Soul mates, or is the misanthrope capable of loving?
The film “How to Marry a Bachelor” (a strange translation of the original title) is actually not a film but a film sketch. A play by two actors. Other characters are only slightly different from furniture. Of course, there was a lot of that. Offhand: “Warsaw Melody” and, say, Linklater’s trilogy – “Before Dawn”, “Before Sunset”, “Before Midnight” – are also entirely phrasebooks, in fact. Compared to those movies, The Bachelor certainly loses. The dialogues are whimsical, but painfully unrealistic: the characters do not talk, but play the game “who outstrips whom in the speed of thought and its apt and concise expression.” There are people who catch and analyze someone else’s thought on the fly and give an original, ornate answer with the same speed. But how do moderate brakes like me perceive such a movie? Keep rewinding? - I don't feel like it. On the other hand, say, the David Thewlis character in Mike Lee's "Naked" also spoke and responded very quickly, even in a tongue-in-cheek, but it was flight and delight (although he was a misanthrope). And in "Naked," the tempo still changed, depending on who Johnny was talking to, in what circumstances, and what. In The Bachelor, the same pace of conversation is the same, whether it’s during sex, at a festive table, or on a walk. I think Keanu Reeves is not a dialogue actor, he's too hypomic for that. Winona Ryder in this sense looks better, she is charismatic, but also for the theatrical version looks Kutsewato.
So the two heroes found a soul mate. In O'Henry's story, soul kinship was revealed on the basis of the patient-disease scheme, and here on the basis of cynicism and misanthropy. I recently read (and watched) Marienhof’s Cynics. It's the same song. Heroes flaunt each other, who is more cynical about life, the phenomena of life and revolution. The result is sour. Although it seems to be the same: eros-carrots (unilateral, anyway). Here it seems to believe that between such nerds-suckers because of their unanimity can spark, but for some reason it does not warm.
The movie is short. That's a plus. But, I think, it turned out better if the movie added secondary characters, at least a couple of three (take them out of the furniture mode). It might have slightly revealed the characters, made them at least a little less cardboard. But, apparently, the creator wanted it to be as it came out. Well, it turned out sour, sourer than in “Cynics”, despite the hippie end.
6 out of 10
I would classify this film as a chamber film with interesting dialogue (although it sometimes seemed too long). The characters of the picture talk to the viewer and laugh at themselves and at him. The dialogue in the film is remarkable for its openness and cynicism. You might think I like it when people talk like that, but no. I'll explain why.
We all have our own level of openness and cynicism. I find it wonderful to meet someone who treats life with the same degree of irony. This is the salt of any close relationship, thanks to this we understand each other's humor, and through humor it is much easier to convey to the interlocutor the baggage with which we, poor lads, got to the place of our meeting.
I like directors who are not afraid of dialogue in films, but I am even more impressed by directors who know how to write these dialogues competently. In this picture, as I said, conversations between the characters are often prolonged, but this does not detract from their relevance.
The film is never brilliant, passable, not catchy, but it fits into the category "What is it to see not stupid, but fun for one evening." "How to Marry a Bachelor" is not stupid (unless you're a snob) and quite cheerful (unless you're a bore).
For a long time I postponed watching this film, believing that it would be boring and sluggish. I finally decided. You know, I have no regrets at all.
“How to Marry a Bachelor” despite the abundance of locations where events unfold, turns out to be quite chamber. Even with faces flashing in the background, events unfold around two characters - Frank (Keanu Reeves) and Lindsay (Wynonna Ryder).
It just so happens that they are invited to the same wedding and wherever Frank is, Lindsay is next to him. Or wherever Lindsay is, Frank's around her. They sit on a plane next to each other, live in neighboring rooms, sit at the same table at a wedding! And even the transfer to the place of the wedding ceremony carries only two of them! It is no wonder that in the minds of the couple there is a suspicion that someone is trying to bring them together.
The film itself is unpretentious, and its plot is simply not replete with original moves. The manner of shooting is simple - the camera operator quite often statically shoots Frank and Lindsay frontal. In this regard, the filming process itself, and the installation of the picture turned out to be very simple and uncomplicated. Given the fact that everything in the film is focused on the dialogue between the Man and the Woman, first of all, the viewer listens to what is happening.
If you imagine that you suddenly lost the image and only sound, much in the picture you will be able to understand it by focusing on dialogue. How to Marry a Bachelor becomes an audio play, or rather an audio book that you can listen to without paying much attention to the image.
Although enjoying a beautiful shot is still worth it. And the couple of characters looks attractive, and interior and exterior shootings also get along well and combine with each other.
But the main thing is, of course, dialogue. It’s not that Frank and Lindsay are trying to figure out if someone is really trying to bring them together. Nope! Frank and Lindsay mercilessly mock each other (primarily he constantly points out her shortcomings), and do it very skillfully.
When viewing, it seems that both of them before the meeting properly practiced eloquence in order to approach the face-to-face contact as prepared as possible. As they say, “they will not get into their pockets.” So, this formulation is suitable for the hero Reeves, and for the heroine Ryder. And to listen, as well as to watch their verbal battle becomes curious from the first minutes, when a conflict brews between them over the queue for the plane.
The film is quite interesting from the point of view of the presentation of material about how a man and a woman get to know each other better and are imbued with sympathy, although their initial reaction to the attitude to the interlocutor was perceived in pieces. This is when the ice begins to melt between them. And it's interesting to watch.
But look at you. I do not impose my opinion on anyone.
I watched the film twice in different periods of my life. I'm sorry about that.
The unpopularity of the film is justified by small fees, a small number of evaluations and reviews on venues. The same unpopularity raises questions, at least because it stars Winona Ryder and Keanu Reeves. By the way, the cast on them ends, because there are no more characters in the film from the word at all.
The plot tells a short, lasting literally a few days, the story of two lonely hearts. The characters meet for the first time at the airport, do not get along literally from the first minutes and suddenly it turns out that they are flying on the same plane to the same wedding, they have neighboring rooms and at the table they are also sitting next to each other. The situation is quite comical.
And if we talk about the very first viewing, I initially liked the image of the hero Reeves, his thoughts and views on life. Not completely, of course, but some micro-moments did not leave me indifferent. Besides, in addition to any philosophical themes, the film is full of sarcasm and irony, which once attracted me.
I want to talk about the dialogue in the film. The whole movie is just one dialogue. Sometimes absurd, sometimes funny, sharp, and sometimes quite the opposite calm and quite soulful. Real. That is exactly some realism and plausibility caught on very strongly.
