Reviews

A film filled with 3 (or 4) dimensional human beings undergoing pressures from life, from politics, and from internal drives. Beautifully developed, showing transformation of all the major characters.

A small town or village is shown before the Cultural Revolution hits them. There is love, romance, and small business operations, well-portrayed.

Then new characters show up representing the national and provincial leadership. They too act out their own needs in this societal context.

Finally, after the "Cultural Revolution" has passed, the characters resume their lives, but much has changed--and some things never change.

I am a lover of great cinema - Vertigo, Imitation of Life (1959), Tokyo Story, and other classics, and I found that Don't Look Up captured so much of both human nature and the needs of society and survival at this time, that I would call it a great film, though not so much as an "art" piece but rather as a direct, heartfelt wakeup call to humanity. The movie left me moved and inspired my better self, and that is one way to judge the value of a film.

Rather than using straw men or caricatures, the film shows people of some complexity, but also each person with their own take on how to live life when the planet is under threat. Characters like the singer played by Ariana Grande, and of course the two leading scientists (DiCaprio and Lawrence) during the course of the film have a variety of reactions to the crisis, and all seem to reflect the multiple personas each of us can take own, especially in times of stress and threat.

In other words, this is not simply a political tract in film form, but shows the human nature underlying each of the major characters.

As far as the actual crisis, a comet heading directly towards Earth, it is a hyperbolic and clear reference to climate change, and perhaps to the larger issue of humanity living as if the planet, species, and nature, and finally human beings, are indestructible. Climate change may not be a threat of immediate extinction, but due to its threat to completely disrupt and destabilize the structures of civilizations. It seems to me to be appropriate to reference climate change through the metaphor of a massive comet heading towards the planet.

Last, and not least, I appreciate the moments of intense emotion at key moments throughout the film. The usual fare of movies are diversion of one form or another. Like desserts, we cannot live on them. We can, however, find sustenance in films that touch on our deeper nature. Kudos to all those involved with Don't Look Up.

I don't think my expectations are extreme when it comes to comedy, but this movie basically falls flat, is how I would put it.

To be more specific as to why, here are three reasons:

1) the humor is not very funny; this is first and foremost a failure of the script and plot line 2) Robert Montgomery seems stiff and somewhat uninvolved. I understand that Cary Grant was the first choice for the part, and indeed he would have brought more energy and dare I say, creativity, to the role 3) the story lacks credibility, and seems to wander a great deal. There are many elements with the potential to be side-splitters, but none are taken advantage of, and then the next comes along, and the next, and the next.

I gave this three stars primarily due to an enjoyable, radiant performance by Carole Lombard. Unfortunately, that is not enough to make up for the other lacks in the movie.

I will keep this short. There are great moments that are suitable for mature individuals, like me, that expose and explore serious moments, intimate moments, sad moments. But then there are other aspects that insult the viewer and take us to a totally puerile level of "entertainment." One example is the doctor, played by Danny DeVito. That ridiculous character is not funny and not realistic. Those scenes took me away from some well-written parts. Perhaps it is the alternation from feeling connected and moved to feeling jarred and insulting while watching an episode, that is most disturbing.

This show is, for me, a mixed bag.

Positives: all the main characters seem different and clearly defined as personalities. They are interesting characters. Some of the typical and important experiences of being a child, sibling, and parent are covered. And the people portrayed are likable, overall (despite the flaws in their portrayal, see below).

The acting is fairly good, but with the writing and directing flaws, it is hard for the adult actors to be truly adult. The writing for the under-20 characters seems excellent, but the parents and grandparents often sounds like clichés of who they are supposed to be.

Negatives: I feel sick every time two characters in the show see each other and say "Hey!" and reply: "Hey!" Who talks like this? One is eating breakfast, the other comes from sleeping to the kitchen and they say "Hey!" to each other. This is NOT believable dialogue, and is so persistent and consistent among (nearly?) all the characters that I find it very disturbing. There is also too much rapid-fire talk and not enough slow, paced dialogue. None of the adults I know speak like these people do, on a consistent basis. Sure, once in a while we toss off conversation, but mostly, we put more of ourselves in our words.

