Sunday, May 11, 2014

Drinking Buddies

Review: Drinking Buddies
Participants: Drew, Sean, Bobby, Joe, Shane, Phil, Bryan, Jon
Initiator: Drew

My biggest reason for choosing this film is due to Olivia Wilde.  She is gorgeous and I have been a fan of hers since "House."  I figured it would be, at the very least, somewhat entertaining.  Somewhat it was.

Its theme is clear - the gray line between male and female friendships.  Having been in this for most of my life, I quickly spotted and related to the situation.  For those of you who never been in this situation, you may not have caught on as fast or at all.

Having been in the situation, the movie was predictable.  The dude (Luke) and girl (Kate) have feelings for each other but both in relationships.  They hangout and constantly flirt with each other to the point where it is obvious but no one wants to admit it.  Everything comes to a head when Luke helps Kate move out of her apartment.  They make formal plans but it all goes to hell when Luke cuts his hand and cannot really help Kate anymore.  She calls Dave, the douche who she slept with after Chris called things off with her, and he casually invites her to go out.  When she would rather do that instead of something formal with Luke, he loses it.  That is when their friendship is called into question but is settled in the end.

The acting was OK at best.  There were some funny parts but they were subtle.  Was anyone else wanting Sudeikis to do a Mitt Romney impersonation?  He was really good at that.  Jake Johnson (Luke) plays in "The New Girl," which isn't completely out of Drinking Buddies' theme, and essentially played the same character.  Olivia Wilde (Kate) was above average too.  She got naked so that was cool but played the everyday girl who has the bartender's charisma and seemed like the cool chick with whom people want to hangout.  Ron Livingston (Chris) is the prick cool chicks like.  Why?  No clue.  Anna Kendrick (Jill) is the girl who wants a commitment.  Luke was unsure of the commitment because of his feelings for Kate and Kate probably liked him romantically but was not ready for what Luke had to offer.

This leaves the question about male and female friendships hanging.  Is it possible?  Well no, actually.  Huffington Post and other media reported of a study published two years ago on this subject. The research suggested men think more of women than vice - versa when they attempt to be "just friends."  Perhaps Luke should have read this.

While I understood the theme, the story, however, was unappealing.  I was not drawn in by the film.  I found myself checking fantasy baseball stats, social media, texts, the fridge while the movie played.  Those are not exactly the best ingredients for a good film.

There were some aspects of Drinking Buddies I omitted.  When Chris and Jill took the hike and kissed and how Jill felt guilty about it.  Another one was the amount of beer in the movie.  Yeah, they work in a brewery and it's the name of the movie but damn, that was a lot of beer.  

All in all, not bad but not good.  Liked the theme and Olivia Wilde.  OK acting mixed with an uninviting story makes for a decent grade.  Grade: C+

Sean, on to you.

49 comments:

  1. I don't know it certainly left me wanting a lot more.

    I don't think you have to had experienced the friend zone to pick up on the super obvious plot of the movie though Drew. I'm not sure why you thought Chris was a prick though. He was clearly the most mature and balanced person in the movie. He felt a connection with Jill and kissed her but didn't push the envelop in an awkward situation and then as a result of his feelings he knew he couldn't continue with Kate and he broke it off and didn't even take advantage of the desperate post break up sex. Kate is clearly an alcoholic, she drinks to bury her feelings, to celebrate, to eat lunch just about any reason possible. Jill is a naive little girl who wants to live the fairy tale little girls dream of and got caught up in the moment "my heart is beating so fast" but then continued to push Luke for marriage before ultimately confessing and realizing that she does love Luke. Luke definitely should've pushed the 3-some angle while Kate was 3rd-wheeling it and Jill was talking about falling in love too young and before she could eat any pussy.

    I understand movies have to over exaggerate things to tell the story in 90 minutes or so but damn Luke and Kate are literally all over each other the entire movie, less than 5 minutes of that crap in front of Jill in real life results in no way in hell Jill likes Kate.

