MovieChat Forums > The Good Guy (2010) Discussion > The best thing about this movie was

The best thing about this movie was

posted 14 years ago by seeairuhh
10 replies | jump to latest

Bryan Greenberg and his character Daniel. He should have been the main character not Tommy. The film should have centered around him and how awkward he is and how he likes Beth. But instead it's about Tommy, a wall street guy who seems like a good guy but still not a like-able character then half way through the film you see that he's a cheat and a scumbag. And then there's Beth. Who is one of his girlfriends, she starts to crush on Daniel then realizes Tommy is cheating on her then dumps him and ends up with Daniel. It would of been better if Tommy had about 10 minutes of screen time instead of being in the whole entire movie. Ugh I am really disappointed, it had a lot of potential.

So yeah I think it would have been a lot better if Daniel was the main character because imo he was the most like-able.

[–] maybutler 14 years ago

When I saw the trailer and from the title, I thought the movie would be about Daniel. I agree with you, it would have been better from his point of view. You could tell from Tommy just leaving 33A in the beginning of the movie that he was a cheat. Guys that are that charming are never the real deal. And you would think Beth would have caught on since she's been with a married man.

Don't say that. Women say that, everything goes black and I wake up surrounded by body parts.

[–] jandibow 13 years ago

The main character of a movie doesn't always have to be likeable. The movie was influenced by the book 'The Good Soldier,' which is why they read it for their book club. When Beth is discussing the book with Daniel she says that we trust the narrator out of habit but as you get into the book you find out he is full of s**t. Daniel replies that maybe it's just like real life, that people aren't who you thought they were.

[–] lilrabbitangel14 13 years ago

I totally agree with you, the most important comment in the movie is from that conversation between Beth and Daniel about the book. The unreliable main character made the movie FAR more interesting. Other than that, it would've been just another cliche movie.

Did you know that your show is the most analyzed?
Lauren: By who? Those crazy internet people?

[–] lilrabbitangel14 13 years ago

[–] goodfellasgirl 13 years ago

Can someone inform this dimwit that it is "should HAVE" or "would HAVE"- NOT "should of" or "would of". If you need to abbreviate, the proper spellings are should've and would've.

[–] siobanphotogirl 11 years ago

Ugh! THANK YOU! It drives me crazy when people write 'should of/would of/could of'! ! I don't get how people actually think they're saying 'of' instead of 'have' when they're talking!

[–] lamont-hard 13 years ago

It's a romcom, If he would not have been a cheater he would have not understood her or worked to much or any other reason for the babe to go with her heart. This is the formula.

[–] Turre1 12 years ago

The whole point of the movie is that it is about Tommy.

[–] siobanphotogirl 11 years ago

The point of the movie is to juxtaposition a good Guy's behavior next to a Cheater's behavior. If it were all about Daniel we couldn't appreciate him because we'd be thinking those good guys only exist in movies and we'd find him annoying because of how awkward he is around women. Tommy's a**hole presence in the film helps us see the beauty in a guy who's not as sure of himself. We are happy that Beth is already seeing the good in him because she's getting played by Tommy and even she feels it coming.

[–] Osmooms-201-517112 9 years ago

.......the fact that I didn't have to pay to watch it