Three Businessmen (1998) User Reviews

Late Night Brit film

[sig_university · 8/10 · 9 July 2007]

A dialogue heavy film that rarely switches pace is perfect for late night viewing when something more kinetic seems inappropriate. It's never less than interesting and well played by the leads and occasionally reminded my of Lost in Translation, with it's meandering scenes of isolation and mutual foreboding.

Tod Davies has created here something very similar to Richar Linklater's Before Sunset. I'm dropping names here because it seems this film has seen a very limited audience so anyone not sure of seeing it, if you enjoyed the ones I've mentioned above, you'll like this.

The humour is delicate and fleeting and usually works pretty well but luckily there's much more to enjoy here than a few laughs. It's a peculiar little film following two men in 'Liverpool' searching for a place to eat and seemingly never achieving their aim. I suppose it has to be seen. Recommended certainly.

Subtle, intelligent film

[Ween · 8/10 · 8 April 1999]

The film 'Three Businessmen' is a clever piece of work in which a businessman from England (played well by Alex Cox) and a businessman from America meet in Liverpool and go out for dinner. But each time they take public transport they end up in a different city: Rotterdam, Hong Kong, Tokyo etc. and are quite unaware that they have ever left England, especially the American, whose typical American tourist behaviour is fun for any Europeans to see.

Though the film got received quite poorly in Rotterdam, I put it down to the fact that there were no Dutch subtitles and the dialogue is very important in the film, because little happens, the entertainment comes from listening to the mini-arguments between the American and the Brit.

Original storyline and subtle humour make this an entertaining little film, shot on a minute budget.

Wonderful

[McGonigle · 26 August 2003]

After Walker and Straight To Hell were mercilessly savaged by film critics in 1987, the creator of Repo Man and Sid & Nancy seemed to have fallen off the face of the earth, at least to Americans. Fortunately for all of us, Alex Cox did continue to make movies, even if they were basically unseen on this side of the Atlantic.

And, just as fortunately, those movies continued to be as creative as the films that made him famous. Three Businessmen is a charming, thoroughly original movie about two men who meet in a hotel dining room. They talk awhile, but when service appears not to be forthcoming, they set out into the streets of Liverpool in search of dinner. And they talk. And that's about it.

Out of this slim premise, Cox and Tod Davies have fashioned a brilliant and memorable film. It never fails to capture your interest -- either intellectually or visually -- and as soon as it was over, I wanted to watch it again (not unlike my reaction when I first saw Repo Man, oh these many years ago).

This is definitely one to check out if you want something a little "off the beaten track" but not too self-consciously artsy.

A duo's surreal search for sustenance

[Afracious · 9/10 · 30 May 2001]

The film begins by showing us the grand old buildings of Liverpool, England. An old man walks in front of one of them and in the next shot enters Lime Street Station. You wouldn't think that this is relevant, but it is. In Alex Cox's Three Businessmen most things that are on view in the frame are relevant. Cox describes the film as "Buñuelian". You could say that it is something along the lines of one of the maestro's films, The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeosie, because the two main protagonists have the same problem – they can't seem to find a meal and a place to eat. The two main protagonists in question are art dealers Bennie Reyes (Miguel Sandoval) and Frank King (Alex Cox). Bennie arrives at Liverpool Lime Street Station with his luggage in tow. He is greeted outside by the damp Liverpool weather. He hails a cab, which then drops him off about one hundred yards away at a plush hotel. Bennie enters the hotel, and after saying "ding ding" at the desk to get some attention, the Desk Clerk pops up (Andrew Schofield of the Scully TV series). He recommends Room 147 to Bennie – "It's got a jacuzzi", he tells him.

Bennie takes the elevator to his room, which he has trouble finding. The corridors in the hotel are dark and difficult to navigate (the film was shot in the Adelphi Hotel). On arrival in his room the first thing he unpacks is his printer. There's a knock on the door – Bennie opens it but there's no-one there. He reads some books to pass some time – the books are: The Seed and the Sower (Laurens Van der Post), The Doubter's Companion (John Ralston Saul), The Multi-Orgasmic Man (Mantak Chia & Douglas Abrams Arava), Urban Voodoo (Edgardo Cozarinsky), and a Johnson Smith catalogue, Things You Never Knew Existed.