    All in all, mostly boring but I wanted it to be better than it was so it had me attached enough to want more out of it so the attachment raises D+ to C- and Olivia Wilde's sexy tank tops up to a C.

    p.s. A+ for the tags Drew

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Had to tag for you, Sean! Can't let Jon the Tagless continue this reign of terror.

      Delete
  2. Well, I didn't hate it. It was actually better than I expected.

    My biggest issue with it was the pace and slow lull during some scenes. It felt like it was longer than 90 minutes for me.

    The biggest positive for me, was the dialogue. I don't mean this in a Tarantino dialogue kind of way... but that I really appreciated how the conversations were realistic and fit the setting of the movie. It wasn't all about poetic drivel on top of casual scenes and characters. Good on that!

    This movie gave me some laughs. While they weren't the kind I get from watching Louis CK or Mitch Hedberg stand-up, there were some chuckles. There was also an insightful thing or two spoken as well. I think the one that really stood out to me was during Chris and Jill's hike, when he said... "I guess you have to take a person at their word that they're actually in to you..." It seems simple enough, but I think it's such a common thing for people to worry about whether or not the other person really likes them, loves them, etc.

    As for the characters and acting... I think they were all adequate, but nobody was outstanding. I didn't see Chris as the asshole at all, and agree with Sean completely about him. Livingston did a good job conveying the awkwardness in the scenes that required it. Jake Johnson did fine as Luke. I feel like Luke was written pretty well overall and is a realistic portrayal in this kind of situation. New Girl amuses me, and a part of that is how Johnson's role compliments the others... things were really as playful in Drinking Buddies, though. I agree with Sean again with Kate. She's got some shit to figure out for herself. Wilde was good, displaying good charisma and emotion when appropriate. I like Anna Kendrick, even more so than Wilde. She was great in Up in the Air and Pitch Perfect (that movie scored me brownie points with random guy's wife down in Atlanta, eh Shane?). I thought she did well with Jill... awkward at moments, emotional in others. I'm not even sure she was the most naive, but the guilt of kissing Chris pushed her to pressure Luke into the marriage discussion.. as if getting that locked down would let her get over it. It clearly didn't, and once she confronted that, I think she realized she was truly content with Luke, even with his lack of marital motivation.

    The plot was mediocre, but again... mostly realistic. I appreciate that, but it wasn't something that really draws the audience in. The whole friends with somebody you're attracted to, especially while you and/or they are in a relationship is pretty common... attraction happens. I'm pretty sure the four of them could have thrown out some sort of group relationship and it may have worked out for them. The 'friendzone' is pretty much just a bogus thing guys made up when they don't get what they want, but i don't think that this movie really even had much, if anything, to do with that. Luke and Kate both felt the attraction, and I think were real and accepting of it in the end. I've always been of mind that one side or the other in MOST relationships like that will be attracted to the other.. if not both. So it's not that platonic friendship can't happen, it just often has the hurdles of sexual and emotional tension added on.

    When I initially finished the movie, I thought C+ due to the slower pace and it feeling longer than 90 minutes while not providing anything overly compelling. As I wrote this out, however, i found myself appreciating it all a little more and am going to settle on a B-

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also, I meant to mention.. Revolution is a real brewery in Chicago that has done pretty well... and there was a quick nod to 3 Floyd's. I hate most beers, but some of their stuff is truly awesome.

      Delete
    2. And here, have some Anna Kendrick and her sweet sweet voice in Pitch Perfect: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2mawaBrvFg

      Delete
  3. This movie needed more from behind the person camera shots.

    I spent most of the 180 minutes trying to figure out if Anna Kendrick is attractive or now. I still don't know.

    When they started talking about Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

    And then, they were all, Well I think Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

    Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    C-

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She is. Just watch Pitch Perfect again!

      Delete
    2. I've tried watching Pitch Perfect several times mid-stream. So many critics I trust really like, nay, love it. I've never made it more than 5 minutes.

      Delete
    3. But Rebel Wilson is hilarious because she's morbidly obese and has an accent.

      Delete
    4. What is this Pitch Perfect you all speak of?

