Your Highness I allowed myself to be talked into going to this film by some friends. I thought, "How bad can a film be if it has Natalie Portman in it. Let's just say I won't hold it against them; or her. They didn't know either and I am telling myself that her enduring this tripe was a form of purgatory to remind Ms. Portman that even though she can win an Oscar she can still be thrust into the abyss.
I am asking why a concept that sounds like it has promise can fail so miserably? And fail it did. I didn't hear a single person in the theater laugh once during the film. Remarkably, the entire script came across as almost worthy of a sophomore high school amateur night with the performances not far behind. A good deal of this film seemed to be aimed at titillating the senses of slow, unimaginative 12 year old boys. I had to search for competent acting here and came up with little to show for it.
Ms. Natalie Portman at least didn't make a fool of herself, turning in a performance that seemed to be at least trying with the sparse material. She had the only good moment, no a great moment, in the film by shedding her duds and revealing a quite stunning posterior. Thank you Natalie! Charles Dance as the King was actually quite good; I suppose because he was removed from the more objectionable parts and since he's been knighted by the Queen he must know what he's doing, right? Damian Lewis, who was so riveting in Band of Brothers as Major Richard Winters, gave a spotty, somewhat credible performance. I imagined that he felt bewildered by the material and those people behind the camera kept telling him, "Go ahead man, do it this way. It'll be great!" Those people lied to him.
The usually great Zooey Deschanel seemed to be spoofing the writers and directors by pretending to act badly with the material she was given. I know she was pretending because I have seen her do worlds better with seemingly little effort.
James Franco came across as a bit less animated that he was at the last Academy Awards program. He must be listening to the Lindsey Lohan school of advice.
Rasmus Hardiker had a badly written part but he seemed to do better with it than most of his colleagues.And Justin Theroux as the bad guy, well, he did what he could I suppose but it was a lurid, seamy, badly written part.
Having mentioned all of those, I suppose I should say something about Danny McBride, who seems to be responsible for most of what appeared on screen. I could swear that I actually saw people in the theater cringe whenever he was on screen. I know I disliked every scene he was in. A lot. Most of those scenes were puerile to the point of being offensive. There is a way to effectively use material that is more on the adult side. This is perfect example of how not to do it.
Each of the participants in this venture can rest easy as, having reached bottom, they have gained an example of what not to do from now on in their careers. I hope.
Where do I get my money back? By Bruce L. Jones http://webpages.charter.net/bruce.jones1/
I am asking why a concept that sounds like it has promise can fail so miserably? And fail it did. I didn't hear a single person in the theater laugh once during the film. Remarkably, the entire script came across as almost worthy of a sophomore high school amateur night with the performances not far behind. A good deal of this film seemed to be aimed at titillating the senses of slow, unimaginative 12 year old boys. I had to search for competent acting here and came up with little to show for it.
Ms. Natalie Portman at least didn't make a fool of herself, turning in a performance that seemed to be at least trying with the sparse material. She had the only good moment, no a great moment, in the film by shedding her duds and revealing a quite stunning posterior. Thank you Natalie! Charles Dance as the King was actually quite good; I suppose because he was removed from the more objectionable parts and since he's been knighted by the Queen he must know what he's doing, right? Damian Lewis, who was so riveting in Band of Brothers as Major Richard Winters, gave a spotty, somewhat credible performance. I imagined that he felt bewildered by the material and those people behind the camera kept telling him, "Go ahead man, do it this way. It'll be great!" Those people lied to him.
The usually great Zooey Deschanel seemed to be spoofing the writers and directors by pretending to act badly with the material she was given. I know she was pretending because I have seen her do worlds better with seemingly little effort.
James Franco came across as a bit less animated that he was at the last Academy Awards program. He must be listening to the Lindsey Lohan school of advice.
Rasmus Hardiker had a badly written part but he seemed to do better with it than most of his colleagues.And Justin Theroux as the bad guy, well, he did what he could I suppose but it was a lurid, seamy, badly written part.
Having mentioned all of those, I suppose I should say something about Danny McBride, who seems to be responsible for most of what appeared on screen. I could swear that I actually saw people in the theater cringe whenever he was on screen. I know I disliked every scene he was in. A lot. Most of those scenes were puerile to the point of being offensive. There is a way to effectively use material that is more on the adult side. This is perfect example of how not to do it.
Each of the participants in this venture can rest easy as, having reached bottom, they have gained an example of what not to do from now on in their careers. I hope.
Where do I get my money back? By Bruce L. Jones http://webpages.charter.net/bruce.jones1/