MovieChat Forums > Just for the Record (2010) Discussion > Apart from the self-promotion....

Apart from the self-promotion....

posted 14 years ago by lucyjad
2 replies | jump to latest

which I admit is rather a little strange, particularly as all of the positive reviewers feel the need to assert the following: 'I work in the film industry', 'it's got a great cast', 'Danny Dyer outside of his usual roles' inter alia. It's a shame that so-called creatives cannot be a little more, pardon the pun, creative.

Nonetheless, I do not see why this film deserves such a low rating. It's not absolutely brilliant but I've seen a lot worse. Lord knows sitting through Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen was a far more painful experience. I found it reasonably enjoyable, and it got me through a very boring study session! Besides anything else, and I'm sorry to mention the 'great cast', I refuse to hate anything that has one of the Young Ones in it, not to mention the legend that is Sean "don't mac me off like a two bob, it's sunday!" Pertwee.

Could any of the detractors state what it is they hate about it exactly? Maybe I'm simply not viewing it with a critical mind, but I just don't get it.

p.s. I presume I'm not about to be lynched as a fake? I hope that IMDB users are open to pluralistic tastes.

[–] emlcoburn 14 years ago

I think the reason why the film has scored so low is probably down to it being billed as a comedy - but its not very successful as a comedy. Sure, Transformers 2 was a complete travesty, and that film in particular had a far greater budget than JFTR. But whether the budget is big or small, it always has to start with a good script (which both of these film sadly do not have).

Sure, JFTR has some great actors to show off, but in all cases they have previously produced far better work. Personally, I was left feeling that with all the talent involved, was this the best end product they could create? It all felt rather flung together IMHO. If you're going for a documentary style (or mockumentary), all the actors must be playing from the same reality. But each performance felt so wildly different from the last (i.e. Pertwee and Fairbrass played it fairly straight, whilst Dyer, Virgo and Salmon were pantomime OTT), it didn't gel whatsoever.

As for the structure of the story, it played out like an expose on a disasterous film, but had little to show for all the 'notoriety'. Personally, I would have liked to have seen more of the disasterous moments, instead of being told about it by random talking heads, otherwise it comes across as an excluding second-hand joke. There was so much more room for comedy, and it could have gone a lot deeper, but it played out very predictably.

Anyway, that's my opinion, and if others liked it then I'm glad they enjoyed it.

[–] joey_bagadonuts 14 years ago

As a film it simply just sucked...as stated above, albeit more eloquently.