Reviews written by
Terry Roehrig II

Page 7 of 17: [Prev][2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [Next]
164 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Peep World (2010)
8 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
An average dysfunctional comedy with a great cast, but a lot of missed opportunities, 22 July 2011

When a comedy comes along with a cast such as this one, I'm guessing that people are under the impression that it's going to be a rip-roaring laugh-fest -- complete with liquids coming out of orifices and hee-hee-ing so hard you can't breathe. This isn't that kind of movie. If you go into this movie expecting Dumb and Dumber, you are going to be disappointed.

Lewis Black is the narrator and he tells the story of Henry Meyerwitz (Rifkin) and his family. They've all gathered together for his 70th birthday and it doesn't look to be a happy affair. Jack (Hall) is his oldest son. He's got a wife, Laura (Greer), who's pregnant. He's the everyman character and would appear to have it all together. Cheri (Silverman) is the artist who hasn't really decided what she wants to do in life, that is, until the book Peep World came out. She seeks solace in her friend, Ephraim (Tobolowsky) who is a Jews for Jesus nut that hopes to one day get in her pants. Joel (Wilson) is the family's renegade risk-taker who also takes anything else he wants: drugs, pills, advantage, money from other siblings. He has a girlfriend, Mary (Henson) who works as a bailiff. Then, there's Nathan (Schwartz). He's written a very popular book entitled Peep World. It's about a dysfunctional family and his brothers and sisters seem to think it's a bit too on-the-nose for fiction. He has a legitimate reason for not wanting to go to the party tonight -- he'll have to face them for the first time since the book's release. There to help him (in more ways than one), is Meg (Mara), his PR person. Now that you've met the family, we get to see them getting ready for the big dinner party. Each one has their own little story and they share their memories about the old man, their fears about going, others are going for their own personal gain. It's certainly not your average family.

What I liked most about Peep World was that it wasn't some silly, goofy caricature of big families and all their problems. It seemed real and I could totally believe every single situation that was presented to us on screen. The movie could have gone with zany antics and big circus acts to dazzle us, but it's more subdued and mellow. There are a few scenes that get close to hilarity (Nathan's book signing), but Peep World is more about the characters and dialog than the all too easy sight gag. Real characters, real problems, real resolve -- all while still giving us clever, witty banter to keep us entertained and staying put. That's what the movie is about.

What didn't work for me in Peep World was the last 20 minutes or so. We get something that's all built up and then Jack's story with him and his wife bring it down to a screeching halt. It got too real for me. Leave the melodramatics aside and bring us the humor. It mucked up the flow of the story and spun it into an entirely different direction. Sure, it's touching and sweet and all that -- but if I wanted something like that, I would have watched a Hallmark movie or something. So, it got a bit too sickly sweet for my taste near the end. Well.... that and I didn't feel they used enough Lesley Ann Warren (she plays Henry's ex) and Alicia Witt (she play's Henry's new girlfriend and she plays the movie version of Cheri based on Nathan's book). They could have easily squeezed some humor out of it and let these two characters interact -- but, alas, they did not. Just another missed opportunity from Peep World. More reviews at Final Grade: B-

Monsterwolf (2010) (TV)
5 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Almost no redeeming qualities, just an awful awful SyFy movie., 22 July 2011

I don't know why I bother with TV movies being released to DVD anymore. Maybe to steer you guys away from them, I dunno. Just because the box looks good and it's got 'wolf' in the title does not a good movie make, my friends.

It starts out with this oil company that needs to do some drilling out in the woods and the crew comes across this weird circle-looking thing sticking out of the ground. They call the project manager, Stark (Picardo, who has a permanent sneer on his face the entire movie) and he more or less tells them to continue or they'll lose their jobs.They do so and it disturbs the force or something like that and out pops a wolf and it slaughters them all with malicious glee. Sheriff Bennett (Macaulay) and his CSI team investigate while Stark meets with Chief Turner (Reevis), one of the last Native Americans, about what's going to happen with the land now. Chief Turner refuses, so Stark hires Maria (Varela), a hot-shot, big-city lawyer who just happens to be the daughter of Sheriff Bennett. So she rolls back into town and of course, her ex-boyfriend Yale (London) is there to complicate matters just a bit. From there, we get to see them all shudder in terror when the wolf appears on screen and try to figure out how to get rid of the wolf and so forth. It's really not worth your time, believe me.

I suppose if you watch a lot of TV movies (and I don't), this may be decent. I realize that the budget isn't the same as a Hollywood-produced film but I've seen indie films with better special effects and CGI than this mess. One I just watched recently, Maneater, comes to mind. Besides the bad F/X, there's also the bad acting that you have to contend with. Some of the frightened villagers were so over-the-top, I didn't know if they were scared or were having a seizure. Maybe we can blame some of the bad acting on the horrible script. The words that came out of their mouths, I don't know the actors said them and kept a straight face --- hmm, maybe they're better actors than I'm giving them credit for.

If all that doesn't make you take this out of your Netflix queue, then try this on for size. There was an ominous soundtrack playing (for what seems like) constantly in the background. I kid you not. They couldn't have any more background ambiance in this movie if they hid a string quartet in the freakin' jungle. How annoying! It was supposed to make you feel like you were on the edge of your seat the whole movie, but it did not succeed. Instead, it made my thumb be on the edge of the volume control on my remote so I could hear what the characters were saying half the time. Movie volume up, movie volume down, movie volume up, movie volume down. Sometimes less is more when it comes to soundtracks.

Let me tell you one of the scenes that really tested my patience with this movie. Don't worry, I won't give out any "important plot details" (as if) or ruin the story for you. The bounty hunter that Stark hires, Coughlin (Eyez, who should win a Worst Acting EVER award and I mean soon) takes an AK-47 to the wolf and shoots him about a million times. That gun runs out, so he grabs another AK-47 and shoots him about a million more times. When the wolf (who isn't fazed a bit by this, nothing I tell you, doesn't even limp or slow down) finally gets close enough to Coughlin, it pounces and Coughlin whips out a handgun and shoots it.... and it goes flying back like it was hit by a bazooka.

Not a good movie, by any means. Not even in the sense "it's so bad, it's good". About the only thing going for it is a somewhat decent production quality (not the special effects or CGI, mind you). I'm talking about how it doesn't look like it was filmed with a camcorder and sound like it was recorded inside a water tank. More reviews at Final Grade: D-

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Come step back into the 80's with me to watch this funny movie!, 19 July 2011

This is one of those rare opportunities where I watched the trailer and it looked so awful, so bad, that I really wanted nothing to do with it. This coming from a guy who worships the 80's, seriously. I loved the music, I loved the clothes and I really loved all the 80's movies. So, imagine my surprise when this one turned out to be somewhat of a dark horse rounding the bend.

Meet the class of 1984. Matt Franklin (Grace, who also came up with the story idea but could not be bothered to actually write the screenplay) is fresh out of High School and is occupying his days working at the local Suncoast Video in the mall. His twin sister, Wendy (Faris) has applied to Cambridge but is afraid to open the letter she got from them. His best friend, Barry (Fogler) works at a car dealership -- or should I say worked at a car dealership? One day, while stocking some Harry and the Hendersons VHS tapes, Matt spies Tori Frederking (Palmer) walking into his store and he does what any self-respecting man in his position would do: he exits immediately, takes off his work smock and re-enters through the front to make it look like he doesn't work there. When he lies to her about what he does for a living, she invites him to a huge weekend party get-together and the con is on from there. Barry is pretty much willing to do anything, but before the party, he wants to take a little revenge on his ex-employer and poor Wendy, well.... she's just trying to find a way to tell her boyfriend, Kyle (Pratt) about Cambridge.

SO much more happens that I am not even going to get into. If I tell you anymore of the on screen antics, it will just spoil it for you. All you really need to know going in is: it's a very funny movie that not only celebrates the 80's, it pokes some humorous fun at it as well. Even though Topher Grace has the leading role, Dan Fogler pretty much steals the show in this one. Where Grace is more subtle and laid back, Fogler is a maniac on the dance floor... and he's dancing like we've never seen before.

Fun, witty and fast-paced, Take Me Home Tonight came as a shock to me, because of how enjoyable it was. It's almost as if John Hughes had a divining hand in creating this film. If he were alive today, this is what one of his movies would look and feel like. My only issue with the film comes late in the game -- the last twenty minutes. The resolution that the main character comes up with to win over the girl of his dreams just doesn't make any sense. How does what he do help their relationship in any way? None. But, I can forgive the filmmakers for this one misstep because everything else was so fine-tuned.... and hilarious. More reviews at Final Grade: B+

14 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
Peter Stormare gives one of his best performances in this indie drama/thriller...., 19 July 2011

No, this movie isn't a slam-packed action film with tons of car crashes and buildings exploding while detectives remove their sunglasses dramatically while reciting a cool line right before the commercial break. No, this movie doesn't have any silly, goofy characters that come on screen and light their farts while other people are deep in thought. This is a grown up movie, dealing with grown up stuff and yes, real life. If you have a hard time dealing with that... then I suggest you close this page right now. Go on... git .. ya immature varmint, you!