      Delete
    5. Maybe that should be my next choice...

      Delete
  4. I'll just assume it means Shane's never actually watched it, as his opinion is clearly that of somebody who hasn't.

    ReplyDelete
  5. For this round of movies, Drinking Buddies has been far and away the toughest to give a grade to for me. Even as I begin writing this, I’m not sure where it’s going to end up. I had heard plenty of good things about it, and I was excited to get into it. Not going to lie, I almost turned it off a half hour in. However, I’m glad I stuck with it. Writer/Director Joe Swanberg gave us nothing new here, but we did get an extremely relatable story that we’ve all either experienced or seen that, while maybe not terribly interesting while watching, at least gave us something to think about in regards to relationships in today’s world.

    Let’s start with the style of the movie. I don’t know what this style is called… I think it’s been coined as “mumblecore” in the past. Regardless, I absolutely hate it. I’m not sure if 2010’s Cyrus was the first movie to use this style, but it was certainly one of the first well-known ones. I really hope it doesn’t catch on. The movie was quiet, the people were quiet… It’s a style that lends itself to boring the audience. As a result, I damn-near turned the sucker off after 30 minutes. However, at some point, it turned. Maybe it was after Kate getting naked. After that, I forgot about the style choice and just wanted to figure out how this story ended.

    This actually brings me to another random gripe about this movie that everyone has brought up already. It was only 90 minutes long, but felt at least 30 minutes more (or 90 in Shane’s case). Maybe it was due to how slow the first half was. Or maybe it was b/c I was legitimately angry about all the stupidity I was witnessing on my TV.

    I think this is where this movie lives or dies: relatablilty. (Good sidebar one day: movies you watched too young. For me, it was Schindler’s List when I was a sophomore in high school.) Whenever you see a group of people in this situation in real life – or, worse, you find yourself in one of the four roles – you can’t help but get angry at the sheer stupidity. We don’t get a great sense of how much time is passing between events (another pet peeve of mine), but how long did it take someone to admit what happened? It took Jill getting rejected by Chris on their trip (pretty confident we all figured that one out) for anyone to fess up, leading everyone to essentially “settle” for whatever person they had paired off with already.

    The idea of “settling” is just one of the many relationship tropes at work here. We pretty much ran the gamut of them here, and in truth, all were done pretty effectively. Any of the scenes between Jake and Jill were tough, as these were two people who just had no common ground on what to talk about. There wasn’t a single meaningful conversation about an exchange of ideas or life – just Jake randomly teasing and Jill trying to drag it out as long as possible before the next awkward silence. (Side note: acting was ok here save Anna Kendrick, who I thought was fantastic.) Kate and Chris had the same issue, but it felt much more obvious early on. They seemed to be able to talk at least. And then we had the dreaded “friend zone.” Any guy who has been friend-zoned couldn’t help but watch some of those Jake & Kate scenes and not see a piece of themselves in there. I’m going to guess a couple of us have been friend-zoned in our days, yours truly included. I guess it’s fair that the friend zone is a purely male invention, making me wish we had a female perspective on this round. Anna watched it with me, so maybe I should ask her what she thinks about that in general.

    ReplyDelete
  6. So we ended up with a fairly open-ended ending (yet another pet peeve), and I think everyone’s interpretation of it would depend on their own experiences. The optimistic dreamers out there hope and see it as the start of their relationship together. The pragmatic realists know we’re more than likely back to square one: Jake & Jill will get married and likely divorced, Kate will bounce around from guy to guy, and Chris will continue to swoon as many hotties as he can until he’s tired of it and just winds up with whomever he happens to have fucked last. C’est La Vie.

