1950s America is often mythologised as a period both boring and socially cohesive, before things became interesting and decisive in the following decade. And today, there seems to be a entire sub-genre of films interested less in telling the truth than in playing with the myth. 'Suburbicon' is one such movie, a satire of a view of the world that surely no-one takes at face value anymore. The script is by the Coen brothers, and as such, it's a typical black comedy, quite cleverly worked but without much of a heart. For example, racism is a theme, but the film doesn't really feel very angry about racism, more amused with the direct juxtaposition of the very real racism of the period with the idyllic fantasy of suburban life. There's nothing particularly wrong with George Clooney's direction; but no great sense that the film has anything in particular to say.
381 Reviews
Would have been a lot better had the Coens directed it.
Hellmant3 November 2017
'SUBURBICON': Three and a Half Stars (Out of Five)
The new crime-drama/comedy from director George Clooney, and written by Ethan Coen, Joel Coen, Grant Heslov and Clooney (Clooney and Heslov also co-produced the film). It stars Matt Damon as a suburbanite, in a seemingly quiet suburb community, that has to suddenly deal with violent criminals, after his house is broken into by mobster thugs. The movie costars Noah Jupe, Julianne Moore, Glenn Fleshler and Oscar Isaac. It's gotten mixed to negative reviews from critics, and it also underperformed at the Box Office. I enjoyed parts of it, but I do agree that overall the film is a bit of a mess.
The story is set in a quiet small community, that is disrupted when an African American family moves in to their very conservative suburb. Young Nicky Lodge (Jupe) befriends one of his new neighbors, who's about the same age as him, but then he has to deal with criminal thugs breaking into his family's home. Nicky's mother (Moore) is sadly killed, and Nicky doesn't understand why his father (Damon) and aunt (also played by Moore) won't identify the culprits (when the police apprehend them). Things only get more complicated from there, and much more dangerous for Nicky.
The advertisements for this film are extremely misleading, and it's definitely not the movie that I thought I was going to see. Parts of it are well made, and very interesting, and it's also surprisingly dark (especially for a film starring Matt Damon, and directed by George Clooney). I think it would have been a lot better had the Coens directed it though (they're ridiculously better filmmakers than Clooney). As it is, the film tries to blend too many different genres, and social commentary on top of that, and none of it really works. It is a bizarrely interesting movie still (at times) though.
The new crime-drama/comedy from director George Clooney, and written by Ethan Coen, Joel Coen, Grant Heslov and Clooney (Clooney and Heslov also co-produced the film). It stars Matt Damon as a suburbanite, in a seemingly quiet suburb community, that has to suddenly deal with violent criminals, after his house is broken into by mobster thugs. The movie costars Noah Jupe, Julianne Moore, Glenn Fleshler and Oscar Isaac. It's gotten mixed to negative reviews from critics, and it also underperformed at the Box Office. I enjoyed parts of it, but I do agree that overall the film is a bit of a mess.
The story is set in a quiet small community, that is disrupted when an African American family moves in to their very conservative suburb. Young Nicky Lodge (Jupe) befriends one of his new neighbors, who's about the same age as him, but then he has to deal with criminal thugs breaking into his family's home. Nicky's mother (Moore) is sadly killed, and Nicky doesn't understand why his father (Damon) and aunt (also played by Moore) won't identify the culprits (when the police apprehend them). Things only get more complicated from there, and much more dangerous for Nicky.
The advertisements for this film are extremely misleading, and it's definitely not the movie that I thought I was going to see. Parts of it are well made, and very interesting, and it's also surprisingly dark (especially for a film starring Matt Damon, and directed by George Clooney). I think it would have been a lot better had the Coens directed it though (they're ridiculously better filmmakers than Clooney). As it is, the film tries to blend too many different genres, and social commentary on top of that, and none of it really works. It is a bizarrely interesting movie still (at times) though.
A Clash Of Too Many Tones
kjproulx25 September 2017
SPOILER: I'm all for unique and different when it comes to filmmaking, but when a unique film doesn't do anything to intrigue its audience, aside from a consistent tone and setting, then it's not really all that impressive in the end. Suburbicon is George Clooney's latest attempt at direction, and I feel pretty much the same about this film as I did about many of his other works. A tone, story, and time period is all set up, but the way each of his films play out have seemed to leave a lot to be desired in my opinion. That is once again the case with Suburbicon, being a little too confident in itself when it came to presenting a powerful story. Here is why I think you could probably skip this one in theatres, but the effort put into it may warrant a rental if you're looking for something new to watch.
