Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

Micitype Pretty Good

AutCuddly Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

Tobias Burrows It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

mr-jon-hope If there is a theme to this movie, it might be the question: What entertains us? The main character stares blankly at telenovelas. He joylessly trudges through tourist attractions. He tells deliberately offensive jokes. He listens to deliberately bad music on endless drives where he occasionally stops to stare at desert vistas. He drinks.He watches others entertain themselves -- watching the absurdist clown who is his opening act; watching people play games at parties; attending a "chromotherapy" seminar; listening to John C. Reilly sing, or letting Reilly mess up one of the comedian's jokes. The comedian laughs only twice during the film.The comedian refuses to tell jokes when he isn't in character. He seems to be repulsed by sex, offended by offers of sympathy (from Reilly and Ty Sheridan), and unable to connect with other people. He ruins his celebrity gig. During another gig, instead of telling jokes, he pretends to shoot the audience while blowing raspberries at them.And we, of course, watch the comedian, waiting to be entertained. Neil Hamburger fans will hear few of his jokes. Michael Cera's cameo is a throwaway. Tim Heidecker fans will be equally disappointed. Speaking of cameos, Annabella Lwin from Bow Wow Wow plays the tour guide in the first scene, and David Yow from the Jesus Lizard also has a brief scene. It isn't worth watching the movie to see them.I gave Entertainment a 5 because it left me feeling ambivalent (which may have been its goal). It is neither great nor incompetent. It certainly isn't entertaining.

jadavix "Entertainment" is almost as hard to watch as Turkington is hard to look at. Why does his hair always appear wet?It's one of those sparse art movies where nothing happens and the movie barely seems to notice the main character, which I suppose is the point. Turkington found fame as Neil Hamburger, an "anti-comedian" who is funny because he isn't funny. That's the joke.In "Entertainment", he plays a comedian - nameless - who isn't funny because he isn't funny. His shows are bad at first, and continue to get worse until he gets on stage and blows a continuous raspberry - repulsive to view and listen to - and in a final performance, collapses.It wouldn't be one of these weird art movies without two things - unexplained celebrity walk-ons and equally unexplained disturbing scenarios. For the walk-on, we get Michael Cera in one scene where he asks the comedian to "hang out" with him in the men's room. For the disturbing material, we get him approaching a woman in labor on a public bathroom floor, and then a cut to him with a newborn baby in his arms while he sits on the floor, looking as bored as he has throughout the entire movie.The stand up performances are the only part of the movie that have any kind of drama to them. Yes, they're bad, but there is some kind of character arc present in the way they devolve. Nothing else in the movie is of any value, none of it makes sense, and it's not even interesting enough to frustrate you when you realise that.

nathanleebush What's annoying about this kind of movie is that if you don't like it, it's assumed you just have no tolerance for dark and depraved realism or difficult films. I've liked many movies resembling this on the surface. I even wrote and shot one of my own before deciding this sub-genre was played out by European films in the 90s and Sophia Coppola ever since. This one is just a total misfire in tone. I'm a huge fan of a lot of the elements individually. I love the 'straight' character Turkington, his on stage character Hamburger, beautiful realist cinematography, and occasionally esoteric, stylized dialogue. They make zero sense when put together in this film.I'd love to see a film about how it would really be for a character like Tarkington to interact with the world, or somewhat less so a character like Hamburger. But not this stylized dialogue where everyone is a silent foil in a world that looks and feels real but has no relationship to the reality we all inhabit. Just so confused by about 90% of the choices.

shamusmcskrap I get what this film was going for, and I'm aware of the new sub- genre of "ultra-awkward," and yet none of this seems to change the fact that this movie didn't really stir any sort of emotion from me whatsoever. Turkington is interesting, but here we are treated to a series of scenes designed to make you cringe and wonder what the purpose is, if any, of anyone going to such great lengths to achieve such a ho- hum goal.There is elements of Sid and Nancy here. You have a bizarre cultural phenomenon (Hamburger) touring a bunch of po-dunk towns as to not "preach to the converted." The result is unhappy dullards responding harshly to an assault on whatever simple beliefs they have. It's no shocker that in the scene (spoiler) someone hucks a glass at Hamburger's head, because that actually happened to Greg at a real set. And in the film Greg seems to be surprised and keeps talking about getting "more security," which is mildly amusing because this guy antagonizes rednecks for a living. Neil Hamburger is a funny character for the most part, but in this there is no contrast between the character and the person. Both are utterly miserable creatures. There is no character arch to speak of. Greg goes from a hollow husk going through the motions to a hollow husk going through the motions. The Comedy was great because there seemed to be some resistance to giving into the great despair of life. There seems to be no point either in the other "celeb cameos." John C. Reilly plays a guy that literally could of been played by anyone's uncle. Michael Cera appears to draw out a few more cringes if you have any left to draw (I had begun to read a book at this point and glanced occasionally to see Turkington staring off at something with a frown, or sitting at the edge of his bed with a frown, or...well you get the point. Sadness. The sad clown is sad on the inside etc, etc.I guess this is a film about depression. As a comedy it doesn't make you laugh, as a drama it doesn't really have anything that dramatic happen, and it fails as nearly everything else. Also a big fan of Greg Turkington, but his near crippling cynicism is getting played out.