MovieChat Forums > America's Sweethearts (2001) Discussion > True reasons why this film is rated so l...

True reasons why this film is rated so low


I will dare say that the film got low ratings primarily from Hollywood. I had a chance to see it in a private screening with Hollywood pros who truly behave like some actors on the set of this film, and they all disliked it immediately. They could not even laugh at any jokes, because they would be laughing at themselves, and that's the last thing they want to do. Hollywood types take themselves too seriously, and hate to be shown what funny and insane creatures they are. Their insanity works only in the world of fantasy and power struggles that they live in and are hooked on.

Same goes for film critics who were thoroughly mocked here, so they were the first to give the film a bad review. Hollywood pros followed, equally dissatisfied with seeing their own mirror images, and the sheeple followed further.

Otherwise, the film is excellent. It could have done without some cheap humor such as those scenes with the dog, but even then, the more biting stuff (John Cusack and his "wellness guide", CZJ on Larry King, Stanley Tucci, etc) more than makes up for it.

reply

That's an interesting perspective. I had not considered it.

I just found the plot rather lame, and the undoubted talents on show were just wasted.
Except John Cusack, who seems to be able to make a silk purse out of any pig's ear.

reply

Well, it is a film about shallow characters, so it cannot produce a great story or plot, and it should not. Sort of like "Pulp Fiction" not having much depth to it either.

But, that's exactly what makes is so funny and enjoyable. I can watch some scenes over and over again, including the unfortunately deleted scene when Hall Weidman's daughter comes to visit John Cusack...

reply

No depth to "Pulp Fiction"?

I review Pulp Fiction in installments http://drdmoviemusings.blogspot.ca/search/label/Pulp%20Fiction starting with this one http://drdmoviemusings.blogspot.ca/2010/05/trying-hard-to-be-shepherd- pulp-fiction.html. Check it out and let me know if you still think it has no depth.

------------------------------------------
I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd.

reply

I am sorry, but I have no patience to read those reviews as my mind is already made up. If you see depth in it, it does not mean it is there. The true value of Pulp Fiction lies in its editing, non-linear story, excellent dialogues, performances and obviously - entertainment value. But beyond that, there is not much more.

reply

And if you refuse to see what depth there is, it does not mean it is not there, either.

------------------------------------------
I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd.

reply

If there was depth, you could have stated it.
If you watch and understand a film such as "Seven Samurai" or "Seventh Seal", or "Grand Illusion", then you will see what "Depth" really means.

As a matter of fact, even Tarantino himself is not particularly concerned with any form of depth in his creations - he is after cheap thrills and entertainment mixed in with some shock value. That's all there is to him. But, even then, "Pulp fiction" is a well made film. The only slightly deep thing that probably even you missed is that Jules manages to find God in all that chaos, and his friend (Vincent) does not and dies as a result.

reply

You don't know what you're talking about. If you'd read my reviews, you'd know I didn't miss that at all.

reply

Well, then, you could have stated it here, like I did.

reply

There is the headline, and then there is the rest of the story. There's more to the story than the headline at the surface - that's what "depth" is about.

-----------------------------------------
Trying real hard to be the shepherd.

reply

Don't mind Nobody-27. They stalk users around the net whose opinions they disagree with then get on their high horse about how much therapy the person they disagree with needs. She needs serious help.

reply

:-) Gotcha!

reply

I loved this film!!! It is exactly what I needed to see. ..a light, romantic comedy with great actors. I can't understand why people didn't like it. There are so many gross, morose, violent films these days that turn me off completely. This was refreshing. I especially liked the roles of Alan Alda and Christopher Walken! Hilarious!

reply

No you didn't. Check the user before you form an opinion. The real troll here is EmmaRobertsKnees. Check her posts on Jennifer Lawrence board... (although they may have been deleted because she really was trolling like it's the end of the world)

reply

I'll say what you said - "my mind is made up, so I won't be reading any more about it."

-----------------------------------------
Trying real hard to be the shepherd.

reply