Gardner's family is tested when a group of men invade his home, killing his wife and leaving only his son and sister-in-law alive. Falling for his wife's sister and becoming a complete psychotic and uncontrollable man, this film quickly spirals out of control into a farce of random occurrences. Throughout the first act of this film, it seems like it's going to be a satire that won't hold anything back in terms of wackiness, but that's very quickly thrown out the window, compensating with many subplots of murder and conspiracy. I found myself taken out of the film when the tone would shift this often, making for a very off-putting viewing experience.
Throughout the majority of this film, you're asked to accept the horrible things that the main characters are doing, or just connect with Gardner's young boy on an emotional level, but he's not quite present enough in my opinion. Not until the third act do you really fin yourself caring about some of the characters, which was too late for me. This movie tries far too hard to be clever, funny, and surprising, that it just comes off as forced more often than not. You will find yourself along for a ride of random events and you won't really know who to root for.
I may seem to be ripping this film apart for being un even, but for throughout all its flaws, there are actually quite a few great aspects, especially the sequence involving an appearance by Oscar Isaac. There is a lengthy scene when secrets are revealed and characters begin to evolve and Oscar Isaac elevated every moment of this portion of the film. Up until that point, there really weren't any characters to grasp onto, but the environment around them, along with the sets and the score, always helped to make the film feel more authentic than what its screenplay was presenting. This may sound confusing, but that's due to the fact that this is a very confusing watch, and I feel that many people will agree with me on that account.
From being written by Joel and Ethan Coen (who's recent track record hasn't really impressed me recently), to being competently directed by George Clooney, to having racial undertones to help give the film depth, to showcasing some great moments of comedy, Suburbicon just feels like a huge missed opportunity, due to the talent involved. Matt Damon and Julianne Moore deliver solid performances here and the score by Alexandre Desplat is definitely what sucked me into this movie, even throughout the moments that annoyed me. In the end, I feel as though the positives slightly outweigh the negatives, so I can generously give it a pass. This is about as average as you can get in terms of having a clever setting and premise, only to never fully deliver on either front. Suburbicon isn't quite worth seeing in theatres, but it may please hardcore fans of the Coen brother's past work.
Gardner's family is tested when a group of men invade his home, killing his wife and leaving only his son and sister-in-law alive. Falling for his wife's sister and becoming a complete psychotic and uncontrollable man, this film quickly spirals out of control into a farce of random occurrences. Throughout the first act of this film, it seems like it's going to be a satire that won't hold anything back in terms of wackiness, but that's very quickly thrown out the window, compensating with many subplots of murder and conspiracy. I found myself taken out of the film when the tone would shift this often, making for a very off-putting viewing experience.
Throughout the majority of this film, you're asked to accept the horrible things that the main characters are doing, or just connect with Gardner's young boy on an emotional level, but he's not quite present enough in my opinion. Not until the third act do you really fin yourself caring about some of the characters, which was too late for me. This movie tries far too hard to be clever, funny, and surprising, that it just comes off as forced more often than not. You will find yourself along for a ride of random events and you won't really know who to root for.
I may seem to be ripping this film apart for being un even, but for throughout all its flaws, there are actually quite a few great aspects, especially the sequence involving an appearance by Oscar Isaac. There is a lengthy scene when secrets are revealed and characters begin to evolve and Oscar Isaac elevated every moment of this portion of the film. Up until that point, there really weren't any characters to grasp onto, but the environment around them, along with the sets and the score, always helped to make the film feel more authentic than what its screenplay was presenting. This may sound confusing, but that's due to the fact that this is a very confusing watch, and I feel that many people will agree with me on that account.
From being written by Joel and Ethan Coen (who's recent track record hasn't really impressed me recently), to being competently directed by George Clooney, to having racial undertones to help give the film depth, to showcasing some great moments of comedy, Suburbicon just feels like a huge missed opportunity, due to the talent involved. Matt Damon and Julianne Moore deliver solid performances here and the score by Alexandre Desplat is definitely what sucked me into this movie, even throughout the moments that annoyed me. In the end, I feel as though the positives slightly outweigh the negatives, so I can generously give it a pass. This is about as average as you can get in terms of having a clever setting and premise, only to never fully deliver on either front. Suburbicon isn't quite worth seeing in theatres, but it may please hardcore fans of the Coen brother's past work.
an audacious film about conservative white America
CineMuseFilms5 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Nothing riles the commentariat more than dashed expectations. With George Clooney at the helm of Suburbicon (2017) many expected something special but instead are using much less charitable words. The almost unanimous condemnation of this film is difficult to fathom. When a movie is so widely panned it means either it is a disaster or that it pricks a collective raw nerve somewhere, for some reason. This movie is not a disaster.
