Rating: 
Summary: Experiment? Ensemble Drama? The Film Doesn't Know it.
Review: Though "Full Frontal" boasts of its great casts including Julia Roberts, the film is rather an experimental indie film, mostly shot in 18 days with a digital camera (which cost only $ 4,600). That is not a problem if the film is interesting -- I mean, interesting characters, interesting techiniques, interesting stories, or anything. No such luck, sorry. Though some actors are giving their best efforts, the film looks more like a self-indulgent film-school student's work.The film follows the events that happen to the characters (whose profiles are revealed in the introductory part). Journalist Julia Roberts is interviewing TV star Blair Underwood; Cathrine Keener is doing the most uncomfortable job of the human resorce office (that is, firing the employees); her sister Mary McCormack is talking about the guy she met on the net; David Hyde Pierce (who shows uncanny resemblance with director Soderbergh himself) is rehearsing the stage drama for the always quizzical Nikky Katt. When the day comes close to the end, these assorted people find themselves strangely entangled in the web of human relations, which is represented by the dinner party for "Gus," powerful Hollywood producer played by one star from "X-Files." The film also includes 'film within film" device (and even "film within film within film" devide, too), which might confuse some of the viewers. Fortunately, the device is not overused, and soon you will understand what is doing on. The trouble is, except for some moments including talented Keener, none of the characters can really grab your attention. They are facing the critical moments of life, the film implies, but strangely we do not care. And as the experimental film, "Full Frontal" is not as innovative as "Schizopolis" (in which Soderbergh himself starred). Possibly, here is the reason for its half-baked result: first, incredible you might say, but Soderbergh's use of digital camera is so poor like someone's home movies. At one scene, you see Sandra Oh very briefly. Well, but I couldn't see whether it was her or not because of a blurred image (I knew her voice, and saw her name in the credits), and I was thinking -- what is the point of doing that? The poorly shot images just detract our attention to the characters which should not be sacrificed for the dirctor's unnecessary "experiments." Some parts of the film might interest you (if you're a film buff). You see many cameos -- Brad Pitt, Terence Stamp, and David Fincher (as the perfectionist director who needs 49 takes for one breif shot). But they are not enough for us to keep being interesting in the story which should really count. The conculsion is this; you just cannot use this great cast just because you want to be experimantal. Life is too short to do that, especially with this cast.
Rating: 
Summary: diluted tenderness, lazy vocabulary
Review: When a script utilizes the f-word ten times in a scene at a traffic light, I find myself wanting to beam in a thesaurus. I do not care for excessive profanity, partially due to personal convictions, but also due to what repetitive profanity represents artistically--a lazy vocabulary. Passion and anger and shock and dejection and even annoyance cannot effectively receive proper expression by the same handful of vulgarities. In this story in particular, characterization is blurred by poorly articulated emotions.
Tenderness which peaks out during the final scenes might have resonated more richly had the script employed more creative lines and less repetion of a generic shock-word which typically dulled the audience's comprehension of a character's motives and intentions.
Nearly all actors involved served their parts well. Julia Roberts' role seemed underdeveloped (not her fault), and Nicky the Nazi felt cartoonish and tacked onto the otherwise love and lust driven plot.
Filming technique enhanced more than it detracted. Music was generally apropos. The varying storylines intersected well, and the concise production length enabled the viewer's sufficient emotional investment in each tale.
Rating: 
Summary: dreadful
Review: Worse movie of year. Made no sense. EXTREMELY GRAINY>Poorly produced. A ripoff.
Rating: 
Summary: Wonderfully Offbeat!
Review: You're watching people being watched - or not. Once you understand the movie-within-a-movie structure, you just sit back and watch life unfold. Of course, it's life in Hollywood, and you're supposed to see how weird that can be. The humor is sometimes dry, sometimes touching and sometimes ROFL hilarious. My favorite scene is when the actor portraying Hitler, explaining the hasty departure of his co-star, says, "The only people offended by drinking blood are those who don't do it." And then he continues riding that train of thought. I loved it and plan to buy it when it comes out on video/DVD.
| 