    + Relatable themes we have all lived or seen by this point
    + Well-done execution without bashing you over the head with it
    + Evoked actual emotion without being ham-fisted or manipulative
    + Anna Kendrick was great
    -Death to mumblecore
    -Numerous pet peeves
    -Felt long

    Grade: I’d love to go higher than a C+, but I can’t go any higher than that if I want to turn the movie off 30 minutes in.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Are you just assuming Jill and Chris went somewhere together? I thought that for a moment, but it didn't stick. I think Jill would have confessed that, or they would have expicitly told us? I don't see Chris taking the trip with her only to reject her during it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree with Bobby here, plus Kate tried to drunkenly visit Chris while Jill was on her trip and Chris shot her down. He gave her freaking poems he wasn't going to shoot her down.

      Delete
    2. They went to the woods together. Did you miss that part? :P

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. That's... not what I'm talking about Drew.. as he certainly didn't reject her on the hike. We're talking about the trip she took later... it seems like Phil is assuming she actually went somewhere with Chris, instead of what she said she was doing.

      Delete
    5. Why would she return early, in a heap of tears, and immediately confess to something that had happened god knows how long ago? We all personally know someone who went on an international trip with a significant other, only to be rejected immediately. (Hello Dr. Jeff Bennett!) The only two explanations would be that either he dumped her ass, or her friends convinced her to return home immediately, which seems 100% implausible to me.

      Riley, the passage of time in this movie is extremely difficult to pinpoint. I might check later (doubtful), but I don't think the Chris & Kate exchange happened while Jill was in Costa Rica. Heck, was Jill even in Costa Rica?! She could have just been at Chris's freaking apartment for all we know!

      Delete
    6. Phil, what's your evidence for thinking that Jill went to spend time with Chris? Is there anything specific, or is your thinking based on her emotional state after she gets back from 'Costa Rica?' I didn't second-guess that scene at all, as her guilt is visible in all of her scenes after she and Chris kiss in the woods?

      Delete
    7. I agree with Phil. Nothing about her trip seemed.viable based on what little we know about her. Also, it's probably super expensive to fly back early, money a teacher doesn't have. Unless her back story is being a trust fund kid. Based on her dating a rebellious figure from a young age this seems plausible. I bet she went to the University of Illinois. Now she's a teacher to save the inner city youth, and its not going well because she doesn't have the prerequisite skills needed to manage a classroom while focusing on discipline due to inner city decay of Chicago's poorest neighborhoods.

      Delete
    8. Jill's a special ed teacher, who may or may not be teaching in the inner city. I may have missed it, but I got no impression she was bad at, or overwhelmed by her job. Also, she's been teaching for a couple years, and probably started at upwards of $50k. I don't necessarily think welshing on a plane ticket would break her.

      Delete
    9. There is nothing that really toward her being with Chris. And there is nothing that implies Chris would reject her if they spent time together. Even more so... She's a guilty mess when she confesses to Luke and clearly afraid of what the consequences may be. If that's already out there and the relationship is on the line, there'd be no reason to be only partially honest and leave out that the trip was a sham... as that seems like something that Luke could find out in a variety of ways (Chris, Jill's friends, etc) and would be an even bigger threat to the relationship she's terrified of losing.

      Now, I do think that her moment with Chris in the woods is what suddenly changed her mind and made her want to go on the trip. She was guilty and wanted to get away from the heart of the situation, and leave Luke to dwell on the marriage thing as 'absence makes the heart grow fonder.' I could be completely wrong and she could have been shacked up with Chris the entire time, but I don't see anything that implies it in the plot or the characters.

      Delete
    10. Kissel - it's based mainly on emotional state. I just can't understand why she would have that sort of breakdown on a "girls' trip." Jill does not seem like the type of character that wants to marry Luke specifically. She comes off moreso as a girl who just wants to get married. Luke felt like her fallback option. Hence, why I thought "settling" was a big theme in this movie.

      If you all think she was really on a trip w/ her friends, I'd love for you to fill in the gap of why she left early. If she was that guilt-ridden, she never would have gotten on the plane in the first place. Also, you're only assuming she was "guilt-ridden." She may have been just scared to be alone.