Controversially, the film comprises two apparently unrelated plot lines, part of which is based on a true story. Set in 1950s middle class America, Suburbicon was a peaceful all-white neighbourhood until the African-American Mayers family moved in. The white community objects and the local progress association builds a fence to wall off the newcomers. Community anger escalates until permanent crowds are stationed outside the new family's home, harassing them to the point of violence, television coverage, and police intervention. This background story inter-cuts to a neighbouring family, the Gardners, who are in the middle of a home invasion. Two thugs tie up then chloroform the family, in the process killing Mrs Gardner (Julianne Moore). Soon her twin sister Margaret (also Julianne Moore) moves in to be with widower Lodge Gardner (Matt Damon) and son Nicky (Noah Jupe). It is not long before questions are asked why the loving husband doubled the life insurance on his wife. Mafia connections, an insurance fraud assessor, and a police investigator start lifting the lid of this perfect Suburbicon family. The two separate story lines are narratively linked only by Nicky and the Mayers son becoming baseball friends.
This is a brave way to frame a movie. Either storyline is enough to power an entire movie but running both in parallel appears muddled and narratively diffuse. However, if the viewer's frame of reference is raised to the overarching level of conservative white American values, then both stories are intensified by their contrast with the other. Keeping the Mayers community racism story in the background and the Gardners domestic crime story in the foreground makes the audience complicit in a glaring social injustice. The Mayers are anonymous, passive victims who are barely seen while we see much of the angry white mob who self-righteously claim the right to live in a white America. Although the general trajectory of both stories is predictable, there are enough twists and turns to keep the tension rising until the film's finale. Across both stories, there is little subtlety or nuance, and the heavy-handed and obvious symbolism is the film's greatest fault. But for Hollywood cinema, that is not a hanging offence.
This dark comedic drama is engaging and entertaining. It captures the tones, fashions, and décor of the era, and the acting relies on stereotypes rather than character development. None of the characters compel emotional investment, so the space is left open for the action to do the talking. Filming coincided with the 2016 American election and Clooney likes his films to make political statements. Calling this one a failure is rhetorical hyperbole. It is an audacious and innovative approach to telling a bigger story that just won't go away.
Controversially, the film comprises two apparently unrelated plot lines, part of which is based on a true story. Set in 1950s middle class America, Suburbicon was a peaceful all-white neighbourhood until the African-American Mayers family moved in. The white community objects and the local progress association builds a fence to wall off the newcomers. Community anger escalates until permanent crowds are stationed outside the new family's home, harassing them to the point of violence, television coverage, and police intervention. This background story inter-cuts to a neighbouring family, the Gardners, who are in the middle of a home invasion. Two thugs tie up then chloroform the family, in the process killing Mrs Gardner (Julianne Moore). Soon her twin sister Margaret (also Julianne Moore) moves in to be with widower Lodge Gardner (Matt Damon) and son Nicky (Noah Jupe). It is not long before questions are asked why the loving husband doubled the life insurance on his wife. Mafia connections, an insurance fraud assessor, and a police investigator start lifting the lid of this perfect Suburbicon family. The two separate story lines are narratively linked only by Nicky and the Mayers son becoming baseball friends.
This is a brave way to frame a movie. Either storyline is enough to power an entire movie but running both in parallel appears muddled and narratively diffuse. However, if the viewer's frame of reference is raised to the overarching level of conservative white American values, then both stories are intensified by their contrast with the other. Keeping the Mayers community racism story in the background and the Gardners domestic crime story in the foreground makes the audience complicit in a glaring social injustice. The Mayers are anonymous, passive victims who are barely seen while we see much of the angry white mob who self-righteously claim the right to live in a white America. Although the general trajectory of both stories is predictable, there are enough twists and turns to keep the tension rising until the film's finale. Across both stories, there is little subtlety or nuance, and the heavy-handed and obvious symbolism is the film's greatest fault. But for Hollywood cinema, that is not a hanging offence.
