This is watchable though suffers from a weak script, and some less than stellar acting. The black characters were excellent, but the rest of the cast struggled with the poor dialogue and direction. The plot didnt really make a lot of sense and the ending was weak. None of the white characters were engaging or very likeable. Wouldn't really recommend.
3 Reviews
15 words per second, times three of them talking at once, does not make a comedy
suicidea6 May 2022
Intertwining stories about the manager of a small, struggling theater who has to resort to his real magic book to make ends meet, and a middle-aged man-child having to deal with his girlfriend's unwanted pregnancy.
There's some good stuff here, which would make some sort of minor hit under different conditions. However, the movie falls into the same traps as many other wannabe-indie comedies do:
A middle-aged man who still acts like a child is N-O-T funny. Not since Seinfeld. If anything, the character irritates the hell out of the audience. Plus, assaulting the audience's ears with three people talking at once, with each one trying to outdo the others as if they were in a fast-talking contest, does not help either. Such long dialogue gives the impression that the writer has a deep, Shakespearean story to tell with many facades, although his material is actually very thin, very light. Not that this is a bad thing, of course, great movies can be made from thin material. But as long as they're treated properly, not as if they're a Greek tragedy.
And there are too many references to other movies, which looks like a sad attempt to look Tarantino-esque: Friday The 13th, The Invisible Man, The Elephant Man, Slumdog Millionaire, Misery, and a few more. But I don't expect anyone to think "Well, this guy sure knows his movie history! Welcome, Tarantino 2.0!" They look more like random movie names sprinkled throughout the script for no reason at all.
The director does manage to juggle the two main stories somewhat seamlessly, which is something that not every moviemaker can do. And some characters and some scenes work, but overall, it comes off as mediocre. It's a chore to follow everything that's being said, and that's not a good sign for a comedy. Five stars out of ten is actually very generous.
There's some good stuff here, which would make some sort of minor hit under different conditions. However, the movie falls into the same traps as many other wannabe-indie comedies do:
A middle-aged man who still acts like a child is N-O-T funny. Not since Seinfeld. If anything, the character irritates the hell out of the audience. Plus, assaulting the audience's ears with three people talking at once, with each one trying to outdo the others as if they were in a fast-talking contest, does not help either. Such long dialogue gives the impression that the writer has a deep, Shakespearean story to tell with many facades, although his material is actually very thin, very light. Not that this is a bad thing, of course, great movies can be made from thin material. But as long as they're treated properly, not as if they're a Greek tragedy.
And there are too many references to other movies, which looks like a sad attempt to look Tarantino-esque: Friday The 13th, The Invisible Man, The Elephant Man, Slumdog Millionaire, Misery, and a few more. But I don't expect anyone to think "Well, this guy sure knows his movie history! Welcome, Tarantino 2.0!" They look more like random movie names sprinkled throughout the script for no reason at all.
The director does manage to juggle the two main stories somewhat seamlessly, which is something that not every moviemaker can do. And some characters and some scenes work, but overall, it comes off as mediocre. It's a chore to follow everything that's being said, and that's not a good sign for a comedy. Five stars out of ten is actually very generous.
It is what it is - a light comedy
windsorenquirer6 July 2020
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