      I can understand leaving the trip out in the confession. One little kiss in the heat of the moment is forgivable. One little kiss followed up with a trip with the guy? Now we're moving into pre-meditated territory. Put yourself in Luke's shoes. Could you forgive a kiss some time back that "clearly" had no followup? More than likely yes. How about a kiss followed up with a trip where she got kicked to the curb and you've become her "silver medal?" Ain't no coming back from that one.

      Delete
    11. It's all assuming too much. The movie isn't one that sets out to try and subtly imply the actions of its characters. We were either shown or told about all the major interactions between them, why would they leave something like that to the viewers imagination? You're asking us to give reason and prove that she didn't go off with Chris, but there is nothing giving us reason to believe she did... aside from your perception of her emotional state.

      Delete
    12. If you can come up with a logical series of events that would start with her going on a girls' trip to the caribbean and end with her home early and in tears, I'll concede. Personally, nothing I can think of could happen in between to make sense of that beginning and end.

      Delete
    13. You're putting the burden of proof on the wrong side. We were told where she went and why she came back. She wanted to distance herself and be away from luke, then the guilt hit her too hard. That's logical, and presented to us in the same way the rest of the movie is... straight forward. The other theory is in your head, and therefore you should trying to show us reasons that it didn't go that way. But so far we have nothing to go off of other than your basis off of emotional state.

      Delete
    14. Burden of proof huh? Alright, here's my evidence....

      1) Emotional state - been discussed at length.

      2) The Costa Rica ticket cost - Brought up by Kissel, and it's fair I think. A quick ticket would be exceedingly expensive.

      3) Illogical event sequence - Like I said before, the passage of time in this movie is very difficult to figure out. Case in point here is the four meeting for the first time as a group, then the very next scene is the cabin trip. Is that something you would do with a couple you just met, even if there was a friendship that connected you beforehand? Anna and I were convinced we missed a scene. So, with that in mind, we have no idea how much time passed between the cabin trip and "costa rica." It could have been a few days or a few months. If it was a few days, then fine, she paid the $3k to get home immediately. If it was a few months, there was ample opportunity for guilt to hit, and it seems very convenient for it to happen then.

      That's what I got. Maybe I am way off. If I am, it makes Jill an exceedingly less interesting character and probably drops my grade to a C- or D+. She's either a flightly dingbat or a girl whose sole focus seems to be being with a man. There are women out there who will not break up with someone until they have the next guy lined up... I guess the pessimist in me felt like the trip was a chance to see if Chris was the "next guy," and he clearly was not. We do hear Jill mentioned that she dated a lot of guys, so she's a "relationship girl." I guess I find my interpretation of her behavior more believable then her just being kind of nuts.

      Delete
    15. $385 to get from Costa Rica to O'Hare tomorrow. Way to go Spirit Airlines.

      Delete
    16. Wow... well maybe she is just a dingbat then.

      Delete
  8. Phil hit the nail on the head with the mumblecore genre. The director of Drinking Buddies, Joe Swanberg, is supposedly a founding member. Other examples would be Your Sister’s Sister, Greenberg, Humpday, and the Before series. Cyrus is on the outside looking in, because I think it might be too crazy for mumblecore. Girls toned down 30% would fit right in. My understanding of it is that it’s been called that name for about 10 years, and the hallmarks are improvised dialogue, white people, low stakes based on relationships, and a lot of introspection, basically all things that apply to Drinking Buddies. I run the gamut on the genre. I love the Before series and strongly recommend it, while Greenberg stars Ben Stiller as the worst person in the world and was pretty bad. It depends on how sympathetic you find the characters, because every mumblecore character ever eventually starts whining, and if you’re not on their side, it’ll just be annoying.

    Which brings us to Drinking Buddies. I had varying levels of sympathy for each character, so the movie largely worked for me. Luke probably drinks too much and definitely needs to work on his passive-aggressiveness, but he’s got an interesting job, a lot of charm, and a cool girlfriend. Kate definitely drinks too much, and is pretty aimless in her life as a side effect, or maybe a root cause. Based on the disgusting state of her apartment, she’s got a good amount of growing up to do, but at least she’s good at her work. Jill is adorable, so she automatically gets my sympathy, but she’s also naïve and a little blind. Chris is the adult in the room, though he’s pretty humorless and way too dry for this crowd. All the actors are good to great at improv, so I bought their interactions fully. They seemed like real people.