Walter (Stormare in one of his best performances ever) is the police of chief in a small town in Canada. Right from the get-go, we can tell something's not quite right with the man. The townsfolk look and treat him differently (something to do with his past). Throughout the opening sequences, we can tell that Walter's being "saved". He's given himself to a "higher power" and wants to make good on his promises. We see him pull over and give a ticket to a motorist (McIntyre), who obviously has no regard for authority -- at least not Walter's authority. Everyone in town treats him with "kid gloves", if you will. But, when the body of a woman turns up by the lake.... Walter has no choice but to come full circle to his mysterious past and deal with it head-on.

The performances are what make the movie half the time. The other half is made up of story and production values. I'd rather watch a movie with some good acting and poor production values than viceversa. If I don't like the acting and/or the characters, I'll either wind up falling asleep or just trashing the movie in a scathing review. Luckily for me, this movie had some very strong performances from all of it's leads. Bonus for us, the story is good, too. It doesn't have to have political scandals and corrupt politicians, it just has to have believable characters doing believable things. The movie may seem slow-paced for some, but it really isn't if you're into the mystery/character aspect of the film. I could easily see this type of thing happening in any small town across the United States.

I would characterize this movie as a very watered-down, unfunny version of Fargo. That's not a bad thing. The story is serious, none of the actors are playing for laughs and it certainly doesn't give you a feel-good vibe. It plays more 'real-life' than pretty much any other cop drama I've ever seen before. The music for Small Town Murder Songs is exceptionally good. Yes, there are some religious overtones, but... then again, so is the entire movie. It's about a man being reborn into a certain faith. A lot of people will just disregard that and give the film a negative review because they felt it tried to 'convert them' or something, but that's not the case.

All you really need to know about this movie is as follows: a crime was committed, chief of police with a shady/mysterious past, small town gossip, murder mystery, excellent performances and adrenaline-pumping soundtrack. I don't need stuff to blow up on screen to move a plot along. I would hope that you don't need one to blow up, either. More reviews at Final Grade: B-

The Reef (2010)
2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
If you liked 'Open Water', you'll LOVE 'The Reef'., 19 July 2011

If this film doesn't get you to understand the dangers that may become of you and your loved ones whilst boating and/or swimming out in that deep, blue wet thing.... there's no hope for you. Period. Always check your supplies, gas, ladders, oxygen tanks, radios, satellite phones, what the hell ever, check them okay? This has been a public service announcement by yours truly at

Four friends (brother and sister and their lovers) decide to get together again after a few years and do some snorkeling off the Great Barrier Reef. Excellent idea, wrong timing. They have a mutual friend in Captain Luke (Walshe-Howling) and hire him to be their guide. Everything is fine until the boat bottoms out along a minor reef, but it causes some major damage to the boat and leaves it capsized with everyone in mortal danger. They're a long ways out, so it's decision time. Try to swim to some land or stay with the overturned boat. I hope none of you gets too attached to Warren (Darcy-Smith), because once he's made his choice to stay with the boat, that's the last you'll ever see of him. I'm not saying why or how, I'm just saying the film never returns to him... at all. It's one of my main gripes. Don't leave an established character and give us bump-kiss. How dare you. You introduced him..... you either finish him or make him do something to make us care less about him.

The real movie begins when the characters that decide to tempt fate by swimming to a piece of land that may or may not exist jump off the overturned wreckage. From there, it becomes a real nail-biter. Sure, it's been done before. But not with these people, now has it? Do they live or do they die? I guess you'll just have to watch and see now, won't ya?

I loved all of the beautiful underwater photography. It never ceases to amaze me what wonders live beneath the sea. Even more important, how about them people above the sea doing all them impressive paddle strokes to save their lives? Yeah, whatever, who cares, right? Wrong! It's based on a true story and I know what you're thinking and everything... do you know these people? Because I sure as hell don't. Do I feel for them? Yes! Even though I don't know them, I am feeling every single emotion that they're going through because of the sheer terror I can sense through their performances.