However, when re-watching absolutely all of the above, I did not like at all. It kind of pushed me off. Maybe I was in the wrong mood, maybe something influenced what I see, and most importantly hear it all not for the first time. Maybe I have changed my views on certain things, so what I responded to earlier now causes some rejection. Unanswered questions.
Despite this, the film is quite pleasant and easy. It was filmed in just 10 days on a minimal budget and only lasts 80 minutes. It looks fast, I would say imperceptible.
Conclusion: For me, the film is as individual as possible. If all the conditions match, you will like it. If something goes wrong, you probably won’t even see the end. Too many “ifs,” one way or another, trying can be worth it.
It's strange to see two grown-ups talking for so long. No, they touch on topics that are so familiar to us: love, sex, marriage. ..
But they are so laid-back and so innocent. Reeves' hero is like a lost stocking with a torn past on a holiday. And the heroine Ryder, who survived the breakup, is full of sadness and despair.
But they drink wine and chocolate, watch naive TV, watch passing passers-by, and the wedding itself, which came, in every way avoided and boycotted.
It's a cute, touching, funny movie. With the most conspicuous scene of love in modern cinema. When doing business, there were conversations. And each movement was so ridiculous that it became charming.
I watched with great pleasure and stayed in a light hangover. It's true, nothing lasts forever. The myth that everyone has someone exists. And many of these prophecies are as true as ever.
And yet that sadness and meekness buried in pajamas that flash on the screen ... They can be more expensive and more valuable than the rigor of John Wick. And although they are different universes, Destination Wedding is worth each of 120 minutes.
8 out of 10
And a recommendation for those over 30. Who is in mild and solitary malaise and longing.
“Is it possible to blame people for always hoping for the best?”
In the broad masses, the name of the director, screenwriter and producer Viktor Levin did not gain fame. However, there are certain interesting points in his track record. For example, he participated in the creation of the plot for the drama 'Mean Girl' (2007), which received, in general, positive criticism and good audience reviews. And his joint script with another filmmaker, not finding distribution in the United States, unexpectedly turned out to be in demand in Russia, as a result of which the family romcom appeared on the screens ' My Mad Family' (2011), but, as expected, the ratings of the picture were very low. But if we take into account the director's biography Levin, then, discarding short experiences in the series, he has up to ' How to Marry a Single' (2018) there was only one film - ' From 5 to 7. Time of Lovers & #39; (2014) It received mixed responses, but it certainly did not fail.
And why not try again, if there were prerequisites? There is a good chance that the second film will be better. In addition, Victor Levin has long associated his cinematic fate with various manifestations of comedy melodramas and experience he has enough. And so he took up the pen to create his own plan romkom ' How to marry a bachelor' And the concept of the tape is this: two complete strangers are invited to a wedding. Their first meeting took place at the airport and after a slight flirtation turned into a slight skirmish. Then more. And now Lindsay and Frank, as the names of the main characters of the film, constantly find themselves face to face. Without hesitation, they describe their lives and worldview, lavishly supplying monologues with either narcissistic (like Frank’s) or compassionate (like Lindsey’s) formulations.
And at first glance, you can see that these people are completely unsuitable for each other. A trembling and fragile Lindsay, hardened bachelor Frank with his pessimistic view of the environment - how they can be together. But the fun atmosphere of the wedding brings them together. And at the same time, the potential viewer needs to be prepared that 'How to Marry a Bachelor' is a completely dialogue window, a kind of movie of two actors. Of course, there are other people in the frame, but they do not exceed the rank of extras - what was, what was not, appeared and disappeared, leaving no memories. Therefore, if you are not a champion of long philosophical conversations in the cinema, and this philosophy is quite distorted, then you should take up the viewing '. A long comprehension of the picture expressed by the characters can bring boredom, which, in the end, will lead to the fact that you want to turn it off and the memories of it will evaporate at the same speed as snow under the influence of a laser.
But attracts the viewer even before viewing 'How to marry a bachelor' the presence in the acting ensemble (more precisely, no more than in the duet) Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder. And these two people have long been known outside of Hollywood for their rare love adventures, so the role of Frank was supposedly written under Reeves, and probably as Lindsey under Ryder. An interesting trend is that the army of Reeves fans is steadily growing, which can explain the appearance of the actor in various forms inside computer games. And no one is embarrassed that except for the franchise ' John Wick' Reeves does not come out any attractive movie. Maybe that's why Reeves took on the role in 'How to Marry a Bachelor' - to diversify leisure and give reason to talk more about yourself. And I can say that at first his Frank was even in something funny, sometimes funny, but then specifically tired of his ego. The heroine Ryder attracted (and also at first only) his trepidation and cuteness, but then became too refined. But we can still say that the actors tried, if not all hundred, then at least ninety.
It turns out that the first part is even more or less tolerable, you can catch yourself thinking that in your heart you smile at the main characters, and some of their views on life may even support. But after Frank and Lindsay encountered a predator, everything went downhill. Nothing curious in 'How to marry a bachelor' did not appear and dialogue on one motive began to frankly annoy. And yet I would like to praise Reeves and Ryder, who created such a wonderful (precisely wonderful) pair of completely dissimilar people. And, admittedly, at one point there was a thought, what if this film was some way to get to know Ryder and Reeves, suddenly one of the most enviable bachelors in Hollywood finally found a friend of the heart?
5 out of 10
The film is positioned as a romantic comedy with cynical humor performed by Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder. Heroes with nihilistic views on life and love are invited to the away wedding of a mutual friend. And for 85 minutes, they scathingly comment on what is happening around, simultaneously exchanging scabrous jokes in relation to each other.
Have you ever seen a stand-up performance at the level of the Camedi Club? Add to this a few locations in a country hotel and the fields of the California outback. Call extras who don't need lines. Sound director and operator can be taken from local. We're ready to invite Keanu and Winona. They will do the rest themselves, they will talk. Heroes arrange a marathon of scabby jokes on the screen, competing in who should hate this world more.
Two social outcasts create a “black hole” of merciless humor that pulls you into every minute you watch. You may want to see the white light, but the last ray disappears in the moment of the terrible act of copulation of the heroes. Yeah, Reeves and Ryder did it on the big screen. Trust me, you wouldn't want to see that. There is no romantic overtones or successful banter, this is not even an intercourse with “apple pie”. This is the rape of the psyche of the audience in the hall under the incessant chatter of the heroes. Even the mountain lion fell down from the soundtrack.
I note that the film is quite successful jokes, but with the general flow of rumbling humor, they disappeared in the depths of the “black hole”. In that darkness also lurked the bright idea of the picture - believe in love and it will find you, no matter how cynical you are. It is noteworthy that Victor Levin has already tried to make a comedy about two heroes - "From 5 to 7". The Time of Lovers has failed. This time he was not saved by the handsome Keanu, nor the returning popularity of Winona.