Bennie decides to visit the hotel's dining room to eat. The eerie dining room is occupied by just two people - a large waiter and Frank. The waiter leads Bennie down to the end of the room to a table close to Frank's table. The camera shot in this scene stays in the location as we enter the room, and then, very slowly and methodically, moves closer to the end of the room where Bennie and Frank are. Bennie is an affable chap and is eager to strike up a conversation with Frank. Frank is more reserved and would rather not be disturbed at all, just left on his own reading his newspaper - but Bennie gets the conversation going. We learn Bennie is an art dealer from New Mexico, whose main office is in California. Frank is also an art dealer, but he specialises in African art. The two men have their habits - Bennie taps his fork and spoon together - Frank continually tears pieces of paper from his newspaper. Bennie asks the waiter for some wine and the waiter leaves the room. We don't see him again. The two men visit the kitchen to investigate and find it is empty. They go to the main desk and the clerk has vanished.

"I suppose it's time we fended for ourselves", announces Frank. They both set off into the Liverpool night seeking sustenance. Bennie fancies a nice juicy rare steak, but Frank is a vegetarian. Frank also doesn't like Italian food. They visit Matthew Street, where The Beatles used to play in the Cavern Club. Bennie says he hates The Beatles. They come across a bust of Carl Jung - "Maybe we took a wrong turn and ended up in Switzerland", remarks Bennie. They arrive at a Porsche showroom - "This is a poor neighbourhood - so who's buying these cars?", asks Frank. Later, on a bus, Frank tells Bennie, "We are on the verge on absolute chaos. The revival of Eastern Mysticism - all these people running around believing they are the re-incarnation of Marie Curie - it's insane".

Throughout the film there is a strange poster that is displayed in abundance on many walls in different locations that the two men find themselves in. "Daddy Z" is written on the poster and there is the image of a man's face (which is actually the face of Zander Schloss). The purpose of the posters will be revealed at the end of the film.

The two men enter a bar, but there is no food available, but at least they are bought a drink by a kind local karaoke-bar owner. The next stop on their journey is an underground station. They take a train and during the journey the lights go out for a few seconds on the train. It is now a different train - a poster on the side where Bennie is sat has disappeared. On arrival at its destination the train has changed colour and the location is now Rotterdam. Not that it matters to the chaps, as far as they're concerned they are still in Liverpool, just a little disoriented. In another bar Bennie tells Frank about his Plutonium Card, which he says offers him dismemberment insurance and, the best benefit of all, total salvation.

The next chance of nourishment for the two gentlemen comes when they visit a Greek restaurant. A large selection of food is put on the table for them, then Bennie has a panic attack and storms out of the restaurant, deliriously running around the town square (the film amusingly speeded up) and then lying down. Bennie claims the sight of the abundance of food caused the panic attack. The discussion subject turns to laptop computers and it isn't long before the panic attack is forgotten.

On another bus ride, Bennie gives us a rendition of "I've Got a Lovely Bunch of Coconuts" in a cockney accent, mainly to get the attention of Frank. Frank suggests a boat ride across the Mersey, although it is Hong Kong Harbour, but it's still Liverpool to the boys. Frank reads a section from his newspaper about a virus on a space station (a nod to 2001). Next they find themselves in Tokyo. "It's the Japanese Gardens in Liverpool", Frank says, "It's in the guide". They enter another restaurant and things look promising. Bennie is agitated now and demands to be served. The food arrives but it is plastic. Foiled again. Another small restaurant visit is abruptly ended when it closes while they are waiting.

Next is a taxi journey that leaves them in the desert countryside. Bennie phones the Plutonium Card Company for help, but all he gets is an answering machine. A ride on a cart pulled by a donkey leads them to a small village where they encounter another businessman, Leroy (Robert Wisdom), who is in a similar predicament as Bennie and Frank, but he got lost in Chicago buying a toy for his kid. I won't reveal the final outcome - I recommend you see the film for yourself to discover that. Debbie Harry performs the catchy end-credits song called "Ghost Riders in the Sky", and the other music in the film by Pray For Rain is effective. It's a very enjoyable and inventive surreal film.

