I cannot remember when I last saw such a boring film.
Someone called this a 'thriller' without explosions but they were wrong.This is a film without anything but miles and miles of pointless dialog and zero action or thrills.
Complete waste of time.1/10.
i want the hour and a half of my life back!
shareThat movie was so disappointing after somewhat promising begining. They were making VIP talks and VIP faces and it came to the "huge" soap bubble explosion at the end...Thumbs down.
____________________
Vanitas vanitatum...
You and me both. I read the synopsis of the movie and I was still a little lost during the movie. I understood what it was about, but it just seemed pointless and a waste of 1.5 hours. The acting was very bad - I even fell asleep during it.
shareBoring indeed, and I can't remember its equal either. (Well, Andy Warhol made a couple of movies that came up pretty close in drabness, but I've forgotten them already.) One reviewer here compares it to "The Conversation." Not. At least, "The Conversation" had a plot. Langella is wasted here. And Elliot Gould's wooden acting reminded me that the only movie in which he was any good was "M*A*S*H," umpteen years ago.
What was the point of the movie? That if you have a good friend you can invite him to watch you be executed? But you have to trick him first?
And how about that finale, with Langella's dying vision of WWII GIs and Uncle Sam in a French town whose name sounded suspiciously like Sarsaparilla? Was that corny or what? (By the way, sarsaparilla is what is known in the U.S. as root beer. I like sarsaparilla.)
The nightclub singer at the end may have been the producer's girlfriend, because she could neither act nor sing. She sure could fill a gown, though.
Anyway, as much as I respect Langella as an actor (not long ago, I enjoyed his performance in "Nixon/Frost") I wouldn't recommend this film to another Langella fan or anyone else, for that matter. A total waste of his talent and my money.
[deleted]