This dark comedic drama is engaging and entertaining. It captures the tones, fashions, and décor of the era, and the acting relies on stereotypes rather than character development. None of the characters compel emotional investment, so the space is left open for the action to do the talking. Filming coincided with the 2016 American election and Clooney likes his films to make political statements. Calling this one a failure is rhetorical hyperbole. It is an audacious and innovative approach to telling a bigger story that just won't go away.
Quite good
fil-nik0921 March 2018
I was postponing watching this film several times because of the low note here - currently at 5.5
However, I would give this film a rating 7 as I think it was interesting and entertaining from the beginning til the end. Beginning with two Juliennes was kinda funny. I think it was really clever to not know from the beginning what has happened at the dinner/night scene. I admit it got me curious and not many films make me think anything.
The whole black family thing ...well, I am from Europe, so we do not have those 'tensions' which also are showing in comments of people here - so I will not say anything particular about it - only that it did not serve a big purpose in the film in my opinion.
For me, the film is quite good.
However, I would give this film a rating 7 as I think it was interesting and entertaining from the beginning til the end. Beginning with two Juliennes was kinda funny. I think it was really clever to not know from the beginning what has happened at the dinner/night scene. I admit it got me curious and not many films make me think anything.
The whole black family thing ...well, I am from Europe, so we do not have those 'tensions' which also are showing in comments of people here - so I will not say anything particular about it - only that it did not serve a big purpose in the film in my opinion.
For me, the film is quite good.
This Was Just Not Good
trublu21514 September 2017
I'm a huge fan of the Coen Brothers. To me, cinema doesn't get much better than No Country for Old Men or Burn After Reading or Raising Arizona...you get the idea. So when I heard that George Clooney was directing their next original script, naturally I couldn't wait to see it. Fast track a year and a half later and here we are. Clooney proved to me that it takes much more than a Coen Bros script to make it a Coen Bros film. Suburbicon is one of the few films that will come about where the talent attached to the project is so overwhelming and plentiful but the final product is so mediocre and bordering on bad that it leaves you scratching your head.
The film is very beautiful to start off. The cinematography is very crisp and extremely colorful which makes the setting of the 50s suburbs seemingly pop even more so. The production design and basically anything of a technical aspect is amazingly done here by traditional standards. So why is Suburbicon falling flat? Very simple: Clooney is woefully unqualified to direct a Coen Bros script as are most people. This feels like it was made by someone who watched Fargo and Burn After Reading a dozen times and decided to make this. It feels like it is an imitation and, by the end of the film, that is all it turns out to be. The cast is even really dull despite a fantastic performance from Julianne Moore. Damon can't decide whether to play it funny or serious and that really plays a big part in the violence of the film. It is comically set up but brutally executed. It doesn't feel right at all and it makes for a very tough watch.
Overall, Suburbicon is a film that will probably leave your mind as quickly as it came. It is a very forgettable film. It is a frustrating piece of cinema as well because we will always be left with the thoughts of what could have been. With the level of talent and star power, Suburbicon has no business being as dull and ragged as it is especially because in a technical sense, the film is great. But with Clooney's misguided direction and Matt Damon's very erratic performance, Suburbicon is a miss of the most disappointing fashion.
The film is very beautiful to start off. The cinematography is very crisp and extremely colorful which makes the setting of the 50s suburbs seemingly pop even more so. The production design and basically anything of a technical aspect is amazingly done here by traditional standards. So why is Suburbicon falling flat? Very simple: Clooney is woefully unqualified to direct a Coen Bros script as are most people. This feels like it was made by someone who watched Fargo and Burn After Reading a dozen times and decided to make this. It feels like it is an imitation and, by the end of the film, that is all it turns out to be. The cast is even really dull despite a fantastic performance from Julianne Moore. Damon can't decide whether to play it funny or serious and that really plays a big part in the violence of the film. It is comically set up but brutally executed. It doesn't feel right at all and it makes for a very tough watch.
Overall, Suburbicon is a film that will probably leave your mind as quickly as it came. It is a very forgettable film. It is a frustrating piece of cinema as well because we will always be left with the thoughts of what could have been. With the level of talent and star power, Suburbicon has no business being as dull and ragged as it is especially because in a technical sense, the film is great. But with Clooney's misguided direction and Matt Damon's very erratic performance, Suburbicon is a miss of the most disappointing fashion.
