicky but just hear me out.
Juno was a movie about a teenager who addressed the people she loved and the people she had problems with, in person. Juno revealed an ultrasound picture of her baby to its future adoptive parents, in person. She laid out an entire living room set on Paulie Bleeker's front lawn, to tell him she was pregnant, in person. The reason its main character maintained quick-witted comebacks and came up with ironic allegories, at the drop of a hat, was because of her characteristic of going out and exploring new things. That movie was so refreshing because it took place in a world in which teenagers didn't constantly have the glow of a cell phone screen, reflecting off of their faces. In fact, there was only one part in the film involving a phone conversation between two people...and both sides had their phones plugged into a jack!
So why does LOL's mentioning of such a great movie bother me? Because its own message contradicts Diablo Cody's vision and her faith in teenagers. Cody believed in a world in which adolescents might actually look up from their gadgets, turn to each other and like, talk. Hell, there actually is a scene from Wall-E, in which two morbidly obese men favor looking at monitors with video feed each other, when they're in floating chairs, side by side. Juno spits in the face of such technological dependence.
LOL, on the other hand, condones the non-stop usage of iPods, Twitter and other sites of the moment. Its lead characters are so reliant of online social networks, where every sentence is simplified and shortened, that once they finally log off, they use phrases like "it's good to love someone so much it hurts." A line like that wouldn't even make it into Juno's deleted scenes section on the DVD. LOL celebrates the idea of kids, hunching their heads over a five by three inch screen all day long, as the rest of the world passes them by. Don't get me wrong - I'm well aware that there actually are teenagers in the world who are this overly consumed. With it being near impossible to find a person between the ages of 18 and 29 NOT on a phone within a three hour period of time, writer and director, Lisa Azuelos, isn't exactly making up fiction here. But to try to portray these hypnotized kids as deep thinking and complex is wrong. How could they have the drive to reflect on who they are when they don't even put effort into typing out full words into text messages? Like I said, it's fine for characters like these to exist because there are real world people like this. But don't try dragging another film down to your level when it boasts unexplained emotions, open for interpretation while your own best moment of self-reflection consists of the line "Every year, it's weird going back to school but here we are, just going with the flow". Oo-hoo-hoo, look out, Hemingway.
87 out of 104 people found the following review useful:
LOL - Load of "Load" (If you get my drift)..., 29 May 2012
Author: Shauneth from Liverpool
I'm going to summarize here:
This "film" bears about as much connection with modern society as KFC represents the life of Chickens. Not only is it the most cheese filled pap ever, it's a walking cliché and the people in it, even say the word "LOL" rather than actually laughing, in one scene; one person even rolls around the floor laughing when she is told a joke by her friend, and it wasn't even funny.
The entire dialogue in this film looks as if it has actually been written on a Nokia 3310 by a 10 year old boy, who has ADHD, no offence to people who actually HAVE ADHD, but seriously, it's like they've given a child three things:
2. 90 Blank Sheets of Paper and a typewriter.
3. 2 Days to complete it.
The acting is below par and even in one scene, it is blatantly obvious that the actress has forgotten her lines, so she seems to make her line up on the spot. How on earth did Demi Moore get roped into this? Demi Moore has made some god awful movies in her time, but this will be a black hole on her CV for many years to come and I imagine she is only kicking herself to the loony bin for partaking in this absolute rubbish.
Then I have to mention the obvious fake posts on here which are condoning and praising this teeny bopper movie, which is obviously made to capitalise on fans of the girl out of this, kids who are grounded and have to use their phones as a social outlet, LOL, and teen kids who have nothing better to do with their money than go and see how the media thinks they should live their lives.
Anyone paying to watch this god awful trash should take themselves and get counselling, go and see a doctor, because whilst there are thousands and thousands of good script writers trying to earn a living, thousands of actors trying to break through; and thousands of budding directors just aching for a chance to even get 1% of this budget for their work; production companies are still lying and pulling the wool over our eyes with pap like this.
If you are fan of the girl in this film, think about it, and think about it hard!!!
If you actually like this girl, then you will NOT go and put money into the pockets of the greed ridden pigs who are actually trying to exploit YOU as well as your idol. So I'm not going to give you grief for liking this girl; like most will, but seriously think about it before you part with your money. If this film does even remotely well, the fat corporate pigs will only release more pap with her in, to try and prize YOUR hard earned money from your hands, and in turn, the big wheel of fortune will grind away on YOU and ONLY YOU!
It says something when a production company pull out of post production marketing like they did on this kids, they want to BURY it without trace, because they know how terrible this film truly is!
Fair enough, watch it on cable (it will be on there soon enough), download it from some kind of torrent site, but whatever you do, do NOT go and spend a penny of your money on this, you will regret it for years to come.
Long live the free thinkers.