Two businessmen and a lost cause

[jarmic6 · 4/10 · 31 October 2008]

Two businessmen meet in an abandoned restaurant of the old rococo hotel their staying and decide to take a walk in order to find booze and food. One is English and the other one is American but their surnames are similar if translated… They start walking in the streets of Liverpool, often stopping in bars and restaurants but never being able to put a bite in their mouth. They are continually talking about society and politics and economy. Sometimes they get along with each other, sometimes they don't. Anyway, from a point on, their walk takes a surrealistic turn…

Alex Cox obviously directed this movie just to keep busy. The screenplay feels written by some smart-ass looser who thinks he is Samuel Beckett. Subtlety is nowhere to be found. The cinematography is atrocious. It's a film full of pretense. Cox thinks he makes an important social statement when in fact his view is banal and childish. He tries to experiment, but he fails, not only because he has produced an ugly film, but because he doesn't understand that experimental cinema is meant to take the art a step further. It's not meant to be used as a cheesy effect. Well, he doesn't seem to understand the substance of experimentation just like he didn't seem to understand the substance behind cult when he made Repo Man. He thinks he's above that stuff and he can easily use them to do whatever he wants. That's the reason why he never gets into the whole thing. Experimentation though, is not easy. It requires true vision, not some pretentious need to just differ. It also requires knowledge of the medium and while Cox has that knowledge, he uses it just to prove that he can do it too.

But to be fair, there are moments where the whole joke seems to work and actually provoke some laughs (mostly because of the performances). The scene, in which the two businessmen meet while waiting for the waiter in the restaurant, is well shot (and terribly light) and is maybe the only proof that Cox is a good director.

One of Cox's finest achievements.

[Infofreak · 28 December 2001]

Alex Cox is one of Britain's best kept secrets, and this is one of his best movies. In fact I'd probably say it ties with 'Repo Man' as his most consistent and entertaining. 'Three Businessmen' is an absurdist fable that shares some of 'Repo Man's surreal humour. As Cox's production company hints Bunuel is a good reference point, as are the odd stories of Flann O'Brien, Kobo Abe or John Sladek.

The idea is simple - two businessmen, one American, played by Cox regular Miguel Sandoval ('Get Shorty', 'Blow'), and one Englishman (Cox himself) meet in the deserted dining room of an expensive hotel in Liverpool. They chat while waiting for service, and when it looks like that isn't forthcoming, they go on a quest for food. Finding the kitchen deserted, and likewise the rest of the hotel, they venture outside to look for somewhere to eat. And so their "adventure" begins.

They walk, talk, agree, disagree, irritate and bond with each other while never quite getting the meal they desire. Things never go to plan, they get sidetracked, misled, confused, and go up various dead ends and strange situations. While still thinking they remain in Liverpool they end up traveling around the world. A plot description doesn't do this movie justice, the real story is in the telling.

'Three Businessmen' (and yes, there is a third one, eventually) is a wonderfully inventive movie that held me until its unexpected twist ending. It's a real gem, and my admiration for Alex Cox grows with every movie of his I see. He is a true original and we need more film makers like him!

Funny and Compelling

[Fred-30 · 24 November 1998]

Alex Cox says this picture isn't "Repo Man," and he's right. It's a neatly constructed and unashamedly intelligent little masterpiece that transports his career to a new plateau of excellence and maturity. Unpretentious and uncompromising, it's sure to be an instant classic.

The DVD offers you not one – but TWO pairs of boring idiots.

[fedor8 · 22 February 2007]

An American businessman and an English one (played by the stunningly handsome Cox himself) go on a journey through Liverpool, looking for food. But, wait! They end up traveling half the globe, not noticing that they've been in Holland, Japan, China, etc. In the end they end up on the set of Clint Eastwood's spaghetti Westerns, where they meet the third businessmen. The three of them are symbolically represented by the Three Kings, which the "hand of God" then removes in the last scene. Meaning… what?... That Cox is a shoddy director? Whatever.

I am so tired of these talentless wannabe "film-makers" trying desperately to devise and present new ways to be "original" about how they deliver their unoriginal same old "messages" about humanity, the problems of the modern man, what have you. It takes ability and talent to do that, and Alex Cox lacks both in abundance.

The movie is only 77 minutes long. I underline "only", though. In Cox's movie universe 77 minutes can appear like 300 years. So perhaps Cox IS some kind of a genius – who can bend space and time to his liking. However, would that excuse torturing us poor, misguided viewers like this? I was misguided alright: dumb even, to even consider that renting a Cox film (don't laugh at this unintentional word-play) could prove beneficial to me – in any way.

