Reviews

I was hesitant to see this film, as it looked like yet another road pic where father and son or whoever bond on the road. But critics and friends love the movie. So we tried it out, and I wish the road was the only problem with the movie.

I am a Payne fan, but I can't see why he would make this movie besides it being named after his home state. If Oklahoma wasn't already taken, this movie could have been called that. Or Montana. Or Wyoming. There is nothing distinct about the characters or setting in this movie to warrant its being made beyond a personal connection for Payne. Too bad for Payne the script is so contrived that it doesn't come across as personal but caricature.

I gave this movie a chance for 20 minutes, as I was surrounded by Christmas vacation movie rubes who seemed to be laughing at things that weren't supposed to be funny. But when June Squibb's character flashes a gravestone in an obvious and painful attempt at humor, I turned on this film. At that point my suspicion that these were caricatures and not real life characters was confirmed. They were just doing wacky sitcom things because they're cute, quaint simple-minded townsfolk. Check out the screenwriter's credits- it's his first feature film, with only one TV show I've never heard of, and writing for MAGIC JOHNSON'S TALK SHOW! for previous credits. That's it! And it really feels like a first-time script, with it not being concerned with genuine, natural feeling plot of character development, sticking to a trite formula that makes the viewer FEEL like they're watching a movie, which is not a good thing.

The story ends well, but the last 10 minutes' payoff was not worth the excruciatingly slow and painful dialogue and "plot" that precedes it. The movie's worst feature is that it relies on a bunch of false conflicts where a simple explanation from Will Forte's character could have resolved everything, a la a Three's Company episode. In fact, such an explanation could have made Bruce Dern's plight more sympathetic, and given the townsfolk a chance to show some humanity rather than their two-dimensional idiosyncrasies and quirks.

The script's problems are compounded by Payne's directorial choices. Can someone explain to me why this is in black and white? Besides a director's insecurity, and wanting the film to seem more important than it is? The already slow script turns to molasses when Payne decides to gather 10 male townsfolk in a living room to watch TV. Payne thinks he's being insightful and/or clever by showing them looking at the TV, aka his camera. The "simple" townsfolk just stare at the camera, watching you watch the film. One caricature asks a question. He receives a one word response. A long pause as everyone continues to stare at the camera/T. Another question asked, a remark made, with a slowly delivered one word response. Absolute. Torture. The pace of this movie made the mostly excellent 3 hour Wolf of Wall Street fly by in comparison.

I can't fault the acting here, but even Bruce Dern's role didn't have much depth or dimension. I already mentioned June Squibb's part, and I have to fault the script that I found her to be obnoxious. Will Forte does his job, but that's about all. The only memorable performance for me was Peg Nagy as Angela, a former love interest of Dern's. Hers was the only part that felt like it could have been a real person. She played the part with a subtlety and poignance that the rest of the film lacked.

Nebraska is the first Payne film that I didn't like. Hope it's the last.

The fine cast assembled for this film makes me wonder what they saw in the script. Was it a matter of one actor signing on, and others wanting to work with him (I say him because the only female in the film is Zoe Saldana, in a one-dimensional and thankless role). Was it that the director used to be an actor and knows all these people? Was it because he had success with Crazy Heart?

Other reviews basically already touch on the problems here: it means nothing. I wanted to like the film, but I walked out of the theater not knowing what I had just seen (the ending is confusing, ridiculous, and poorly done). The film takes itself far too seriously to get away with just being entertaining, and when you don't have a clue what the whole point of the movie was, that's a bad thing. Things happen in the film without really coming together and create a cohesive narrative where you feel that there's any growth or direction. Perhaps that's the intent, but any theme or themes were underdeveloped and not apparent. I find the comparisons to Deerhunter insulting, personally.

The actors do a fine job, although I feel there is some miscasting in the movie. Would Forest Whitaker really be able to attract Zoe Saldana? Nothing in the movie gave me any reason to think they had a believable relationship. Frankly, nothing in the film convinced me that Saldana would even stay in a town like Braddock. Bale is good, as is Affleck and Harrelson, but I didn't really connect with anyone except Affleck's character.

Definitely a missed opportunity and a disappointment.

While watching this Richard Linklater film, I was frankly underwhelmed, but by the time the end credits rolled around the film's charm had snuck up on me.

I am a huge fan of Linklater's Before Sunrise trilogy, and School of Rock, and have enjoyed his other films. I remember the marketing campaign for this film positioning this film as true life crime dramedy. There are comedic aspects that help the film along, but it never really went beyond some amusing scenes. Matthew McConaughey as the town sheriff probably provided the closest thing to comedy, playing a publicity-seeking narcissist who somehow is about the only person in the film who keeps Bernie's crime in perspective. Jack Black's performance is one-note, and made me wonder why Linklater and some other directors (such as David O. Russell with Jennifer Lawrence) keep on going back to the same actors even though they may or may not be right for that movie or part.