    A lot of the characterization comes out in the direction. Swanberg is good at showing and not telling. While she and Chris are trying to sleep in the cabin, the agony on Kate’s face while listening to Luke and Jill having fun in the other room told me all I needed to know about her relationship, as well as being a completely relatable moment. We’ve all likely been there before, possibly while spending time in 1506. A clear shot of Chris’s water glass juxtaposed with Kate’s constant drinking adds to the distance between the two of them. Kate picking at Chris’s food until he insists she eat it points at her indecisiveness. Jill and Chris have a well-prepared picnic in the woods while Kate and Luke slap together a huge sandwich to share. Jill putting aside her confession at the end to focus on Luke’s injured hand first. All these and more qualify as subtle character hints that I really appreciate.

    I hadn’t considered that Jill’s Costa Rica trip was a secret getaway with Chris. That’s possible, but I think the only way the movie hints at that is by omission, such that Luke doesn’t talk to anyone who would be going with her, plus the short time she’s gone. I think she left on a Friday and is back on a Sunday, barely enough time to get to Costa Rica and make a decision about staying. I don’t think the film would leave that scene of Jill and Chris out, though, because that’s a big leap for the viewer to make. It’s possible, but I’d have to watch again to make sure, and I didn’t like this movie enough for an immediate rewatch.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who says she actually went to Costa Rica with Chris? She could just take a "normal girls' trip" to a place like Costa Rica every year or so. She could've been at Chris's apartment for all we know.

      Delete
  9. I agree with Bobby that the friend-zone is mostly bullshit. The study Drew linked to seems to show that most men in cross-gender friendships are just waiting for a chance to bang, but that doesn’t mean that’s always the case, if it was even a solid study, which I didn’t look into. As someone who’s been friend-zoned before, it was always my problem, not the girl’s. I think the cultural connotation is frustration with the female, assuming that she can be worn down by enough friendly conversations to finally put out, and then when it doesn’t happen, it’s her fault for being a bitch somehow. Attraction is chemical and either exists or doesn’t. It’s no one’s fault if it doesn’t happen.

    A few more odds and ends. I went into this movie thinking about the difference between Olivia Wilde and Emily Blunt, preferring Wilde’s work in Looper to Blunt’s in Your Sister’s Sister. Turns out Blunt’s in both movies, and I can’t tell them apart. Wilde was great in Her in a small part, though, unless it was Blunt. I loved every scene at the cabin, though that is likely a post-Geoff-fest glow. I also loved Luke, who at one point had clearly been black-footed, saying, “He’s got a brother, but he’s weird as fuck.” I feel like I’ve said that exact line about you, Setnor. I put in some time at the Revolution Brewery in January, and it is pretty cool. Lots of space, good beer. The best part by far was instead of Sportscenter on their TV’s, they were playing straight-to-DVD schlocky 80’s horror movies. The eye is constantly drawn to a deformed creature that lives in a laundry hamper.

    Overall, a good experience. Movie stakes don’t always have to be gigantic. It’s fine to go more insular occasionally, and this was one of the better mumblecore films I’ve seen. It sounds like a lot of you may not revisit the genre, but there’s some great stuff there, specifically the Before series, the last of which, Before Midnight, is the most recent A+ movie I’ve seen. Drinking Buddies isn’t near that level, but I’m a fan. B

    ReplyDelete
  10. This might irritate some people, but I think one's rating of this movie is directly correlated with your ability to relate to it. If this were sophomore year of college Bryan I may have liked this, but having given up on anything but complete honesty in relationships I thought it was painful to watch.

    I can't think of Olivia Wilde without thinking of Hutington's Disease from House. I was hooked on that show at that time. I kept waiting for her to break that news to all her buddies. The guy from Office Space is painful to watch in anything except Office Space. The other guy reminds of Jason Mantzoukas, the raunch guy from The League. I'm not sure how I feel about Anna Kendrick.

