it just wasn't that bad. I actually purchased this after I saw a news item on blocks long lines of people waiting to see this film ala "Rocky Horror Picture Show". What I was expecting was "so bad it's good". And yes, it is not good, but it is also not so bad that it would really qualify for MST3K. Granted, there are lots of hallmarks of bad film-making - wooden performances, strange reactions, subplots that go into a brick wall, and what is it with that footage of Alcatraz between every scene? This is the story of Johnny (Tommy Wiseau) and his fiancée, Lisa, who discovers she is bored with Johnny shortly before their wedding. A cast of characters pop chaotically in and out of the plot, which include Johnny's voyeuristic young ward and Johnny's best friend who winds up sleeping with Lisa, but does at least show his loyalty to Johnny by whining about it before, during, and after. Lisa's mom's performance is certainly one for the books. She casually mentions she has cancer as though she has mentioned a hangnail and then nothing is ever said about it again. Lisa certainly doesn't seem that worried about her mother's impending doom. Maybe her lack of concern is understandable considering her mother is always telling her she needs to stay with Johnny since Lisa doesn't have what it takes to make it in the job market and needs someone to take care of her. This is a mother figure the way Howard Hughes used to write them.
This whole film viewing experience leads me to one conclusion - young people today are both spoiled and deprived when it comes to film. They are spoiled in the sense that they think this is the worst film in history just because of the rather cheap sets and oddly constructed storyline. Independent filmmakers that make such films as a rule have been priced out of the market, and all that is widely released today are prepackaged superhero films with special effects to dazzle and scripts that have no impact on the soul. Young people are also deprived since they don't get to see much "so bad it's good" film-making either. If you want to see truly bad films that entertain feast your eyes on "The Killer Shrews" with dogs suited up in bath mats as the shrews. Also, try any film written by/directed by /starring Ed Wood and see what really bad stream-of-consciousness dialogue and cheap art design are all about.
I gave this film five stars because more stars would say it's a good film, which it isn't, and less stars would say it is really bad, possibly to the point of being interesting, and it's not that either. It's mediocre - which means it really is not worth your time.
This whole film viewing experience leads me to one conclusion - young people today are both spoiled and deprived when it comes to film. They are spoiled in the sense that they think this is the worst film in history just because of the rather cheap sets and oddly constructed storyline. Independent filmmakers that make such films as a rule have been priced out of the market, and all that is widely released today are prepackaged superhero films with special effects to dazzle and scripts that have no impact on the soul. Young people are also deprived since they don't get to see much "so bad it's good" film-making either. If you want to see truly bad films that entertain feast your eyes on "The Killer Shrews" with dogs suited up in bath mats as the shrews. Also, try any film written by/directed by /starring Ed Wood and see what really bad stream-of-consciousness dialogue and cheap art design are all about.
I gave this film five stars because more stars would say it's a good film, which it isn't, and less stars would say it is really bad, possibly to the point of being interesting, and it's not that either. It's mediocre - which means it really is not worth your time.