GrimPrecise I'll tell you why so serious

Steineded How sad is this?

ThrillMessage There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

terrybrass i don't get this s**t. You have cameos from all these funny, interesting actors, and you cast the leads as there community theater rejects? what gives? what are you trying to covey? The content become contrived and predictable after a while. The dialog COULD have been striking, but s**t, you got Jack Black playing a mental defect, and Laura Kitelinger on screen for like a second and a half, and you cast the movie with these forced dialog suckers? I don't get it, Bob, i don't' get it. This film had a lot of potently but failed. I DE-Recommend this film. Don't bother, It's not worth it. It's too simple, but could have been good.

melloyellobiafra I have never walked out of a movie in my life. Had I seen this in the theater I would have.The characters in this movie are very true to life, unfortunately they are all pseudo-intellectual hipsters who think every mundane thing in their lives is absolutely fascinating. Perhaps for his next movie Bob Odenkirk can make a feature about a group of alarm clocks. The buzzing of the alarm clocks would be no less annoying than the characters in "Melvin Goes to Dinner" and the film would be just as entertaining."Melvin Goes to Dinner" may be the worst movie ever made avoid it at all costs.

Polaris_DiB I had mixed feelings about this one. I went into it knowing that it was largely based on conversation with very little vestiges of plot, so I was pleasantly surprised to find that it all sort of falls into place to mean something at the end. All in all, the conversational elements are richly written and very appealing. However, that's the end... it takes a while for it to be truly enriching.Sometimes the conversation is such that you feel like you're in it, and that's probably as close to good as the cinematography and editing gets, considering in general it really isn't that well done. I can forgive the hand-held look and a lot of how the image turned out from its independent production value, but try as I might I couldn't help but feel a lot of the work was just shoddy camera operation.Sometimes the conversation isn't very appealing and I can't help but think, "I'm obviously not in this conversation because I wouldn't go there." So there's that element too, a sort of discursive alienation one feels when the conversation feels less than involving.Mostly, however, the dialog is great and the characters are amazing. There are some really great performances all around and it's definitely worth a viewing or two, or more, but even as I say that I can't help but think that the play version of this story must be absolutely amazing because of mostly the format of the two media.--PolarisDiB

rcpeyton It takes a little time to get into it, but once the story is established, it's surprisingly fun to watch four near-strangers talking about all sorts of things. It's a bit vicarious. Was it Hitchcock who said that movies are like life without all the boring parts? This film disproves that. I definately recommend it.