Maybe I Do

How can a film with an amazing cast come off so wrong? The banter and wittiness you expect from Diane, William, Richard & Susan is strong but the script doesn't live up to what you know them to perform in.

Lots of strong dialogue they fills like it was meant for the theater and missed the mark with the space that is left in a film.

So many awkward scenes that have holes or dead moments that make you wonder what could have been done differently. The last 20 minutes has the best line's delivered by the cast.

The cast try's hard and have some really great scenes that made us laugh. Overall I don't regret watching it just wished it offered more.

The one thing i wanted to comment on about this movie is its dull visual style. There is almost no visual language at all. Every shot lacks almost any dynamism/movement. The color palette is fairly bland. The lighting is purely utilitarian. The weather is not used in any visually suggestive or symbolic way. There is a lot of grey, dark tones, shadows. In short, its dull visual quality only highlights the more talky and pedantic aspects of the script. It was originally a stage play and it's almost as if director Michael Jacobs-whose background is in TV-doesn't realize that a stage is at least well-lit. This is his directorial debut so I'll cut him some slack (as though he cares what I think lol), and I will admit I laughed a number of times. Macy gets all the good lines. Gere is stuffy and somnambulistic. Keaton is very good. Sarandon is okay too. I think Luke Bracey was the worst piece of acting in the film, and I imagine it's because he wasn't given enough takes, or that he didn't fully understand his character, which I would cut him some slack for because I didn't fully understand him for most of the film either. So, you can watch this movie, but I recommend stopping in the middle to get to bed and then forgetting to watch the rest.

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.

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.

This was a movie of such contrived drivel that having to watch 'mature' characters who hadn't learned anything about how to be in this world along the way of their collective 260+ years on this planet made me squirm uncomfortably in my seat that the only saving grace was that the movie came in at 92 minutes in length.

So fed up was I, that without wanting to, a fairly loud sigh of exasperation left my upper respiratory tract and caused the biggest laugh of the night in the theater I attended of this star studded dud of an attempt at movie making. You shouldn't be surprised if something similar happens at your theater also. Hard Pass!!