I finally saw A Dog's Breakfast.
Sep. 23rd, 2007 12:06 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
icarusI finally saw A Dog's Breakfast.
Anybody wanna buy a DVD? Only partially used?
Yes, that's right. About halfway through the movie![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
wildernessguru started complaining, "This is really bad."
I said, "Wait. Hang on. People have said it's funny."
Ten minutes later... "This is really bad."
"I'm bored," I admitted. And cringed, trying to explain. "I find have no sympathy for these characters."
He said, generously, "Every actor is in a bad movie from time to time. He [David Hewlett] was really good in serious movies. Like that one where he was in a tree."
"Treed Murray."
"Yeah. That was great." (He doesn't know ADB was written and directed by DH.)
I said, not as generously given DH wrote this, "The writing was better in that one. Here, the characters have been written deliberately weird, and I find I don't care about any of them."
We got as far as the scene where the DH's character was in the basement, chastising the dog. Then we clicked it off.
I thought the camera work was self-conscious but good (my favorite shot was how it kept returning to that ugly brown house -- I don't know why that cracked me up). Definitely this movie is a director's "toy."
The acting was okay, not brilliant, definitely a bunch of people throwing something together on their weekend and not trying hard. DH oversells his role. Paul McGillion was okay, I couldn't see much difference between his role here and Doctor Beckett. Kate I really liked, she played it lightly but there was a richness to her delivery that was just a little bit serious, like she was weary of her brother's antics. But then the script was just mean to DH's character, cutting away any empathy I'd have for any of them.
The score was professional, well-timed, not overbearing, fit the subject well -- the sound mixing expert.
The problem is the script. It's very common to make one of three mistakes in ones first original character "creations":
1) A Mary Sue, self-insert.
2) A bland Everyman.
3) A character overloaded with quirks (usually done to avoid the first two).
David went through door number three.
The pacing in the beginning was slow, wallowing in the main character's OCD. Without a spoiler or two you didn't get a feeling for where the story was headed until late. There wasn't a good hook. The dialogue had snap and all the actors had good comic timing. But it kept coming back to, wow, I don't care about these people. I keep feeling like we needed some explanation of what was going on with DH's character, or we needed to start somewhere we could empathize -- like with Kate, chivvying her fiance out the door, trying to explain her brother and not being able to.
Then, the plot, well. I'll finish the movie sometime before I make a final statement about the plot. But as far as I got, I kept thinking, "I've seen this before. This is a live action version of a Road Runner cartoon and DH's character is Wile E. Coyote -- with less arrogance and more mental disorders."
wildernessguru's summation is simpler. "It was stupid. DH was constantly sweating and running around like a chicken with its head cut off, taking everything seriously. It's been done to death. A joint and being half-drunk wouldn't make it funny."
Anybody wanna buy a DVD? Only partially used?
Yes, that's right. About halfway through the movie
wildernessguru started complaining, "This is really bad." I said, "Wait. Hang on. People have said it's funny."
Ten minutes later... "This is really bad."
"I'm bored," I admitted. And cringed, trying to explain. "I find have no sympathy for these characters."
He said, generously, "Every actor is in a bad movie from time to time. He [David Hewlett] was really good in serious movies. Like that one where he was in a tree."
"Treed Murray."
"Yeah. That was great." (He doesn't know ADB was written and directed by DH.)
I said, not as generously given DH wrote this, "The writing was better in that one. Here, the characters have been written deliberately weird, and I find I don't care about any of them."
We got as far as the scene where the DH's character was in the basement, chastising the dog. Then we clicked it off.
I thought the camera work was self-conscious but good (my favorite shot was how it kept returning to that ugly brown house -- I don't know why that cracked me up). Definitely this movie is a director's "toy."
The acting was okay, not brilliant, definitely a bunch of people throwing something together on their weekend and not trying hard. DH oversells his role. Paul McGillion was okay, I couldn't see much difference between his role here and Doctor Beckett. Kate I really liked, she played it lightly but there was a richness to her delivery that was just a little bit serious, like she was weary of her brother's antics. But then the script was just mean to DH's character, cutting away any empathy I'd have for any of them.
The score was professional, well-timed, not overbearing, fit the subject well -- the sound mixing expert.
The problem is the script. It's very common to make one of three mistakes in ones first original character "creations":
1) A Mary Sue, self-insert.
2) A bland Everyman.
3) A character overloaded with quirks (usually done to avoid the first two).
David went through door number three.
The pacing in the beginning was slow, wallowing in the main character's OCD. Without a spoiler or two you didn't get a feeling for where the story was headed until late. There wasn't a good hook. The dialogue had snap and all the actors had good comic timing. But it kept coming back to, wow, I don't care about these people. I keep feeling like we needed some explanation of what was going on with DH's character, or we needed to start somewhere we could empathize -- like with Kate, chivvying her fiance out the door, trying to explain her brother and not being able to.
Then, the plot, well. I'll finish the movie sometime before I make a final statement about the plot. But as far as I got, I kept thinking, "I've seen this before. This is a live action version of a Road Runner cartoon and DH's character is Wile E. Coyote -- with less arrogance and more mental disorders."
wildernessguru's summation is simpler. "It was stupid. DH was constantly sweating and running around like a chicken with its head cut off, taking everything seriously. It's been done to death. A joint and being half-drunk wouldn't make it funny."
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
I get way off-track...
Date: 2007-09-25 04:25 am (UTC)That's not to say that I can't squee over an actor or photos (you say sexy JF pics are where? *g*) but I'm not blind or ignorant enough to think a film or tv show is good just becuase of who's in it.
Honestly, *looks around warily for the screaming mad fangirls in case they go berserk at next statement* I was not pawning nor salivating over buying the DVD. What sacrilige! I thought the toothbrushing clip was funny, but the more trailers that came out, I began to think, that perhaps, it may not be all that funny after all. *shrugs*
*is a bad squirrel* Hell, I'm a bad fangirl, period. I went to DragonCon, and breifly met Paul McGillion and Corin Nemic. Guess what happened? Nothing. Nada. Zip. I was like "Hi, how's it going? Cool." That was about it. Didn't get all worked up or hot and bothered. Hell, I didn't even bother to get an autograph. I mean seriously, what would I do with it? Whoopy-do-dah.
Yah, it takes a lot of guts to work as an actor (what with the public and fangirls - yeesh, there was a fangirl chattering away at poor Paul the whole time I was there and I was ready to smack her!) and I respect them for that, but otherwise...meh.
Now if I ever meet Johnny Depp, all bets are off. *g*
Re: I get way off-track...
Date: 2007-09-30 11:45 am (UTC)The directing is good. The acting is uneven in places but they're all good actors. The script is problematic and needed more work before it was made into a movie. I think it needs the fundamental question answered: why does Patrick not want his sister to get married? Not just "he was afraid she was going to be murdered" and Patrick's general fear of change -- why did he have such a stake in it?
I have a feeling that something simple like an opening scene that describes, say, his sister as Patrick's only connection with the outside world, or somehow showing her importance to him, would have solved a lot.
I promoted ADB partially out of fangirlness, but as my fangirlness waned (I can't say much about a movie sight unseen), out of a wish to promote Indie movies in general -- successful or not. Also, I'd like to see David be able to move from acting into a new role in film-making. He has a face that will likely have a long shelf-life, but you can't act forever.
Icarus