In total, it turned out oversaturated with misanthropic jokes performance of two stars, among which 54-year-old Reeves looked much better 46-year-old Ryder. I do not recommend looking into this black hole. It'll suck.
2 out of 5
After "The Professional" with Keanu Reeves approached this project rather wary, despite a different genre. The trailer seemed cheap, the humor flat. However, the film itself left quite positive impressions, at least it was not boring to watch.
We have a kind of average, in which Keanu has recently been filming. Despite a modest budget, we have two good actors bombarding a rather original dialogue throughout the film.
That’s what the film holds, not to say that the actors tried hard to play, Reeves is common here, Winona Ryder is more overplaying, oh, these squeezes. All the accumulated life garbage and experience in the heads of these selfish loners splashes out sharply, without retreating until the very end. You can not like this type of people and, nevertheless, look at their quarrels and relationships interesting, because the characters are well written and believe in them. On the one hand, a simple scenario, but a strong dialogue of the duo sometimes makes you think and reflect on some of the issues raised.
An interesting reception is that attention is focused exclusively on the two central characters, the rest are nothing more than scenery, emphasizing the selfishness of Frank and Lindsey, saying that they are not interested in anyone but themselves. However, the couple is already over 40 and, one way or another, two cynics through “don’t want” to reach for each other.
Good humor perfectly complements the conversation and does not let you get bored throughout the film.
Despite two significant advantages, the picture lacks full return from the actors, too they play exclusively comedic, besides simple, although the characters themselves are much more complicated. The film lacks a budget, then we are in an apartment, then in a hotel, then in a tiny plane, etc.
Result: Simple and budget film with good dialogue and humor. Non-typical characters and their conversations are the virtue of the film, simple but tasteful. But from a couple of Reeves and Ryder, of course, you expect more.
7 out of 10
“Love flees from those who chase it, and those who run away rushes on the neck.” – Shakespeare
We see the story of Frank and Lindsay. They go to the wedding and this event turned into a fateful acquaintance for the heroes. He is a hardened bachelor who has been alone for a long time and is already accustomed to his loneliness, understood and believes that it is beautiful to be alone, away from the endless turmoil of people, broken hearts and painful love. She also goes to the wedding to the one she loved all her life, and now she is alone and turned into a very cynical woman. The unexpected acquaintance of the heroes turned into a string of ridiculous events, intellectual disputes and spiritual intimacy. This cute and funny story of Frank and Lindsay.
Once upon a time, as a child, I watched the cult vampire horror film Bram Stoker’s Dracula, and even then the duet of Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder was well remembered for life. They are both two respected actors, and with them a huge list of favorite and cool movies. After so many years, it was great to see them on screen. This is the reason that draws attention to this film. Romantic comedy is a rare genre, and it is always nice to plunge into such a movie, love always rules in such stories, and it is here that the center of the universe.
This film is for an adult audience. This is the story of two adults, very lonely, tired of life and cynical. For some reason, the hero Keanu Reeves very much resembled the actor himself here, for some reason this was an impression. There were similarities between Reeves and Frank in character. Keanu is an amazing actor, and watching movies with his participation is always interesting. In this film, he was the heart of the film. Wynonna was the soul. Once in the 90s, she was mega popular and was considered one of the most popular actresses. Now this is not the case, but Ryder has again returned to universal attention because of the series “Stranger Things”, so we see a reboot in the career of the actress.
This film is like strong wine, which you want to finish to the bottom, and then make love - such associations with it. I cannot say that the film is a masterpiece, but it can not be called a failure. I am neutral about what I see. The actors, of course, did their job and gave life to this picture, thanks to them it looks so funny, with humor and some ease.
OThe general impression: This is a dialogue film, but so empty that you want to cut out the film as much unnecessary conversation that was scattered throughout the plot between the two characters. The picture is so poorly sewn that sometimes you lose the essence between monologues, which are full of the story.
Do you know what is important in the film? This is an interesting story, if boring, then no game will save. The role of this “masterpiece” was invited to Kiana Reeves (Frank) and Winona Ryder (Lindsey). “So there were two solitudes.” Hacky acting knocks the ground out from under your feet. There was nothing going on, the curvatures and the stupid grins caused confusion on my face. The bed scene is so terrible that I want to scream in horror! Why is it so bad? In the last 3-4 years, Keanu has disappointed me. Everywhere the same face and no emotions, so that's it! I know his sad biography, but then you need to take on a more charismatic actor.
The film is boring, about how two people found each other. But mortal boredom spoils the whole mood. I couldn’t find a single plus in the picture. Everything is bad here: terrible monologues-dialogues, a murderously boring narrative, a not distinguished musical part and the hulking work of the entire film. I would have put 0, but then I remembered that I laughed once, so
1 out of 10
Sweet, romantic comedy 'How to Marry a Bachelor' shot in the theatrical manner, which brings novelty and highlight to the film. The magnificent choice of actors made by Viktor Levin is flawless. It is unusual and striking to see Keanu Reeves in such a cynical image of the social phobia Frank. Beauty Winona Ryder also plays an unusual role - a doomed victim of broken feelings. The guys are good at the role. Everywhere ' put them together' as extra guests at the celebration of life - enchanting wedding Ostolop Whale.
Philosophical themes are saturated with conversations of the heroes, they have long lived, understood a lot and decided for themselves, have long buried dreams and happy days. Two loneliness have come together and come together for a bright future, the remnant of hard lives.
Frank ' Allergy to decency' and Linsey ' Fascist from culture' how can they not ' to consecrate the earth with their rays'? Many interesting phrases - about such can be said - right to the point.
The whole plot is built on the conversations of the main characters Linsey and Frank, invited to the wedding of a man who for them is more an enemy than a friend. They fly in the same plane, live in rooms next to each other, they are put in adjacent places, everything unites and connects these two lost souls. And despite their stiffness, deep and settled despair, they were able to make friends.
Cinema as a beacon of hope for those who have long been reluctant to leave home and have lost meaning in relationships. I don’t know how many people there are in the world, but many of the themes raised in the film are familiar to me and resonated in my heart.
Grace 'How to Marry a Bachelor' is off the scale, and another plus that there is no vulgarity. I think the film will appeal more to the female half of the population, but men should also watch it.
9 out of 10
Sometimes a person is so unsuitable for society that there is no doubt that he is designed exclusively for one person lost in this big world. Frank and Lindsay are two sick individuals caught in the middle of a healthy society. Or vice versa?
People need people.
Wedding is the event that Lindsey dreamed of. A magnificent, pretentious celebration, and where else the groom is her ideal ex. So: her former great love and the current noble festival, where she, in principle, should not be. She came to this holiday is not in her fate to put an end to the relationship with not her fiancé, who has been in their relationship for many years. Even the madman Frank is struck by her crazy behavior. The crazy guy Lindsay's been hooked up with. He pisses her off, and it's mutual. On the plane, in a taxi, in a hotel, at the wedding table – everywhere together. It's not someone or anything that brings them together, it's just an elementary solution to the problem. People who do not fit anywhere have found a common, albeit evil language with each other.
For the entire film, few people will interfere with the communication of these people. Outsiders only occasionally flash on the screen, invading the personal space of Lindsey and Frank. The guests have a holiday, the glorification of love and the dawn of hypocrisy, to which the main characters do not care, because they have a triumph of sarcasm, anger and impotence, which suddenly turns into a bright feeling.
You probably have to be a sociopath, an introvert, a nutcase, or just painfully lonely to make this movie like. To forgive all the sins of this picture, and just take pleasure in watching it. It’s an uneven film, but incredibly calm, unhurried, where the main characters are unpleasant people (despite the fact that they play Reeves and Ryder), who turned out to be pleasant to each other, and in the end, to me.
It’s easy to see why How to Marry a Bachelor can trigger negative emotions after watching. It's hard enough to spend almost 90 minutes in the company of two cynical narcissists. For Frank (Keanu Reeves) and Lindsay (Wynonna Ryder), mutual insults and reflections on the grayness and meaninglessness of life are common topics for conversation. As they interact with each other, the topics become more acute and, although neither of them wants to openly admit it, secular chatter leads to mutual sympathy. Very interesting, because love, as such, is alien to both: Frank never experienced it, and Lindsey’s love experience was negative.
This setup is intended for those who want to watch a romantic comedy, but do not tolerate the sweetness of typical samples of the genre. It's like "Before Dawn," only if its heroines were cynical to the bone, which, I think, slightly dulls the feelings of romanticism, which, apparently, is what the creators wanted. Despite the fact that Keanu and Winona are really cute actors, their characters, in my opinion, are unpleasant enough to worry about their feelings. First of all, because the words from the lips of the characters are the lines of the script, and do not convey the immediacy of real conversations.
The installation is simple. Frank and Lindsay had never seen each other before, but had heard of each other from a mutual acquaintance. They both head to a small resort town where Frank’s half-brother (also Lindsay’s ex-fiancé) marries. A man and a woman are in neighboring seats on the plane, in neighboring rooms in the hotel, and also sit at the same table at the celebration. Incredibly different people have an undisguised dislike for each other, but it does not prevent them from exchanging long, bile-rich monologues and, ultimately, falling in love with each other.
The success (or lack thereof) of How to Marry a Bachelor is independent of the chemistry between the central characters. Strictly speaking, the ability to bring characters to life through dialogue and support a partner is the cornerstone of the tape. Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder did a great job. Unfortunately, natural wit and body language do not always help. When it comes to these most extensive dialogues that the couple have, you can see a higher level of Reeves. Although we all love Keanu, recently his career is going through hard times, and here he still found himself in his native element. Ryder on his background is even somewhat lost; while Reeves pronounces his lines of the script with pleasure, Winona almost whines.
Besides, Winona Ryder’s character doesn’t always make sense. The film shows several times Lindsey’s habit of blowing on houseplants, which may symbolize her desire to share air with something alive, but mostly such details in character somewhat omit her. The best part of Lindy is honesty, bravery and acknowledging her own problems. Which, again, makes her another romantic comedy heroine who can't love life. In other words, Frank, I think, is more "volumeful" against the background of his companion.
“How to Marry a Bachelor” is made in bright colors and with an indispensable jazz soundtrack. The film is made with dignity, but still the best creative moment is to narrow the world down to two characters. Although we hear a lot of gossip about other wedding guests, and even see them, the writers do not give them a word to say. It is likely that the incessant talk of gossipers just made other people dumb. The only words spoken in The Bachelor come from Frank and Lindsay, and from the TV screen.
The story of two cynical characters discovering an unknown sense of love could be annoying, but the tone of How to Marry a Bachelor is so light, and the actors harmonize so well with each other that it is quite possible to forgive the shortcomings. The dialogue here is intellectually romantic, although not real, and the actors analyze every sneeze of their characters, even if their emotions predict a different development. A simple and almost experimental film with two stars, on which all the action is concentrated, is suitable for watching a leisurely weekend. And while the pace here is a bit slow, there is still something refreshing about watching romantic comedy, where most of the genre's techniques are either missing or upside down. Ultimately, when it comes to "anti-romantics," so to speak, "How to Marry a Bachelor" lags far behind "Unbearable Cruelty."
6 out of 10
Strange people or how you always manage to find a person on your own
A bit peculiar movie, even strange with talented Keanu Reeves and Wynonai Ryder. Keanu Reeves I first learned from the series of films 'The Matrix', I consider Keanu Reeves a talented diverse actor who combines dramatic roles and roles in action films, I was delighted with the series of films ' John Wick' and I am looking forward to the third part of this film, and with the career of Winona Ryder I am not familiar, so I will judge her only by playing in this film.
In general, only two people are involved in the film - the characters in the person of Frank (Keanu Reeves) and Lindsay (Wynon Ryder), who accidentally met at the airport and immediately began to exchange barbs in their address. And ironically, the characters collide accidentally, or maybe not, in the same places, such as a hotel, an airplane, a wedding table, a taxi, ah, yes, the original purpose of the trip of the heroes is to attend a wedding in California, and as it turned out, they are going to the same wedding.
It is not surprising why the film is in the genre of spoken comedy, since the film is full of dialogue and conversations, in general, for an hour and a half of timekeeping, so much was said between the characters that enough is enough for a whole book, there are conversations about life, love, work, especially with limited places of action, the actors managed to keep the film on themselves. Also looking at the characters Keanu and Winona, it was clear that they are both emotionally unstable (by the way, based on their interviews, according to them, their characters in the film are similar to themselves).
'How to Marry a Bachelor' - from love to hate - one step, a good film about the meaning of life with good acting from Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder.
This movie is a surprise. After all, nothing, as it would seem at the start, does not portend a deep... Not (again) an incorrect public translation of the title, not a light flirting cover, not even a slogan, and most interestingly, not a trailer!
And then the movie starts talking to you. And it's wonderful! Each story is a separate sketch. All timekeeping can be divided and taken into theatrical sketches of dialogues and monologues. You look, listen and think – how much work it took to find these words in this narrative.
The film is about an adult, he is not vulgar, accurate, daring, moderately funny and concise. He stands out from the crowd, remembers. It can be quoted and recommended.
Infinitely nice, in the current stream of films, to be so pleasantly surprised. And then there is the aftertaste, which occupies a special place in. Thinking about what she heard and played for a couple of days will echo you.
Lindsay and Frank (Wynonna Ryder and Keanu Reeves) are the two main characters in the film Victor Levin 'How to Marry a Bachelor'.
The story is simple - a romantic black comedy about two seemingly completely different people who, by the will of fate, find themselves in one place at the same time, and are forced to communicate, gradually finding some points of contact.
The film is built on dialogue - and that's the undeniable virtue of the film. Even in dubbing, dialogues are very pleasant, and their very essence, the text itself, is impressive. For an hour and a half, the characters have time to discuss almost everything that is possible - the attitude to the wedding they are going to, to weddings in general, all secondary characters, fate, cynicism, religion, films, sex, each other and much more. That is, the layer of raised the bigger, and the way they are described is great.
The interaction of actors is also very organic, Reeves subjectively plays better, Ryder slightly overdoes with the curve, which, of course, against the background of unperturbed Keanu looks very contrasting, but still overkill.
The main claims to the film - filming, editing.
Director Victor Levin, being also a screenwriter of this project, could not competently translate his rather theatrical script into cinema. One gets the impression that they were not shot by professionals - the shots are dry, often cropped, the complete absence of camera movement (this could be a technique, but looks like a marriage, justified only in a scene of sex in nature), terrible color correction. Literally, there can be two frames next to the same stop at the airport, which differ significantly in colors, it cuts the eye so much that it becomes problematic to perceive the game.
Difficulties in the film and with the pace of the narrative - the exposition and the set-up are less successful, but the denouement turned out to be crumpled, because of this, Frank's actions in the end do not seem justified, the finale looks strained, somehow unnatural.
Conclusion: the script is good, you can say that it resembles the style of Woody Allen, but it is ruthlessly poorly implemented, and this makes it even worse.
5 out of 10
“How to Marry a Bachelor” is the second directorial work of the famous serial screenwriter Victor Levin (Cunning Maids, Mean Girl, Mad Men), which, with all its advantages, not everyone will like. Two strangers meet on the way to the same wedding. From the first minutes, they quarrel and hate each other, but over time their views change, and the hostility suddenly changes to mutual sympathy.
The whole film is perceived as a theatrical production in which only two actors participate. It is hard to believe, but for the whole film with the characters, no one else intersects, does not talk, does not conduct discussions and so on. All other characters participate as extras. Throughout the film, we hear and observe the relationship of only the two main characters, where almost the first half of the film she constantly argue, and only then fall in love and the most interesting begins. I personally didn’t like the beginning of the story. Characters are repulsive and even annoying, especially for a girl whose behavior is beyond my patience. But to the final part of the story, when the characters changed, they impressed me quite strongly.
In general, the second half of the film completely pulls the whole film and thanks to which the viewing experience remains very positive. It is worth mentioning that there is practically no action in the film. We are witnessing exceptionally large and versatile dialogues in which the characters vividly express their thoughts, assumptions and arguments. As for the cast (Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder), they did everything possible to anger the audience at the very beginning, and then fall in love with themselves. And that's great! I recommend watching.
We lived a lot, we saw a lot of things in the movies. We know what you did last summer. We know what the lie is, what to do with a dead man in Denver and who framed Roger's rabbit. We figured out what Gilbert Grape was eating, how to tame a dragon (twice) and overheard what men were talking about (three times). Director and screenwriter Victor Levin presents us the film “How to Marry a Bachelor”. Well, let's find out that too.
At the airport, two people collide at the landing gate – he and she. He is attractive, he is damn attractive (I don’t insist, maybe the opposite). They shower each other with caustics and barbs and put up a little on the plane on the basis of a general aversion to nuts in bags. It turns out that both of them are flying to an exotic wedding in Paso Robles, California. He is a half-brother, she is the ex-fiancée of the groom.
He is a marketing specialist at a global corporation, a “culture fascist” who sues companies for actions and statements that “contradict cultural traditions.” He's in number C, she's in number D. He was always a cynic, she was once a romantic. He's Frank, she's Lindsay. They despise each other. They're all clear.
And they're damn verbose. The main value and the only meaning of this film is endless dialogue. Frank and Lindsay don't shut up at the airport, in the plane, in the taxi, in the rooms, in the noisy restaurant hall, in the midst of fun and deception, in the front gardens and vineyards. They literally don’t give a word to the supporting actors – and they silently crawl to the third. They do not stop even when they have sex in a clean field: hurry to see this long scene, fans of the acting skills of Keanu and Winona.
Because of this perpetual sparkling, an analogy comes to mind with Richard Linklater's trilogy (Before Dawn, etc.), but still Frank and Lindsay throw a smaller spark. I will not say what turns out bad: moderately witty and unbanal. Comedic exaggerations are available, but very small, legs do not lift when falling. The heroes who have just met lay out the cards chaotically, talk quickly and, despite the modest timekeeping, manage to walk through life, birth, death, love, family, fate, happiness and self-deception. And that's except for the ongoing conversations driving the plot.
The number two value of this film (I don’t insist, maybe the opposite) is Winona Ryder and Keanu Reeves. Both of their characters roughly match the types developed recently. Winona - nervous, unstable, explosive, vulnerable, but without extreme - there is no reason to bare the wires. Keanu is outwardly loyal to Neo-brutalism. Lindsay immediately notices this and says, “Blazer!” Face!, but his female things rather quickly gropes into his hero human. It turned out John Wick, who repaired the car and petted the dog.
How old are the heroes, history is silent. Winona is 46, and Lindsay is just a bride. Keanu is 54 and Frank's maximism is youthful. So young at heart. Both have learned long roles, both are beautiful, both tend to philosophize. “It’s better to be a strong loser than a weak loser,” says Frank. “Life is just a series of torments, and I don’t want any confusion at all,” Lindsey said.
Of course, Keanu Reeves is not just John Wick or even Wick and Neo. This is well remembered by Victor Levin,
(a) inserting the words “You are the devil’s advocate” into Lindsey’s sugar lips;
b) unnecessarily putting Frank on the edge of an empty bench.
Two coincidences? It's up to you!
The film's pure plot (fabula rasa) is secondary and extremely uncomplicated. The plot twists once or twice and got tired, and where they come from - the plot of the cat cried. Not the plot, but flirting. The ending was a collection of thousands of romantic film stories from 1945 to 1985. But thanks to the cute details (including anthropological ones, but not what you think), the movie looks nice. Light chirping on the background of sunny California vineyards - it is always better than sad bubnez in a gray and dusty metropolis. Dropping everything and running-hair-back to the movies may not be worth it. But wait until Monday and arrange a romantic trip to the movies for two for the price of one – why not?
How to Marry a Bachelor is the sweetest movie in a long time, simple and very cozy.
The film almost entirely consists of dialogues between two characters in different locations, which somehow relate to the wedding to which both are invited.
The characters are simple, but made very nice and charming. The film gives hope to anyone in their early 30s that someone will be fascinated by your oddities. The sensation after the film as after a light alcohol that leaves a relaxed and hangover-free is a bit like "Intern" with Robert De Niro. Play actors like everything around looks harmonious. The jokes are funny, but designed for a mature audience.
If you are a little tired of the midlife crisis or just want to see a nice movie, then this movie is for you.
8 out of 10
This film is about the relationship of a bachelor and an unmarried woman.
It's a talking film. The main characters are talking about the whole movie, or maybe they are joking. They're always together at the wedding. The movie says, “If you want to have sex, then do it.” Bachelors and unmarried women in their 30s also want love, sex and understanding. Keanu Reeves starred in the lead role (he is known for the film The Matrix (1999)). A bachelor and an unmarried woman are very complex people who are used to turning their loneliness into everyday humor.
Loneliness of people over 30 breaks them, that is, makes them emotionally crippled. Of course, bachelors are better off hanging out with unmarried ladies at weddings. Keanu Reeves and Ryder are both singles in the pack, both wanting some understanding and love. With age, a person loses confidence in the people around him. He needs a constant change of events, otherwise stagnation and bachelor humor. The sex between the main characters is very spontaneous. Sex between a man in his 30s and a woman in his 30s is like a stream of clean air, like a stream of clean mountain stream: it refreshes such hardened bachelors.
The genre of this film is rated as a romantic comedy. But for me this is a film-talk (an attempt to return the theater to the audience in HD-quality). The film shows the relationship of bachelors who are already over 30. The meeting of two bachelors, a man and a woman, causes emotional excitement. They do not trust them even after sex (why let someone else into your soul?).
The film is very pessimistic (two bachelors plus sex between them = what will happen, no one knows). It is very difficult for a bachelor who is over 30 to overcome his conservatism, his mental stiffness. This film is intended for those who feel lonely.
Despite the fact that Frank is no longer young, he is in no hurry to walk down the aisle because he values his integrity and freedom. However, he cannot refuse his brother to attend his wedding. Going by plane to the final destination, the hero accidentally meets during the flight with Lindsay, the ex-girlfriend of the groom, who also does not particularly want the event, but still must be there.
Not seeing anything interesting in Frank, over time Lindsey still begins to change his mind. And this is facilitated by unexpected meetings with a man who is always the same where she is. So willy-nilly, and the heroes still have to get closer and understand whether they suit each other or not.
The romantic comedy-melodrama of Viktor Levin does not pretend to be genius. She just entertains the audience with her serenity and humor, which is predictable, but quite pleasant. Do not expect any revelations from the heroes of Reeves and Ryder, there is nothing truly striking here and is not expected. But at the same time, prepare for a whole stream of charisma from actors whose best years of career are behind them, but they still know how to light up.
I was particularly pleased with Reeves. Still, he continues to be the charming guy who is able to kill opponents in cold blood in the image of John Wick and knows how to be a romantic hero of the sample of Frank, who seems to be slightly cynical, but his heart is not so difficult to melt.
Winona Ryder plays the traditional role of a somewhat cocky persona, which reveals itself in the course of the plot and is no longer as strange as it was in the beginning. Everything is standard, but fun.
So 'How to Marry a Bachelor' in every sense a nice movie. Do not expect anything special from him, just let the film distract you. Perhaps this is enough for a good mood.
Honestly, after seeing the title of the film and reading the annotation to it, I went to the movies, expecting to see an unremarkable average comedy about an alpha male who will eventually change her views, and an impregnable girl who is destined to fall in love with the main character by the end of the film. So it was such a pleasant surprise that the film, in fact, is not about that.
This story is primarily about two disappointed people whose lives, in their own opinion, failed and who over the years, each climbed into his shell, trying to protect themselves from the difficult past and frightening future. This story is a stunning mixture of metaphors, irony and touching, close to most of us everyday philosophy. It is a grotesque presentation of all those thoughts, experiences and questions that occupy our minds for years. And in the end, this is the story of the meeting of two loneliness, which risked to appear before each other as they really are without embellishment.
Yes, this is a dialogue film, there are only two characters, all the others are nothing more than scenery. But personally I love dialogue, from beginning to end I was interested in listening to the main characters, I sincerely laughed the whole session and even made a couple of quotes for myself.
Cinema is not for everyone, and yet I sincerely consider it underrated.
10 out of 10
Strangely, the title “How to Marry a Bachelor” let’s say frankly, it is not about this movie, romantic comedy here and does not smell, rather it is a drama of relationships, which is filmed in the format of a mono play with only two actors.
Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder play two losers invited to the wedding of his brother and her ex-lover. A couple from the category of those who were invited just to not offend and by and large nobody needed people. Heroes, middle-aged people, both with their cockroaches, get acquainted at the airport and all the way argue, upon arrival it turns out that the rooms in the hotel and the seats at the table are right next to them, continuing to slander at first among themselves, soon they switch to the groom and bride and everyone around. So gradually it turns out that completely lonely angry people around the world have something in common.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this movie fails miserably at the box office, because the format is more suited to a TV movie or a performance, in the movies it is incredibly boring to watch. Talk, talk, talk. Keanu Reeves is not particularly suited to the role of an angry neurotic, and Ryder played as if constantly under the chauffeur. I wouldn’t say that the film is really bad, there were a couple of good jokes, however, those five people in the cinema after the end looked just woken from a deep sleep.
6 out of 10
A movie that I got into quite by accident. The more pleasant it was on the way out of the hall to understand that 'How to marry a bachelor' - this is a beautiful drama, which is ideal for watching it both with a girl and in the company of friends, not regretting the time spent.
According to the plot, bachelor Frank (Keanu Reeves) and fatal Lindsay (Wynonna Ryder) are invited to the wedding of the same person, to whom they do not harbor passionate feelings, and their first meeting at the airport and does contribute to the emergence of mutual hostility. By chance, they find themselves together, anywhere, as if it were someone’s clever plan. Or fate? The film is incredibly light and cozy. I definitely believe the director is a fan of Woody Allen. Here the operator does not forget to show the local sights, turning California into Italy, but the composer accompanied it with a pleasant melody - very hospitable.