Entertaining enough
fletcherhutchison17 December 2019
Not great but enough to keep me watching, thought it might have been a bit darker and might have appealed a bit more if it was. Too much like Edward Sissorhands turn Truman show.
Damon does pretty well as always but the kid in the film is just woeful, has witnessed half a dozen murders and then proceeds to go throw a baseball in the backyard with his friend like its another magical day in Suburbicon. Didn't leave the best taste in my mouth at the end of the film.
6 Stars for being different, could have been a whole lot better though!
Damon does pretty well as always but the kid in the film is just woeful, has witnessed half a dozen murders and then proceeds to go throw a baseball in the backyard with his friend like its another magical day in Suburbicon. Didn't leave the best taste in my mouth at the end of the film.
6 Stars for being different, could have been a whole lot better though!
Wait...What?
matthewssilverhammer3 November 2017
Suburbicon is weird. Like, really weird. And not in a good way. Like drinking coffee out of a beer can that's also spiked with orange juice. And man, is it trying its darndest to make something unique and intentional. Unfortunately, I don't know if I've ever seen a movie swing so hard and end up whiffing even harder. Suburbicon is not just weird; it's also just plain bad. To describe it would be an act of futility. It's sort of about a family dealing with death. It's sort of about racism. It's sort of a mafia comedy. It's sort of a satire of the American dream. It's sort of a familial thriller. It has some great production design, and Oscar Isaac is a blast in his short screen time. Otherwise, it's one of the most obnoxious critiques of the dark suburban underbelly I've ever seen. I have no idea how someone is supposed to plug into this movie. Predictable when trying to be sneaky, dull when trying to be exciting, awkward when trying to be funny; it gives us no character to latch onto, no story to intrigue us, no humor to overcome its darkness, and no clarity or focus to its themes. Honestly, Mr. Clooney, what is this movie? Is it a quirky comedy? Is it a dark thriller? Is it a corny message on love, or a cynical study of American justice? Whatever it is, I'll tell you what it isn't: a movie worth watching.
Suburbicon is a very dark comedy
hollywoodhernandez-7086827 October 2017
Suburbicon is a very dark comedy from the mind of director George Clooney. Clooney has a very twisted sense of humor. The gags about murder and death run rampant in the movie, yet some how we can't help but laugh at the misfortune that occurs to the characters in Suburbicon.
Suburbicon is a fictitious suburban town in the late 1950's where things are slow and the worries about the traffic and the hustle of the big city are far away. Then the unthinkable happens to the members of the small community; a black family moves to town!
We soon see the "true colors" of the people in the small community as they ban together to "over come" and run the professional black family out of town. Meanwhile, next door to the protesting mob, a home invasion takes place at the Gardner house (Matt Damon and Julianne Moore). Damon's wife is killed by the burglars and he and his sister-in-law pick up the pieces after the crime, along with his young son Nicky (Noah Jupe), and start a new life. But things take a twist and we find out that Damon's character is not what he appears to be to everyone in the community of Suburbicon.
The movie is written by Clooney, along with the Cohen Brothers (O Brother, Where Art Thou) and is about as satirical as you can get. It drips with irony and is a social commentary film about this country, both in the 1950's and still even today.
Even with it's violence and dark theme this will be a film that will be discussed at Oscar time, perhaps even as Best Movie. There is no denying the quality of the film; however, it wasn't a movie I really enjoyed. For me it was too dark and too violent. It's rated "R" for violence and sexual situations and runs at 1 hour and 44 minutes.
There were parts of the movie that made me howl with laughter and the black family living in suburbia was another good twist on the tale, but overall the movie wasn't an enjoyable experience. My sense of decency made it hard for me to laugh at all the murders and violence in the movie.
On my "Hollywood Popcorn Scale" I rate Suburbicon a LARGE. Hollywood Hernandez
Suburbicon is a fictitious suburban town in the late 1950's where things are slow and the worries about the traffic and the hustle of the big city are far away. Then the unthinkable happens to the members of the small community; a black family moves to town!
We soon see the "true colors" of the people in the small community as they ban together to "over come" and run the professional black family out of town. Meanwhile, next door to the protesting mob, a home invasion takes place at the Gardner house (Matt Damon and Julianne Moore). Damon's wife is killed by the burglars and he and his sister-in-law pick up the pieces after the crime, along with his young son Nicky (Noah Jupe), and start a new life. But things take a twist and we find out that Damon's character is not what he appears to be to everyone in the community of Suburbicon.
