Reviews

2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Garden State (2004)
1/10
Thoroughly lousy film-making; Braff needs to be less impressed with himself
24 July 2005
Apart from the cloying pretension of the entire script, the hamfisted metaphors, the often frighteningly amateurish acting, and the fact that Zach Braff apparently thinks gazing emptily into the camera communicates some soul-stirring information on the nature of the character he plays, this film is very poorly done even on the most basic levels of film-making. Witness the repeatedly blown eyelines (for example, where the hell is he looking when the cop pulls him over on the motorcycle?), horrid and cliché shot selection, and abysmal characterisations... Some people have been giving this film a pass, saying "not bad for a firt effort," or even claiming "Braff really knows what he's doing behind the camera." Well, as someone who's gone through a graduate film program, I can tell you, this IS bad for a first-time effort; Braff does not seem to know much about what he's doing behind the camera; and many of the blunders in this film would not be acceptable in a student film, much less a feature.

2 things really bugged me. One, how the hell did he get Ian Holm to show up? Does he have pictures of him naked with a sheep or something? Two, and this is them kind of precious garbage that enrages me in films like this, good thing there's a vintage WWII era motorcycle lying around in the garage, complete with sidecar, because, y'know, it looks really neato. While saying nothing at all about character or story.

I don't know Mr. Braff, but he seems to havepoured rather too much of himself into this flick, and convinced himself that virtually every cliché of 20-something ennui constitutes blinding, revelatory insight. I am at an utter loss to explain this film's 8 out of 10 IMDb rating, except to posit that those raving over how deep this film is are the same sort of self-involved, self-pitying spoiled rich white kids from Jersey, or similar environs, who seem to share Mr. Braff's conceit that their commonplace and often trivial hardships constitute the stuff of tragic melodrama. I'll see your Zach Braff and raise you half a dozen Kevin Smiths.
20 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Dogme <> amateurishness
5 July 2005
Trite, pretentious and banal, this attempt at Dogme-style film-making is so amateurishly directed, shot, acted and especially edited I am astounded it ranks a 6 on the IMDb scale. The director shows no understanding of even the most basic cinematic techniques and a complete inability to communicate human behavior and emotion because of his shot selection, clumsy jump-cutting (motivated, I'm guessing, by the need to cut around lousy improvisation -- there seems to be no other motivation in terms of story or character) and horrid videography. The performances are broad or otherwise miss the mark, particularly that of Paul Schneider, who seems to be making a career out of playing mumbling/stammering dimwits like the Paul character here. The improvisations especially repulse, often comprised of stammered, meaningless half-sentences, and the conclusion is contrived and meaningless. Here's a clue: making a Dogme film does not mean jettisoning all competency or basic storytelling ability. Really bad -- how this ponderous drivel got on the Sundance is beyond me.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed