chintzable I bought this in a 99p shop because it said on the case that it was about "a journey that is relentless, engaging and darkly humorous". It isn't. The half-hour I endured was like being stuck in the company of someone who won't stop talking and believes they are cool and funny, but aren't, and I switched it off prematurely, wishing I had spent my 99p on something worthwhile, like onions.Irritating men jabber nonsense at each other about love, porn and drugs, over what sounds like a really annoying fourteen-year-old's mix-tape. I think the fourteen-year-old may have scripted, edited and directed the movie too. There didn't seem to be a flowing plot as such, just a bunch of random incidents that a teenage boy thinks that "cool" adults do, like shoot each other in an adults-only store. Oh, and Matthew Modine waddles around a lot, pulling smug faces, and talking in a faux cockney accent that even Dick Van Dyke would be embarrassed by.How was anyone given money to make this shambles?

SnoopyStyle Mr. Jack (Matthew Modine) and Sweet Stephen (Callum Blue) travel the streets of L.A. pontificating on various subjects. They go to Bucky (Zach Galifianakis)'s porn shop to buy something special. The first one is free. Philly comes (Paul Adelstein) in to rob the porn store. Police detective Tommy (Adam Baldwin) shoots him in the head and rescues everybody. In his investigation, Tommy meets Norma (Liza Weil). Meanwhile the guys keep traveling.Everybody is acting crazy. How crazy? Zach may be the least crazy one in the movie. It's all very wacky, random, and tiresome. In the only thing that truly matters, this is not funny. Quite frankly, the movie loses all the drive after it leaves the porn shop and Zach. If it stayed in the shop, I could see some interesting wacky things happening instead of the boring wacky things in this movie. Directed by Gregory Dark and written by Robert Dean Klein, I don't know anything about either guy and I don't see anything here to suggest anything good can be expected. This does try to be profound in the end but it's too little too late.

aknot-229-248227 Maybe I can count myself lucky, because I decided to watch this movie because of it's original title: "Little Fish, Strange Pond". I quite often feel like a little fish in a strange pond - a very strange pond. While watching this movie I realized, there probably are quite some people, to whom that pond seem even more strange, which made me laugh - at first. Soon enough one get a feeling. You couldn't predict anything, but you feel this is going from bad to worse and I suddenly was not sure whether I laughed because it was funny or my laughter was plainly hysterical. I saw this movie last week and I was ever since having some thoughts I didn't ever before. I must admit others who have seen this movie might not have been stirred up like me and again others might not have liked being stirred up. I think that's the reason this movie gets a lot of low ratings and yet some excellent ones.

stopthesunshine Just a few words. First, the movie was above average. I like that the director was trying to do something different, but I think he didn't take his weirdness far enough. I'd like to have seen more stylistic camera work, and perhaps better written dialog at times. I mainly signed up to post this: Am I the only one tired of these anti-intellectual pricks coming on here just to say OH I GUESS I'M NOT ARTSY ENOUGH TO GET THIS MOVIE or OH THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO LIKE THIS MOVIE THINK THEY ARE SUPERIOR.How insecure are people who post comments like that? How much of an inferiority complex do you have to have to watch a movie you don't enjoy and then automatically assume that everyone who enjoys it imagines themselves as superior to you? I think my previous sentence might be a bit too long for such people to follow. Translation: YOU INSECURE. OTHER PEOPLE LIKE MOVIE. THAT ALL. GO BED. BETTER YET EAT CHEETO. A LOT CHEETO. Some people enjoy movies (or don't enjoy them (I'm not sure the type of people I'm addressing can understand the concept of digressive parenthetical remarks--particularly parentheses within parentheses--not to mention the double dashes which serve as further parenthetical-type remarks--no doubt this type thinks parentheses are optional and thus when happening upon that first curvy line skips immediately to the last curvy line--thus this type won't know I'm insulting them right here, right now)) without thinking about whether they appear intelligent to others for enjoying said movies. In other words, if you think other people think they are smarter than you because they like a movie---they are probably smarter than you. But not for that reason.