I'm not one to debunk theories regarding professions and everything --- but here's my problems I had with The Reef. I heard Luke (Walshe-Howling) state many times, "Let's keep moving" and "We got to keep moving".... yet, I hardly seen them moving at all. They would say that they have to keep going, but would wind up staying in the same spot for several minutes upon minutes. Um, practice what you preach, maybe? And what was up with him constantly putting his mask back on to go underwater to see where the shark was, huh? Stop looking for it and f*cking swim, ya jackass!

Overall, it still had me in suspense and awaiting the outcome of the entire crew. If you liked Open Water, you'll love The Reef. More reviews at Final Grade: B

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
If Dax would have just studied up a bit more on mockumentaries, this could have been comedy gold!, 18 July 2011

This film was supposed to be filmed as a mockumentary, Dax Shepard has actually been filming sequences since 2006 in order make this movie, which is all about him trying to get this movie (Brother's Justice) made in Hollywood. Some of it works, some of it don't, let me tell you why.

Dax Shepard comes up with a brilliant (or so he thinks) movie idea about two brothers. One gets kidnapped by a biker gang who also happens to deal or is on (I'm not sure which) crystal meth and the other brother comes to his rescue. Once he's infiltrated the biker gang and gained their trust, he saves his brother's life and must fight down the mountain. I guess the biker gang likes to drive their motorcycles up into the mountains. I dunno, don't ask. He calls his best friend (and producing partner) Nate Tuck to help him with the project. Nate agrees and they embark on a semi-hilarious journey through Hollywood's red tape. When his agent refuses, he realizes that he's got to "package" the movie with some big-time names, so he stops by a few of his friends' houses (Ashton Kutcher, Tom Arnold, Jon Favreau) and asks for help.

There are a lot of funny moments in Brother's Justice. The only problem is, it would have been a hell of a lot funnier if we didn't already know that this is just one big joke. From the poster and the trailer to the bad acting by Nate Tuck, we've already been let in on the hoax. Why would you spoil something that you've been working on for four years? Dax is convincing enough but his partner-in-crime is certainly not. There are a few moments when Dax does take the bit a little too far (crying, yelling). It makes him come off as a spoiled Hollywood brat or makes him look like he's struggling with bi-polar disorder, your choice. Even the celebs who do cameos are great at keeping up the appearance that Dax is serious about doing this. If Nate's acting doesn't clue you in, there's also those "fake trailers" that Dax and Nate make in order to sell their idea to Hollywood. Their goal is to film a few short scenes and show the Hollywood people so they can visualize Dax in the role that's being pitched. They are beyond ridiculous. At least try to make them look real. As they are, they're goofy, silly and it makes Dax look like some newcomer on YouTube, not a seasoned actor.

There's still plenty of funny to be found, though. It's just too bad that Dax didn't study up on some mockumentaries like Best in Show or For Your Consideration directed by Christopher Guest. What is now just a mediocre attempt at mocking could have been one of the greats, like This is Spinal Tap. Be sure to sit through all the credits for the bloopers and an additional scene with Seth Green that is easily one of the best scenes in the movie. More reviews at Final Grade: B-

Let Me In (2010)
0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
A very sweet, very touching vampire love story, 18 July 2011

This is the American remake of a Swedish film entitled Let the Right One In. I haven't seen the original and I don't see why Hollywood felt the need to rename it. This version was written and directed by Matt Reeves, who also directed Cloverfield. At least with this one, I didn't need to take Dramamine before viewing.

The movie starts out in a mysterious frenzy -- Who is this burned man? Why is he a criminal? Who came to visit him? What happened when the detective left the room? All good questions and they all get answered as soon as the movie fades to "Two Weeks Earlier".

Owen (Smit-McPhee) is pretty much all alone. His mother (Buono) and father (Browning) are getting a divorce and argue nonstop. He has no real friends at school, which causes another boy, Kenny (Minnette), to constantly harass and bully him. After peeping on some neighbors, he spies Abby (Moretz) and what appears to be her father (Jenkins) moving in next door. The next night, Abby comes across Owen in the courtyard's playground. It's apparent that Abby doesn't want to get close to Owen, but at the same time, she can't help herself from becoming more and more enamored with him. It gets to the point where they are hanging out quite a bit, but Abby's got a secret and Owen just may be too curious for his own good. It all culminates into a very touching, very sweet vampire story. It's what Twilight should be like.

