Rating: 
Summary: Not an exact duplicate of novel, but in its spirit
Review: This is a movie you have to get into. True, it isn't the same as the novel, but the message is similiar. After getting drunk and watching it again, it brings back a massage that was lost the first time. True, it didn't end the way I hoped, but it something to make Vonnegut proud. Or way else would he be in it
Rating: 
Summary: Very confusing and repulsive
Review: I am a huge Vonnegut fan and, having read the novel, rented Breakfast of Champions. I was curious to see how Vonnegut would translate onto the big screen. As much as I wanted to like this film, it was pretty bad. Bruce Willis isn't too bad as Dwayne Hoover, which is more than I can say for Lukas Haas as his gay son, and Nick Nolte as his cross-dressing co-worker. If you have read the book then some of this film will make sense, but those of you that haven't will be completely baffled. Avoid this.
Rating: 
Summary: Not nearly as "bad" as you may have heard
Review: The truth? "Breakfast of Champions" is a very well-made, well-acted and artistically conscious film. But it is also extremely uncommercial, slow-paced and incomprehensible. The bottom line is this: If you've read the brilliant masterpiece written by "Father" Kurt Vonnegut, then the door swings both ways. You may like it or you may despise it. But, hey, at least they ATTEMPTED to do justice to the greatest book ever written. I watched it with someone who hadn't read the book, and he enjoyed the movie for it's zaniness. But he's probably one of the few. The fact is the plot will make absolutely no sense to people who haven't read the book. The book had no linear plot. The reviewer that had qualms with the "happy" ending is somewhat correct. But the ending is not as Hollywoodized as you may think, and after all, the screenplay HAD to end SOMEWHERE. It was the only way that Alan Rudolph could put his script together. He had to find some way to make it cohesive. In any case, the film is probably of interest to Vonnegut devotees only. I'm a Vonnegut devotee who "liked" it. Judge for yourself. But if you've never read the book then don't bother watching the film. On it's own it's a strange concoction that's interesting without being particularly satisfying.
Rating:
Summary: The people who gave this a low-rating just didn't get it.
Review: This movie really get a different rating depending on what type of movie you like. Not to put anyone down, or anything, but - if you rush to the movies for the newest John Grisham adaptation, or if you were counting the seconds to the new Star Wars movie, or if you think Keanu Reeves is the greatest actor you've ever seen, then don't see this movie.However, if you enjoy THINKING while watching a film, and see it as a somewhat active experience, rather than a passive experience, then you must see this. It's the lost film of 1999, and has a lot to say on many different levels. The people who gave this one-star or two-stars simply didn't understand the movie. That's OK, it's the reason it failed in the box office. But some of us know that box office sales are absolutely meaningless when it comes to art. One of the few movies I'd recommend watching with subtitles, as Albert Finney's character is often hard to understand, even though he has some of the most important lines in the movie.
Rating:
Summary: Movie So Bad, The Reviews Were Removed!
Review: I don't imagine this review will last long on this page. A review of mine, along with about four others, was removed, presumably to protect sales. The upshot of all of the reviews stated that this film is not worth the celluloid it was filmed on. If you are a Vonnegut fan, avoid this film. If you are not a Vonnegut fan, avoid this film.
Rating: 
Summary: An Appallingly Jumbled Mess -- A Massacre
Review: For readers of Kurt Vonnegut Jr.'s Breakfast of Champions, and non-readers alike, this film will completely and utterly fail to satisfy. It's disjointed direction and confusing mish-mash of nonsense makes this film virtually unwatchable. Not only being turned into a Hollywood Happy Ending picture, this film is a badly crafted, poorly edited, and terribly directed collection of useless celluloid. The confusing stream of mumbling actors, disjointed dialogue, and empty characters is a disappointment on all fronts. With no building of characters, one does not care about their plights. Wayne Hoover is insane from the word go. His wife is not dead, and actually remains living through the entire film, finally taking part in a grotesque happy-ending. Next time out, the film-makers should employ Terry Gilliam, or some other person of talent. My advice to the motion picture industry on this project is "Start Again!" On all fronts, this film is a poorly managed, poorly directed massacre -- a travesty. What can one say after seeing this film? There is only one thing one can say... "Poo-tee-weet"
Rating:
Summary: Breakfast of Champions
Review: Absolutely the worst film of the 21st.century.
Rating:
Summary: For Kurt's fans only
Review: If you've read the book you'll probably enjoy this talented cast's interpretation of Kurt's characters. But there's a reason it took almost 30 years to come to the big screen, this was a written-novel for people to read - unlike so many bestsellers these days which are practically screenplays and you can easily predict the future film's cast after reading 20 pages. This reminded me of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas - another unfilmable novel - if you've read the book you get the point but it's pretty tough going if you're not a Vonnegut fan.
Rating:
Summary: Ishtar is no longer the worst movie of all time
Review: Notice to reader, the only reason I gave this movie 1 star, isthat there is no lower rating available. - Well, I thought it wouldnever happen but it has, Ishtar has been usurped as the worst flick of all time . . . (L)et me tell you why I did not like this movie. 1- There was almost no action 2- The acting was very good, but it did give the impression that the director might have been lacing the cast's morning coffee with a rather strong brand of hallucinogen (I think that was the only way to achieve the desired effect) 3- The plot was more obscure and harder to follow than a random combination of clips from Brazil, Clockwork Orange, and Pink Floyd's The Wall. and finally 4- While the ending was not entirely unhappy, it in no way vindicated the amount of time invested. In short, this movie could have gotten the job done with a particularly bad B-Rated 15 minute Art flick, and left you with the remaining time to get on with your life and possibly pursue a more enjoyable passtime . . .
Rating:
Summary: This movie proves...
Review: exactly how difficult it is to move written word to video. The novel contains many internal thoughts of the characters, which are almost impossible to represent in on video. Nevertheless, it was a decent movie. Thank god I read the novel beforehand, or I may not have had the slightest idea what was going on...
|