'How to Marry a Bachelor' is a dialogue film. All 90 minutes you will see only 2 main characters, and it is not boring! The dialogues are masterful and incredibly funny! During the viewing you will learn everything you need about the meaning of life, the need for relationships and even more.
The only drawback of the film is that in the last 15-20 minutes it starts a little ' sag' due to the final dialogue, which is a little protracted. The finale is beautiful in its own way.
The most important thing you can see with the naked eye is that from hate to love one step. Who said this would be easy?
Lindsay (Wynonna Ryder) and Frank (Keanu Reeves) met on a plane when they went to Frank's brother's wedding, and immediately hated each other. But they have to go through the wedding trials together - games and pre-wedding entertainment, rehearsal of the ceremony, hotel accommodation and the like. How will it all end?
The phrase destination wedding can be conditionally translated as ' wedding on the road '. This is when the banquet is arranged not at home or in a local restaurant, but choose some beautiful / romantic / fashionable place, such as the California winery. They book a hotel for guests, send a judge, a priest, and everything necessary for the ceremony and the subsequent banquet. The advantage of this ceremony is that drunken guests do not have to drive to get home. Among the disadvantages, which are usually not mentioned, is the need to live together with unfamiliar, unsympathetic, drunk guests.
For cinema, the words 'destination wedding' mean 'romantic comedy' varying degrees of isolation. The trick is that the scriptwriter and director Viktor Levin shot an anti-romcom, or if you like, destruction of the genre ' wedding romantic comedy'.
Lindsay and Frank are superfluous at this fake life party. She is the ex-girlfriend of the groom, he is his half-brother with an allergy to relatives. Nothing unites them except aversion to everything that happens, and this distances them from the rest of the guests. Both entertain themselves by issuing poisonous and wordy comments on everything that happens. The other characters in the film exist only as the object of their mocking remarks. Just talking and nothing else. Even when they are left alone to have sex, they keep talking and talking, now complaining about their lives. Such a technique is sometimes practiced by theater directors, leaving only two actors on stage, who for an hour and a half somehow have to keep the attention of the audience.
Of course, everything in the film rests on the charisma of the two leading actors. Both were once incredibly beautiful, both have certain characteristic features of acting. For Keanu Reeves, this is his famous 'woodiness'. And that's where she came in. Here he plays a cold and narcissistic cynic. Winona Ryder’s peculiarity is her round eyes and upturned eyebrows, making her a kind of stupid girl, which is not true. Here she acts as a lonely, frustrated bitch in men. Whether you like the movie or not depends solely on how much you love these actors. Especially outstanding game from them to expect, as well as enchanting humor or deep reflections on life. The characters themselves are very unpleasant people, no wonder no one wants to communicate with them. So 'charisma' that's pretty strong. The film's most charming character is the bobcat, a wild California cat that Reeves and Ryder's characters encountered on a narrow path. After meeting the sweet couple, she decided it was best to stay away from them. It seems that this was a hidden message from the director to future viewers.
3 out of 10
Ironic trailer. A poster with a smiling couple. The title is typical of romantic comedies that are drawn to review on Friday evening with a glass of wine.
I expected How to Marry a Bachelor to be similar to Letters to Juliet, only for a more mature audience. That will be an easy movie, where you immerse yourself in the atmosphere of the southern country and follow the skirmishes of the main characters. We had an hour and a half of dialogue and dialogue. And these close-up dialogues, shot from one angle, could still be digested if Winona Ryder hadn't so desperately rolled her eyes and frowned when the script requires it and doesn't require it. Her face gives the impression that the heroine is an alcoholist, although the wine appears in the frame only in the middle of the film. Reeves handled the role better. He embodied the dream of any woman - a cynic, a poor man (by his own admission) and a lover of free souvenirs from hotels.
What are their endless dialogues about? Anything. It begins with stretched to the limit mutual insults, ends with each defending his point of view regarding life and relationships. The reasoning of the heroine Ryder is sometimes so long and confusing that it is worth a second to distract yourself on Reeves, and you have already lost the thread. There were some witty quotes, but they can be counted on the fingers.
The rest of the characters are silent extras. In principle, if the director left only the arguments of the main couple about the people around them, it would be more original, and nothing would be lost.
There are cute nuts in the movies like Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper in David O. Russell’s My Boyfriend is Psycho. There, the reasons for their derailment are logically justified and give the characters a special charm. In "How to Marry a Bachelor" Ryder breathes at the flowers, and Reeves growls madly, plugging his finger in his ear. Funny? Maybe. Where and why these quirks are a mystery covered in darkness. And with both seems to be something wrong, but the subject by the end of the film is not disclosed.
What's the movie about? It seems that a person still needs a person, even if one of them denies it.
3 out of 10
"How to Marry a Bachelor," or the original title, "Wedding Ceremony," which you won't really see in the movie.
Short story. Two singles, Frank and Lindsay, go to the same wedding, and almost immediately begin to conflict. But their similarity in irony and misanthropy begins to gradually bring the characters closer together.
The genre is listed as a romantic comedy melodrama, but it is worth preparing that you get to a kind of play where there will be a minimum of action and a maximum of dialogue. Everything around (even people) serves only as a background, focusing on the main stars. Winone and Keanu. It seems that these two are just enjoying each other’s company, and decided to take part in this project more for themselves than for the viewer. The stationarity of the picture and a slight monotony can cause boredom, and can, on the contrary, attract the sensation of a chamber performance.
The film is based entirely on the two main characters. But the duet is grown-up, but still chic Reeves and Ryder is nice to watch. Frank's character is a low-emotional cynic, which is very suitable for Keanu. Emotionality for two goes to the character of Lindsey - the facial expressions of Winona will often resemble her facial expressions during the presentation of the Screen Actors Guild of the USA for the series "Stranger Things", which was discussed on the Internet more actively than the award itself.
To sum up: if anyone wants to look at the chemistry of Keanu and Winona, where these two for an hour and a half swear, flirtatious, sharp, profanity and just talk, not wanting to be too silent, you can try to appreciate this creation. It brings a kind of aesthetic pleasure.
A cynic is a disillusioned romantic.
The author is unknown, but it is said to be Tutankhamun, who was very intelligent.
This film is not worth watching: 1. Children under thirty. 2. People who do not like movies with long dialogue, but prefer actions. 3. Definitely hates melodrama. You're okay, it's just that this piece is not your format, and it won't bring you fun. And that is the main objective of cinema today.
The rest of us can see and enjoy it, just like I did. The pleasure of great, smart and caustic dialogue. Dialogues in which the main characters ridicule everything and everyone: each other, themselves, political correctness, wedding ceremony, relatives, former, the meaning of life etc.