See, that was my first mistake about this movie. I thought it was going to be very scary and plenty of blood and guts. What I got, though, was a sweet story about two kids from different worlds and each one needing something different to go one with their lives. They literally exist to save each other's lives. They need each other. So, scares, no jumps or frights. There are a few gory scenes, but nothing too crazy, just a lot of blood and some flesh-eating acid. I didn't need the phony frights or cheesy "got-ya's" to enjoy this film. All I needed was the performances of Moretz and Smit-McPhee and the ongoing mystery of how it will all turn out in the end.

Yes, the film does move at a slower pace than I intended, but I wasn't thrown off or bored by it in any way. The actors are captivating enough to keep you interested and I loved the idea of pure innocence and concentrated evil getting together. It was giddy and devious all at the same time, it just makes me want to view the original even more. This is the reason why remakes are made. It gets an entire nation to take notice about someone or a certain movie that they would have never even thought about before, had it not been done. More reviews at Final Grade: B

Extremely funny rom-com, filled, 18 July 2011

I usually skip the romantic comedies as they come out in the theater, but it's a shame that I passed this one up because it's pretty damn funny. The fact that Barrymore and Long dated on and off before filming this only helped them be more intimate in some scenes and certainly highlighted the fact that they clicked so well.

Garrett (Long) just got out of a relationship and his buddies, Dan (Day) and Box (Sudeikis), decide to take him to a local watering hole to drown his sorrows. Once there, he meets Erin (Barrymore) and they hit it off immediately. After a very awkward morning after, they agree to date casually (she's only here for a summer internship and he doesn't want anything serious right now) and when the time comes for Erin to go back home to San Francisco, they decide to further their little whirlwind romance by having a long-distance relationship. The rest of the movie finds them pining for one another while several thousand miles apart. They deal with jealousy, time differences, phone sex and the frustration of being apart.

The movie is very funny, the dialog crackles with wit and hilarious banter. Some people may complain about the excessive language or raunchy things the characters talk about, but as I said before, there isn't anything on the planet that offends me (well, that show Toddlers & Tiaras offends me). I've heard people talk like this before and it shouldn't come as a shock to anyone that there are people who do talk like this. It's an R-Rated rom-com, what do you guys want? I'm sorry, but it's more believable to me that someone would say the f-word instead of trying to mask it with fudge or frick. It's called real life. People swear, they get naked, they have sex, they poop, they pee, they vomit, if people get offended because of some talk about masturbation and cunnilingus, they need to either experience more life or stick to those cutesy little animated flicks like Beauty and the Beast or Bambi.

I loved all the supporting characters in the film and from the looks of it, people are taking a shine to Jason Sudeikis and Charlie Day. They co-starred in the hilarious Horrible Bosses together as well. Also joining in on the laughs is Jim Gaffigan. I wish he would do more feature films because the limited screen time he had in this one just does not do him justice. He made me laugh practically every time he was on screen, I especially loved the scene in which his and Long's character met for the first time. Going the Distance zips along at a very speedy pace and it isn't slow until the third act. I felt like the film had hit a brick wall when they were deciding the more important issues. It seemed like the writer wanted to make the characters mad just because it gave the film more tension and the characters more depth but in reality, it came off as unrealistic and made the characters seem arrogant and unlikable. I also wanted a bit more of an ending, where they left things didn't exactly close the door on the story. Ultimately, I enjoyed the film, had some good laughs and would recommend it to anyone with a good sense of humor and make sure they're not easily offended. More reviews at Final Grade: B

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Need a reason to watch the show? I'll give you FOUR., 17 July 2011

Hot in Cleveland takes four stars from for different sitcoms (Bertinelli from One Day at a Time, Leeves from Frasier, Malick from Just Shoot Me and White from The Golden Girls) and if the jokes don't get ya, then the star power will. It works, to an extent.

Melanie (Bertinelli), Joy (Leeves) and Victoria (Malick) were on their way to Paris from Los Angeles. Their flight had some complications and was forced to land in Cleveland, Ohio. While the girls were waiting for the next flight, they stopped at a local pub and lo and behold, the men were attracted to them like moths to a flame. Loving this new-found attention, Melanie decides to live amongst the locals and convinces her girlfriends to do the same. Then the girls find out that the house Melanie's bought comes with it's very own cranky, old caretaker, Elka Ostrovsky (White). Melanie is a published author (she wrote a book called 200 Things Every Woman Should Do Before She Dies), has an ex-husband and college-aged kids. Joy is an unmarried beautician who had a son when she was 15, but gave him up for adoption. Victoria has been divorced five times, won an Emmy for her role on Edge of Tomorrow, a soap opera that got canned. And Elka is not your typical old lady, she can be crude, crass and seems like she has a lot more fun than the girls do.