The movie is HELLISHLY dull. The two main characters talk about absolutely nothing the whole time. Now, Cox's DVD commentary explains that this was done on purpose to show how lost, lonely, pathetic (what have you) the two are. The only problem with this, Mr.Cox, is that you are BORING THE VIEWERS out of their minds! And that is the worst trait a movie can have.

It was a such a trial sitting through the movie. I had to alternately switch to the audio commentary, in which another two boring fools – Cox and Davies (the writer) – pathetically prattled, and then went back to the other two dull morons, the two businessmen in the movie. I just kept jumping back-and-forth, and most of the time it was a dead heat, really: who is duller, the creators or the characters? Tough one to answer. The choice: to watch two characters saying nothing in a movie about almost nothing, or to listen to two self-deluded, arrogant, self-indulging wannabe "artistes" jabber about the dull movie.

Davies, the woman who wrote this dull, pretentious piece of trash, was also responsible for the supremely dull "Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas", which means that she already had experience in boring audiences around the world with pointless crap. Still, I mean give credit where credit's due: the woman has a knack, a TALENT, for dull, pretentious, left-wing screenplays.

Left-wing. Yes, well, obviously that is the primary characteristic she shares with Alex Cox, who's yet another frustrated baby-boomer who thinks that time should have stood still in 1969. Screw that. Western society had shot itself in the foot in that year, it was a horribly embarrassing year by any standard. So, basically, Cox is just like Terry Gilliam, the director of "Fear and Loathing" – an "aging liberal douche bag" (a quote from "South Park") who worships 1969, drugs, Marx, those damn awful Beatniks, and anything that is even remotely anti-Capitalist.

If you listen to the Cox/Davies commentary, you'll hear arrogance just oozing out of them. Half of their commentary is politically loaded. Cox whines about the "New Socialism", which he sees as exemplified by Tony Blair, and which he defines as "Capitalism mixed in with some more Capitalism". That pretty much says it all about his intellect and grasp for reality. For Cox and Davies, Capitalism is the One Great Evil, the scourge of humanity. Never mind the fact that it is CAPITALIST companies that finance the bulk of his lousy anti-Capitalist movies. What a hypocrite. I love these rich, over-saturated, always-complaining Marxists who can NEVER seem to get over the fact that their beloved Communism failed in just about every country – always carrying with it millions of corpses as a souvenir (and warning) to the next generations.

Cox even mentions the bombing of Serbia at one point. I am from Serbia, and I wasn't interested in his naïve critique of NATO, Clinton and Blair. Certainly, there is criticism to be made there, but I don't want to hear it from a Marxist. After all, Milosevic and his wife were Marxists, and they had caused the bombing in the first place. Could it be that Cox was opposed to the bombing more because it was directed against a commie regime? Would he have minded if they had bombarded Pinochet's Chile? That raging hypocrite knows the answer to that one.

It's no surprise that this sniveling ex-Blairite even uses Marxist terminology in his audio commentary. Vile.

Sorry about not delving more on the movie itself. But perhaps when Cox one day delivers a movie that doesn't BORE ME LIKE HELL I will not switch to the commentary. Like that'll ever happen… This is the man who brought us such "classics" as "Sid And Nancy" and "Repo Man". Cox even refers to himself as a "rock'n'roll film-maker" which is so pathetic, revealing not only (yet more) self-delusion but a whole new trait: unabashed immodesty. However, the pits was Cox trying to be funny with "silly voices" during the commentary. It was just as funny as the movie, namely zilch.

Which brings me to the question of genre. This is supposed to be a comedy! Trust me, whether you're right-wing or left-wing or apolitical, dumb or smart, black or white, you won't find ANYTHING funny or amusing here. It's just DULL. Cox says that the appearance of the desert "always gets a laugh among cinema-goers". He is a liar. The only people who ever laughed watching this malarkey are Davies and Cox in the commentary. Sad, really

Very enjoyable, classic Cox

[JB-35 · 15 October 1998]

Didn't really know what to expect from 3 Businessmen, but it's a typical bizarre Alex Cox-style story. Very enjoyable, particularly the silent punchline. Go see it!!