Behind all these conversations and hamstrings hide, like armor, two lonely, broken lives of a man who are afraid to become attached to anyone again (especially the hero Keanu Reeves). They are afraid, but they still need it, because people need it. Not free stuff from a hotel room or a wedding. And they are squeezing, but they are moving closer together.
Winona Ryder was pleased with the game, and the character of a low-emotional cynic perfectly suited Keanu Reeves, who (to be honest) is not a genius in depicting complex characters.
Having escaped briefly from their current images of an action hero in the cruel and dangerous world of killers ' John Wick' and a single mother facing mystical events in the series ' Stranger Things', Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder decided to plunge into something similar to love, and starred in a comedic melodrama. It became interesting to see these actors in roles that they have not resorted to for a long time.
The director and screenwriter was Viktor Levin, who created a very good, in my opinion, film of romantic content ' From 5 to 7. Time of Lovers' with Anton Yelchin in the title role. The new creation of the director was filmed as soon as possible without long rehearsals and other elegance. As a result, we get a pretty watchable movie, which is very lacking event element.
The plot draws our attention to a couple of misanthropes in the person of Frank and Lindsey: each of them for their own reasons is disappointed in the high feeling, which, oddly enough, becomes a reason for rapprochement. In principle, the first hour of the picture can be called entertaining (but not catching 100%): well-written dialogues (about life and death, about man and woman, about love and children, etc.), filled with interesting, vital thoughts that each of us understands, but does not say aloud, since it is not a Comilfo for a decent society; subtle and intellectual humor that makes you laugh, because it is true, and after watching it, good morality strikes you in the head that no matter how terrible, even cynical you are, no matter how many times you understand, but do not say out loudly, because you will always meet the world with hope that you will find your life, you will find it easier. The culmination of this creation is, without exaggeration, one of the coolest scenes of sex in all those films that I ever happened to see.
The last third of the narrative turns quite wrong: the dialogues lose freshness, humor - sharpness, and the denouement completely slides into the predictable finale of the most expensive soap opera, becomes simply boring. Remember the classic 'How Harry Met Sally', which is conceptually similar to the movie we are reviewing. In the work of Rob Rainer there are constant stuffing, not giving the viewer at least a minute to get bored: pimping friends, the cult scene of imitation of orgasm, emotional outbursts from meeting with exes, inventive staging of episodes. Here I complain about the weakness of the above event element in 'How to marry a bachelor'.
In the technical aspect, I want to praise the operator for the beautiful shots: the vineyards DuBost Vineyard undefined Winery became the main location for the filming. And despite the tight production time, everything is completely at the level.
To Kean Reeves and Winone Ryder, already for the fourth time being on the same platform (after 'Dracula', 'Disturbation' and 'Private life of Pippa Lee'), there are no complaints: they played confidently, in moments they reveal their comedic talents in a new way, and the corresponding images turned out to be interesting and vivid.
'How to Marry a Bachelor' is a cozy, conversational and consistent movie that lacked a fuse in order not to slide into mild despondency. But I repeat: you can watch the tape, it is not devoid of weighty advantages, and that very love scene really will not make you regret the time spent (and I am not kidding). Good to see you!
6 out of 10
P.S. And one more help for the viewer: look for the meaning of the title of the review in the film, it is also impressive.
You know those moments when, say, a three-person company is relaxing, where two people get along, they talk and talk, and the third one is a little out of business? The so-called third extra, but without a live teddy bear nearby. If not, then when you watch the tape 'Destination Wedding' with a disgustingly localized and inappropriate title, you will clearly understand this situation.
The film is essentially one big conversation where the locations change and nothing happens. Well, almost nothing. Sometimes a mountain lion appears, and Keanu spills wine on himself. This is the most unexpected. The rest is classic: two selfish, introverted and ironically sarcastically toxic people accidentally converge, understand each other and become imbued with feelings. Simple and simple. The result of this story will be clear after the landing of a small plane at the desired destination. To surprise the tape was in this case something different, but here Victor Levin he drove himself into a dead end, choosing a dialogue comedy theatrical production. Locations and action do not impress the viewer, strong drama, as, for example, in a similar theatrical story a la ' Fences' Washington or ' This is just the end of the world' Dolan, there is no mention here. There are dialogues and interesting characters. And with both details in this journey comes a bright problem.
Initially, everything looks decent: here is an energetic and charming Winona Ryder enters into a verbal spat with a cynical and emotionless Keanu Reeves. Their dialogues are full of hamstrings of each other and, in principle, everyone and everything around them. Gradually, conversations go into the category of everyday wisdom, which will undoubtedly be familiar to many couples. And all nothing, but after a while you realize that the characters say the same thing just in slightly different categories, occupying the same positions and nothing more to offer the viewer can not. Conversations at a simple essence become more complex, where the number of words per square meter of attention of the viewer goes beyond conceivable limits. As a result, the viewer begins to get tired. Listening to an hour and a half of hamstrings, which are thrown one by one in the hope of making the viewer laugh, and reasoning without any movement is not the easiest thing. The fatigue begins to grow. It is especially intensified when you understand that Kianu does not portray a person without emotions at all, but simply cannot play differently. With one face, Neo gets angry, happy, has sex, gets scared and even spills coke on himself. Undoubtedly, it can be regarded as a necessary image of the character, but, for example, at the moment where Winona Ryder begins to scold her new lover for a disgusting face during the act, while the expression Keanu does not change at all, then it is already difficult to think about the brilliant talent Reevza. And why introduce his hero growling chip and nothing to do in humorous terms, using only once, although the prerequisites for this was enough? It doesn't matter. Of course, against this background, Rider blooms. Smooth and brisk, changing twenty grimasses in a few minutes, which reflect all the emotions experienced by her heroine. It is difficult not to give in to the charm Winona. Like Reeves, the viewer clearly will not be able to resist her charms.
By the end of the hour and a half conversation, it seems that time stretched very slowly. Your children managed to grow up, and you yourself get old and forget about good roles Keanu. Levin diligently tried to let the audience not get bored, diluting everything with cute humor and that very everyday wisdom, but it came out with difficulty even, probably, by the standards of the theater. There will certainly be an audience. Couples in relationships, overly emotional older ladies or just lovers of dialogue tapes in the most vivid manifestation of this concept. But the rest, dreaming of a world in which interesting characters conduct dialogues, and not about not very interesting characters leading dialogues against the background of a seemingly existing somewhere out there world, ' How to marry a bachelor' will seem a very difficult and tedious thing, like being stuck in the company of a couple who do not need you at all. Two of them are enough, and you want to leave soon. Who likes to be a third party? The conclusion is quite simple: wish Winona and Kianu happiness and slowly move towards the exit. Rest assured, they won’t even notice your absence.