    Maybe it's my inability to separate their characters from prior experience or maybe they just cast the movie by placing actors in rolls which are identical to nearly everything else they've done; or maybe it's just my short attention span for movies that start slow. But, I'm having a hard time coming up with something positive to say about this movie.

    Mumblecore, wtf?

    D.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I still think the movie was supposed to be painful. I boosted th movie from a C- to a C+ b/c it evoked a genuinely angry reaction from me. Any well-adjusted person should expect complete honesty in a relationship. I would sum this up as a pragmatic view on relationships, and how big of... well, pussies some people can be in the face of transgression.

      Delete
    2. I'm not irritated by the view, but don't agree, or perhaps don't see why, or what the correlation would be. I agree with Phil for the most part here. I don't know that I related to it, beyond agreeing with it's view of... people and relationships in general. Not that ALL are like that, clearly, but most people go through something similar at sometime (you referred to your sophomore year, perhaps?). I think it's a general relation, and a realistic view.... which was one of my favorite aspects. The relationships may not have been honest, but the movie was honest about them. It was nice to see people and their interactions without a bunch of fluff.

      Delete
    3. Several things: I think the ideal of complete honesty in a relationship is something attained when the relationship is healthy. Chris and Kate were not a good match, so they weren't honest with each other. Luke and Jill are getting to that good point by the end of the movie, though they're not quite there yet. If they do end up following through on their wedding, hopefully Luke will be more honest about his feelings for Kate, like Jill was with her feelings for Chris, but the impression I was left with was that her opening up was going to get him to the same good place.

      I would absolutely agree that the actors were cast in roles that are very similar to other roles they've played, especially Jake Johnson.

      I don't know what you mean by your first sentence. We all have pretty narrow life experiences, so if I just watched movies or TV that I could personally relate to, that would mean discarding a lot of great movies. Roger Ebert defined movies as empathy machines, something I subscribe to. An inability to relate to what's happening onscreen is my failure, not the movie's failure. At a minimum, I should understand why characters are doing what they're doing, and I think Drinking Buddies succeeded at that.

      Agreeing with Phil on discomfort being a legitimate emotion to be dredged up by a movie, as long as the discomfort is closer to something like "I can see these people making mistakes." A lot of great TV runs on discomfort humor.

      Delete
  11. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I wasn't angry. I thought, "Oh geez, is this still going on?"

    ReplyDelete
  13. I should mention that I am much less likely to drink Revolution brews having witnessed this debacle.

    ReplyDelete
  14. You have convinced me my ability to relate hypothesis is wrong.

    However, I'm changing my grade down to a D- and trending lower. I can't think of one enjoyable or engaging scene in the whole movie.

    I thought it was pre-school instead of special ed. Either way, why was she making that super detailed diorama. That was AP Art quality.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. After all this engaging conversation, I choose to up my grade to a B-.

      Delete
  15. Most of you mentioned the friend zone. Where did you see that? Had Luke not been with Jill, he'd be with Kate. The scene where the feelings come to a head is all about that. Remember when Kate yells at Luke to "go to your girlfriend" and the tone in which she said it? No friend zoning. No one was friend zoned.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brewer Guy was in the friend-zone with Alcoholic Woman. Sure, maybe it's not the traditional friend zone like where a girl keeps the guy around and he wants to date and she just wants to make him jealous by telling him about her relationship issues, but it is still the friend zone.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, I disagree with that assessment. He wasn't friend zoned. She had romantic feelings for him but when he tried to do something about it she became upset because he had a girlfriend. I don't see the friend zone. I need (a) specific example(s).

      Delete
  16. “Slut is how we vilify a woman for exercising her right to say yes. Friend zone is how we vilify a woman for exercising her right to say no.”

    http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/i-keep-getting-friendzoned.jpg

    Because the friend zone is pretty much a crock of shit, and isn't really worth discussing. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As a whole, I agree, but in the context of the movie, it is.

      Delete