Maybe I Do

I had to put on subtitles for this. For a talky romantic comedy with no explosions. Christopher Nolan this is not.

Directors: pay attention to audio. At this point, we're nearly back to silent film with how badly y'all handle this stuff. Movie watchers all watched the explainer about why movie audio is so bad these days. Did movie directors? You should. I don't care if your actors want to sound more "naturalistic" with their mumbles and their whispers. They have a job to do and they are not doing it if I can't hear the words coming out of their mouths.

Apparently my review is too short until now.

Deep sigh.... you know that sinking feeling right at the beginning of a movie WHEN you immediately recognize the movie you are watching is a STINKER, a FLOP, well there you have it...

The bad: this movie shouldnt have been made. It was made anyway AND advertised SOLELY to attract an OLDER audience who recognizes these fabulous names of Richard Gere and Diane Keaton. Even William H. Macey was (and still is) a great actors, but this is a SENIORS movie with only some young B-actors thrown in to at least try and attract SOME youngsters to go watch it. I doubt any youngsters will go watch this FLOP. And deservedly so...

I feel sorry for anyone who decided to go watch this empty vessel, this hollow surrogate of a movie.

Recommended to be AVOIDED like the plague. You have been warned....

It starts out with several minutes of credits - and I'm not talking about names on top of scenic landscapes in the background, literally just white text on a black screen. But, at least the original song "Always You" was playing, which I liked. It was very obvious that the story was originally a play and was not adapted much for a screenplay of a movie. There was a lot of dialogue...I mean A LOT. And sometimes it seemed like they were talking in circles or in a translated language because I didn't even understand what they were talking about. It also felt like it didn't have enough characters and lacked a variety of scenery and settings. With such a great cast list and well-known writer/director (for TV anyways), I had higher hopes but there was much room for improvement in terms of making it into a romcom movie.

Give us our time back. The writing was terrible. Almost no one had any chemistry whatsoever. This is especially true for Emma Roberts and Armie Hammer want to be. I was so bored I was counting the minutes to get out of the theatre. I could see it being entertaining in a play but it did not work in a movie. The music did nothing for the film as well as we could not connect with anyone due to how shallow and boring the characters were. Bringing the stories together usually evokes interest and lots of laughs but all this did was bring a chuckle, then it was back to watching paint dry. Frank Gallagher playing Frank Gallagher was the only entertaining part of the entire thing. Diane Keaton gets a shout out too as she was fun to watch. I wouldn't recommend the film to anyone, besides recommending to avoid. An A list cast that would have better spent their times promoting the movie than actually being in it.

I'm not sure why they made this a movie. It's clearly a play. The monologues are play worthy, the acting is play worthy, even the blocking is stage worthy. While the acting IS stellar, it's awkward as a movie. The main cast is fantastic, and the 4 parents definitely play opposite their usual. The couple in love have very little chemistry, and her lines border on slapstick. The thing is, I don't remember any of their names because it was SO strange to watch on screen. I would love to see this written as a play script and acted on stage with the same cast. It would read so much better if it was seen live.