Despite earnest attempts to touch on the serious issues of parenting and living, much of the show is handled in too lightweight a manner. Human beings have some profound challenges in getting through life. This show definitely touches on some of them as topics, but turns most of them into a clichéd version. I have watched only two of the six seasons, so maybe things change a lot later in the series (unlikely but possible). My favorite scene so far in terms of REAL feeling was when Adam told Zeek about how he is angry all the time. In that scene, the writing and acting and the two characters overall made total sense and had MEANING. This is the underlying intensity of being a person on this earth. Not everything in life is anger, or love, or worry, and so on... but they are the pieces that drive forward the rest of our lives for better and for worse. That intensity is what makes life full and rich, and in a show like this, it should be more visible.

Summary: The show touches on important topics, and the characters themselves are enjoyable, but it is too superficial most of the time. The writing, with the fast-talking and the "Hey!" overuse, distracts from what could have been a more moving and involving version of the same story lines. Perhaps there will be a season seven, and the writers will have time to "fix" the flaws and make this a truly great show.

The humor is terrible and awkward. I would have given the movie a lower rating, but I should reserve a 1 or 2 for bad movies that also throw in a taste for gratuitous violence and gore, misogyny, and such.

None of the characters shows a real personality, and the transitions between scenes and moods are abrupt and do not make sense at any level.

There is gratuitous nudity or suggested nudity (such as when Sandler is running a barbecue) that contributes nothing but a sense of weirdness.

Yes, the world has problems and we all need to laugh and forget at times, but please don't make it so painful to get a chuckle or two.

The best (and perhaps only interesting) concept of the movie is exactly that: the idea of a super-fighter turning hair dresser. But the idea goes nowhere from that original and creative and potentially humorous starting point.

I hesitated a moment before writing, since other reviews already here seem right on target. But, I will say, briefly, that the movie kept me laughing, moved, and totally attentive for its entire length. The spontaneity moment by moment is striking to experience as a film viewer, and gives a feeling of overall vitality. Since I am studying psychology, it was refreshing to see individuals with emotional challenges portrayed coping and trying to grow. It seems portrayed in a realistic manner, neither too easy nor too depressing or defeatist. Just real.

Bravo to the creators of this film. I give it a 9 not a 10 because it does not really touch on eternal existential themes of survival as the greatest classics do, but as a romantic comedy/drama it seems to be at or near the top of the category.

It is unnerving that this film has received one of the highest rankings I have seen or heard of at IMDb, although I am a part-timer here. My experience has been that even the best films of the last century are generally in the 8.0 - 9.0 range. Anyway, let me go beyond analysis of reviews.

I saw the movie last night, and was struck first by how difficult the voices were to hear. My son, who is 19, spontaneously offered the same comment to me. And there were no British accents (that I recall)! It was the loud, ominous music pulsing in the background, and possibly issues in the theater (which appeared to be very well maintained, however), that seemed to obscure the dialogue in many places.

Now, the guts of the movie: this film falls into the category of slightly better-than-average kids/fantasy movie. The top in that field was indeed Lord of the Rings (all three), and I also consider Terminator 1 and 2, and the first Matrix, to all exceed The Dark Knight by quite a margin in enjoyability and quality. So, I am not set against fantasy as a category of entertainment or creativity.

However, this movie was fragmented with many sub-plots that did not seem artistically to jell well together. There was also a typical lack of subtlety in the actors (and their scripts) that you might expect in comic book fantasy, and during my watching of Dark Knight I constantly missed movies such as (to name just a very few) Dr. Strangelove, Kiss of the Spider Woman, Swept Away, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, It's a Wonderful Life, which all exceeded Dark Knight in wit, dialogue, acting, or humor (or all the above).

What were the strong points? Well, again, it was not so bad for the genre - the acting was workmanlike given the one-dimensional or unreal dialogue. The Joker (Heath Ledger) really was performed with great intensity and is probably the standout feature the breaks the limits of the rest of the film. The characterizations were far from terrible - touches of humor with Alfred (Michael Caine), the love interest that had some sensitivity and adultiness to it, and again, Joker's performance.

When does our public have a chance to see real movies of quality, and learn to distinguish expensive, earnest, but childlike efforts from masterworks of adult art, whether comedy, adventure, or tragedy? Apparently not very often.

Despite the noticeable islands of quality in Dark Knight, my sense was that of having been swept away by a wave of excess and hyper-drama, and I came away feeling that there were a wide variety of better ways I could have passed three hours.