What works about this sitcom is the banter between the four leads. Betty White was only supposed to be in the pilot episode, but the audiences received her so well that the producers and writers cast her as a regular on the show. Another thing that Hot in Cleveland has going for it are the numerous guest stars it seems to pull in almost every week. So far, we've been treated with Shirley Knight, Hal Linden, Joe Jonas, Carl Reiner, John Schneider, Wayne Knight, Huey Lewis, Amy Yasbeck, Tim Conway, Dave Foley, Susan Lucci, Mary Tyler Moore, Sherri Shepherd, Bonnie Franklin, Jimmy Kimmel, Melanie Griffith, Illeana Douglas, Jack Wagner, Peri Gilpin, Frank Caliendo, Mindy Cohn and John Mahoney. That's a lot of name-dropping!

The premise seems a bit far-fetched but once the girls are all in the house, then it works just fine. It's almost like a forty-something Golden Girls. With sitcoms, it's all about comedic timing and these girls have shown that they've got the goods in other shows and works just as well here. It always brings a smile to my face when I see that sweet ol' Betty White calling Joy a "slut" or even better yet, when she's calling them all "a bunch of hookers". Aw, isn't she adorable? More reviews at Final Grade: B-

Somewhere (2010)
3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Somewhere, Sofia Coppola is saying, "I can't believe the studio actually let me make this!", 17 July 2011

I don't think I've ever watched a movie as slow as Somewhere. I'd like to see the screenplay for this one because there's virtually no talking in the first 30 or so minutes. This movie only got made because the writer/director is Francis Ford Coppola's daughter and she won an Academy Award for Lost in Translation, which was similarly slow-paced, but at least it had conflicts and emotions.

Johnny Marco (Dorff, who looks like he never combed his hair once) is a Hollywood actor who lives at the famed Château Marmont hotel in West Hollywood. He lives a pretty normal life and occasionally his daughter, Cleo (Fanning), will be dropped off by his ex-wife, Layla (Sloatman). He hangs out with his friend, Sammy (Pontius) and beds a bevy of babes throughout. One night, his ex calls and says that she Cleo needs to spend more time because she needs a break. He has to take her to Italy and when they get back from the trip, he has to see her off to camp. That's it. No conflict, no drama, no emotions, no protagonist, no anything, really. The main character is so anti-confrontational, he ignores many rude text messages, not even bothering to find out who it is and why they're saying what they're saying. It is an extremely boring, painfully slow-moving piece of nothing.

More than likely, some haters will trash my review of the film stating that "I just don't get it" and "It's deeper than that". Yes I do and no, it isn't. I understand that he's a spoiled actor with a bunch of materialistic things in his life and the opening scene with him going around and around in a race car symbolizes how his life has no meaning and he's just caught in one vicious circle. I understand the relationship with his daughter. He does kind of bond with her (over ping-pong, tea parties at the bottom of the pool, ordering gelatto at midnight) but he never has a real connection in the film once. Not once. Finally, near the end of the film when she breaks down and cries (the first drama of the film and it only took 80 minutes!), he hugs her. That's it! No speeches, no reassurances, again, no nothing! Maybe Hollywood people don't know how to show emotions when they're being their normal self and not in front of a camera.

This movie is poorly written and put together, it's almost as if they forgot they had to shoot a film and just set up a camera and let it roll. Speaking of which, what is up with Coppola's extra-long, pandering camera shots? She shows us one mundane thing after another and holds the shot for so long, it's enough to put you in a coma. Do we really need to see twin sisters on their stripper poles and watch their entire routine? It's not the actors fault (hell, anyone could have played the characters and it would have come out the same), they just got up, walked here, walked there and on every odd take, they might nod at each other or talk about the weather, food or sports. No real conversations were had throughout the film. He didn't know his daughter was ice-skating for 3 years, yet he fails to talk to her, ask her about it or even try to get to know her at all. We're supposed to believe that he wants to try and change when he's not even giving forth an effort? And the ending is so ludicrous and pretentious, it's downright insulting.

So, I completely understand what Coppola was going for, but I think she failed miserably in trying to achieve it. Real people have emotions, conversations and heart. The only reason the film doesn't get a total fail from me is because at least Coppola didn't forget to take off the lens cap off the camera. Somewhere goes absolutely nowhere. More reviews at Final Grade: D-

Page 7 of 17: [Prev][2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [Next]