77 out of 91 people found the following review useful:
The Worst Film-Making I've Seen in my Life, 4 May 2012
Author: Joey A' Rpd
The film? Well, I went with high expectations about a humorful and emotional life of teenager Lola who faced huge and ravaging problems with the consequences of having her life plotted on Facebook and Twitter. You know, kind of this Social Network/Cyber-Bully kind of thing, if you know what I mean. But let's have something clear here: IT SUCKED LIKE HELL! The acting was horrible, the plot was sverely weak, the movie had a humorless atmosphere and the characters were not strong and afirmable enough to compel a well-made background. It was all LOL. Literally, bitchy girls, bitchy boys kissing and texting. THAT'S ALL! Maybe if you want to waste some money, i truly recommend this movie and I wanna thank this movie for 2 things in my life: First: To teach me that I'm not supposed to go to a movie with high expectations Second: It gave me this huge relief when it was over. Rating: 0.1/10
76 out of 101 people found the following review useful:
Why?, 25 April 2012
Author: (karategirlleh) from United States
I feel bad for the critics who have to endure a single second of having to watch this "movie". Miley Cyrus is back once again at trying to act and we all know what that means. That's right C list actors and bad plot lines. This movie looks awful from the get go,i usually give these the benefit of the doubt but this is just bad. The director's attempt at high school drama is pitiful and the main character seems like one of the popular girls you were forced to partner with in chemistry class. You all know the one i'm talking about, the one with the rich parents who bought her anything no matter what and treated everyone like a peasant. This movie is basically about the popular girl and all her little social problems. There's no escaping the fact that Ms. Cyrus cannot act and putting her in this role with others who have no idea what they're doing just adds fuel to the fire. My advice: Go watch a real movie with actors who can do their jobs well.
50 out of 78 people found the following review useful:
A Nutshell Review: LOL, 3 March 2012
Author: DICK STEEL from Singapore
The first Hollywood film to premiere in India this year, which is quite
apt since I suppose audiences in India can appreciate remakes upon
remakes hitting their screens every now and then, since different movie
regions in India have cross-made their films especially if they are
financially successful. This version of LOL is a second generation
remake, with the original film made with French actress Sophie Marceau
playing the role of Miley Cyrus' titular role of Lola, before switching
to play Demi Moore's role of mom in writer-director Lisa Azuelos' 2006
version, who then decided to direct the same film all over again, this
time with Hollywood money.
I suppose it's tough getting bored when doing the same project, albeit with a different cast bringing different sensibilities to the table, and of course, being set in different countries allowed for an exploration of the modern / current day teenage trials and tribulations, and see how they would have differed from the very first film. For starters, this is an out and out teenage chick flick, set in high school where topics are rather constricted, ranging from bad grades to boys, to hot teachers and cliques, circle of trust and betrayals, and so on. High schools make for very fertile ground as a story setting, but you really can't get away from the formula, even if technology from webcams to IM chat sessions enter to spice things up a little
Miley Cyrus had a scene involving smoking of drugs here cut out, because a real life shenanigan blew way out of control with the teenage idol hell bent and desperate to leave behind her Disney child-friendly persona of Hanna Montana. Be it having provocative personal pictures making their way online, to recreational drug use or otherwise, the filmmakers probably thought it best to leave behind the negative publicity, and cut that out of the film. Which didn't do the flow any favours at times, with other less than stellar editing efforts such as a following scene that contradicted what was said before.
In any case Cyrus plays Lola, a teenager who opens the film being dumped by her boyfriend Chad (George Finn), and we'd just about know that she'll fall head over heels with her best male buddy Kyle (Douglas Booth) especially after gushing ad nausem about him and confessing so in her secret diary. But the road to true romance is always a bumpy ride, so you can bet your last dollar it has to deal with misunderstandings which led to temporal breakups and the like, not to mention falling school grades all over the shop make school life quite the bane to a relationship. Kyle too has issues with his dad's frowning upon his musical CCA, but since this is a chick flick, who really cares about the male characters anyhow, except when they fail to pout and look hot.
Subplots in the film that pad it up include a focus on Lola's best friend Emily (Ashley Hinshaw), who has the hots for her math teacher (Austin Nichols) with dream boat looks, and is the female equivalent of a Stifler or that obligatory rude, shock jock in any teenage sex comedy, and of course, Mom Anne, which the film splits 50-50 with her own relationship, being unable to move on from the husband (Thomas Jane) she divorced, and being at the crossroads to begin one with a rather persistent cop James (Jay Hernandez). Plus the dynamics between mother-daughter getting the highlights and focus as well, between Anne and Lola where sometimes they drive each other nuts, only to always inherently realize blood runs thicker than water.
LOL, after so many iterations, came off as flat and offered little surprises to fans of such films, who lap it up only because of a different cast. It's the usual chick flick dealing with rudimentary issues for its formula, which in real life may not even be issues at all. It's mildly amusing with nary a class act from anyone in their delivery, and perhaps it's that generation gap that's fast driving a wedge between myself and issues brought up in the film which may seem like a big deal for one growing up. Surely it's a coming of age tale, but I'm not getting it, nor am I the right demographic targeted to begin with.
|Page 1 of 9:||        |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|