MovieChat Forums > Storytelling (2001) Discussion > My thoughts

My thoughts

posted 15 years ago by M_Exchange
3 replies | jump to latest

I'm not going to critique it formally. I want to write candidly, and I think that I would rate it 6 or 7 stars anyway, which is what it is averaging.

The first story was much more realistic than the second, but it lacked a point. I laughed when the brunette girl who critiqued the class' stories so negatively always closed with, "but hey, what do I know?" I have encountered that passive aggressive nonsense on screenwriting websites from reviewers who write 50 bullet points of negativity about my or someone else's script then close with, "but what do I know?" Well, obviously you think that you know quite a bit, *beep* Get real.
But yeah, I was impressed by the realism and dialogue of the first story. But its overall message (if any) left something to be desired.

The second story's opening scene made the entire film worth watching. Giamatti's conversation with his former high school friend blew me away because it reminded me so much of the conversations I have had with my old high school friends (if you want to be humbled, register at Classmates.com). It also establishes the character as well as you will ever see in a movie: someone who was evidently handsome and had potential during his youth is now struggling severely and living with-- NO *beep* WAY-- that dude from AMERICAN MOVIE! I laughed my ass off at that scene. I loved it. The American Movie guy's appearance is also indicative of the (deliberate) irony that follows in Giammati's documentary. If you don't know what I'm talking about, watch American Movie. Compare.

Anyway, aside from that opening scene, I hated most of the second story's acting. Even Goodman seemed to be off his game sometimes. His eruptions seemed forced. The kid who played the family's youngest son acted in the slow, deliberate manner that directors or child actors use when they are uncertain of how to portray a child as a genius. It makes for bad, boring, unrealistic acting.
But again, I loved the irony of the second story and its overall message. I heard George Carlin echoing in my mind: "The game is rigged!!! And noooooooobody seems to notice; nooooooobody seems to care."
It's true.

[–] TheSteelHelmetReturns 15 years ago

You wrote so much but didn't really say anything of value...

But hey, what do I know?

[–] caseyrook 12 years ago

A few years late but Goodman did seem to be a little off his game and that is rare of him, usually he can do anything and make it seem so natural for him. Maybe he was too focused on trying to disassociate himself from Dan Conner (In that case he did a good job).

"I'm from L.A: Lower Affton."-John Goodman, AKA From St. Louis MO

[–] chas437 12 years ago

I don't fault Goodman, but rather the way his character was written and directed. The character is basically pretty simple, he's the overbearing, Jewish patriarch who is meant to represent convention in an overt, simplistic way. I think his character works as it is intended.

The scene where he is talking about what a great time he had in college is a riot, and probably Goodman's highlight in the film.

Another thing I found a bit odd was that when Toby has a screening of his documentary, the audience laughs like they are watching the Three Stooges. Toby seems to be pleased, but wasn't he setting out to make a serious documentary?

Who's High Pitch?