The film's premiere, planned to be held at the Paris Theatre, was canceled at short notice just hours before it was set to take place after reps for the premiere cited "unexpected circumstances." See more »
When I saw the rating before seeing the movie, I got a bit defensive. It is so low because of the people's inability to distinguish between the person and the art. American puritanism is at play again here.
Then I saw the movie. It was weird. From the very beginning there were some obvious inadequacies in the editing and the acting. This might be taken as something charming, something unpolished on purpose, may be a stylistic decision. At times the movie feels like a movie from the 40s (the scenes from the birthday party and just afterwards with John Malkovich); at other times it nods to Woody Allen. But what makes it hard to watch it in isolation from the current events, is the fact that the movie is so much in a dialog with them. Mindfuckingly so. It examines the grey areas when it comes to consent, signals people give in the flirting game, what is objectively appropriate (if there is such a thing) and what is acceptable from society. The latter is as divided as its members.
As for Louis CK's acting, the confused expression worked better in the context of the series Louis, but it could hardly carry a whole movie.
Overall, it is an interesting film to watch. I am still a fan and a supporter and wish to have the opportunity to review many future Louis CK's projects.
45 of 61 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this