But when the final credits rolled, and we get to see the real life Bernie, Jack's performance seemed appropriate for the film. The film is not really about Bernie, his crime, his inner demons, or whether or not he did it or why. The thesis of the film can be summed up in one of the townsfolk's on-camera interviews that are interspersed throughout the film: "People in small towns want to believe the worst in people. But they also want to believe in the best in people." Once the final credits rolled, and I was finally certain that the townspeople talking about Bernie in the film were the real people, then the point of the film became clear to me, and its faults didn't matter as much. Perhaps the film's title is misleading, as it is not really about Bernie, but how people who knew Bernie felt about him.

This won't go down as one of Linklater's best, but it's definitely worth a viewing.

Although Matthew McConaughey has done a lot of crap films, I usually do enjoy seeing him in good films. I enjoyed his performances in Mud, The Lincoln Lawyer, and of course Dazed and Confused, among others. But as good as he was in those films, he still never completely disappeared into those roles. This is not necessarily his fault all the time; he just exudes a lot of his personality naturally.

Although Mud came close, this is the first film for me where MM disappeared and the character of Ron Woodroof came alive. It's more than just the actor becoming skinny; from the opening scene, you can feel his sickness. Both MM and Jared Leto are never over the top in the "Hey Look at Me, I lost a bunch of weight so I could get an Oscar nomination" way that some other actors have been in other films requiring massive weight loss.

As for the film itself, it is most successful in the beginning, when it recreates vividly how really frightening and stigmatizing the AIDS epidemic was early on. Woodroof fights against both external and internal prejudices, and then takes on the fight against the FDA. The second half still holds up well against the first half, as the viewer is completely absorbed in Woodroof et al's plight and fight for survival.

One criticism of the film I've read is that Woodroof goes from homophobic to accepting his homosexual business partner and customers rather easily. I don't find this to be a valid criticism. For one thing the film covers a long period of time, with gaps of time between one scene and the next. Secondly, the film is not about Woodroof's transformation from bigot to tolerant human being. It is about struggling to survive in the face of disease and a heartless bureaucracy that gets in the way of his survival. It is thru the process of this struggle that he realizes that he and those around him are all part of the same struggle.

The ending of the film should not be a surprise, but the director ended it perfectly, without undue sentimentality. Definitely one of the better films of this year.

One did not like this movie. One found it to be totally lacking of any genuine insight or originality. One realizes that one was supposed to feel sad and touched by this movie, but one was more touched by the Police Academy movies. One thinks that beautiful actresses (Embeth Davidtz, Monica Potter from Patch Adams) and talented actors (Oliver Platt, and Philip Seymour Hoffman from Patch) will have to start a support group for those whose careers have had to suffer through a Robin Williams "How I am a better Human than You" type movie. One could not understand why Sir (Sam Neill's character) would think the audience is so dumb that he would have to say to Andrew Martin (Robin Williams) "You stopped referring to yourself as One" when the constant referral of one's self as One was extremely irritating to this viewer (er...one). It's like pointing out that someone has finally stopped dragging their fingernails across a chalkboard for 40 minutes. One would notice that one's self, Sir. One is grateful that Hallie Kate Eisenberg was in this for a relatively short time. One thinks that is the only good decision Chris Columbus made regarding this movie. One found the humor completely lame and it seems that the actors (besides Williams) did too b/c their laughter was extremely fake. One thought that the female robot dancing to "A Little Respect" by Aretha Franklin was the most horrifyingly awful 15 seconds of cinema ever produced. One found the characters to be one-dimensional, especially those who hate the android for no reason other than the trite script requires them to hate Andrew. One especially did not like Andrew, b/c he falls in love with someone only because they look exactly like her grandmother who he was in love with. Also b/c he insults a rival for his "love" based on physical appearance, and not the rival's character.

One considers this movie to be cinematic wallpaper. A completely flat, monotonous dreadful movie that should only be seen if it is playing in the background of another, better movie.

Finally, yes you guessed it, One gives this movie a 1 out of 10.

Matrix is a stunning achievement in visual effects, but Keanu Reeves and Laurence Fishburne both give dreadfully flat and boring performances. In short I didn't care about any of the characters, and was bored by the hour long explanation of the plot (this after Fishburne's character claims that "no one can be told what the Matrix is"). The Matrix had a similar plot structure to one of 1998's best movies "Dark City" which unlike the Matrix, didn't bog down the action with boring actors and dialogue. And did anybody really buy the garbage ending?

The effect this movie has on you is devastating. The combat scenes in the movie are where you can find Speilberg exploring territory that no other director has before in war movies. Spielberg comes as close to capturing the madness of war by showing us the horror in an unrelenting fashion. Deaths alternate between quick and horrifying and slow and agonizing. It's unfortunate that such a pedestrian script was used to connect the awesome combat scenes. But the frustratingly simplistic plotline serves as a way for the characters to question war in a way a post-Vietnam American would, without making such questioning seem historically preposterous (as it did in "The Thin Red Line," whose "hero" has gone AWOL just months following Pearl Harbor). The movie would have been a 10 if not for the bookends (Private Ryan visiting Normandy as an old man) that were taken from "Titanic."