The movie is written by Clooney, along with the Cohen Brothers (O Brother, Where Art Thou) and is about as satirical as you can get. It drips with irony and is a social commentary film about this country, both in the 1950's and still even today.
Even with it's violence and dark theme this will be a film that will be discussed at Oscar time, perhaps even as Best Movie. There is no denying the quality of the film; however, it wasn't a movie I really enjoyed. For me it was too dark and too violent. It's rated "R" for violence and sexual situations and runs at 1 hour and 44 minutes.
There were parts of the movie that made me howl with laughter and the black family living in suburbia was another good twist on the tale, but overall the movie wasn't an enjoyable experience. My sense of decency made it hard for me to laugh at all the murders and violence in the movie.
On my "Hollywood Popcorn Scale" I rate Suburbicon a LARGE. Hollywood Hernandez
It's a Misguided, Mismatched Disaster
Jared_Andrews28 October 2017
George Clooney's latest directorial effort, overflows with Oscar-level talent both on camera and off. A quick glance at the credits list on IMDb would make moviegoers flush with excitement. But sadly, Suburbicon is one of those cases in which a movie with a loaded cast teamed with a star director and writers turns out awkwardly, embarrassingly wrong. It's unfunny, ill-fitting, frustrating, pretentious, tone deaf and abysmal. In other words, this movie is a disaster.
In addition to Clooney directing and the Coen brothers writing, the movie features the tremendously talented Julianne Moore and Matt Damon, who both feel like they're going through the motions of a walk-through day at practice. The stoicism of Moore and Damon's dorky dimwitted schtick both feel tired—been there done that. Given the limitations bestowed on them and their stiff characters, their half-hearted efforts are understandable, but nonetheless disappointing.
Suburbicon's greatest flaw is its mismatched identity. It doesn't know what it wants to be. Attempting to weld together two incompatible story lines, it throws the audience for a loop. Is it a socially conscious tale of racial mistreatment with the backdrop of a "perfect" all-white 1950s neighborhood, or is it a satirical Fargo-like family scam gone darkly and comically awry? A movie can't be both, so it succeeds at neither. Simply put, it just doesn't work.
Clooney and Coen brothers have produced sweet music on past projects, but they have different goals here. The Coens provide a zany violent spice as Clooney strives for an earnest political commentary zest. The combination leaves the movie with an incongruous and unpleasant flavor.
Mercifully, there are a few highlights. The consistently excellent Oscar Isaac provides a charming liveliness and the promising young Noah Jupe delivers a helping of humanity to a movie that is mostly starved of decency.
Alongside the scam family's disarray, a more disturbing story takes place as the town's first black family arrives (remember, this is the 1950s). The quiet and respectable family is tormented, subtly at first, rapidly escalating to a mob scene complete with violence, vandalism and fire. What is this disgusting side story doing in the movie? What purpose does it serve? Seemingly none. It's condescending and obnoxious. The father of the tormented family doesn't even receive a single speaking line. This story's inclusion a clumsy attempt to depict racism that uses the black actors as mere showpieces, rather than meaningful, developed characters.
The racial subplot is so vague and shallow that it winds up feeling empty. The rest of the movie isn't much different. This movie was not worth any of these stars' time and it's certainly not worth yours.
In addition to Clooney directing and the Coen brothers writing, the movie features the tremendously talented Julianne Moore and Matt Damon, who both feel like they're going through the motions of a walk-through day at practice. The stoicism of Moore and Damon's dorky dimwitted schtick both feel tired—been there done that. Given the limitations bestowed on them and their stiff characters, their half-hearted efforts are understandable, but nonetheless disappointing.
Suburbicon's greatest flaw is its mismatched identity. It doesn't know what it wants to be. Attempting to weld together two incompatible story lines, it throws the audience for a loop. Is it a socially conscious tale of racial mistreatment with the backdrop of a "perfect" all-white 1950s neighborhood, or is it a satirical Fargo-like family scam gone darkly and comically awry? A movie can't be both, so it succeeds at neither. Simply put, it just doesn't work.
Clooney and Coen brothers have produced sweet music on past projects, but they have different goals here. The Coens provide a zany violent spice as Clooney strives for an earnest political commentary zest. The combination leaves the movie with an incongruous and unpleasant flavor.
Mercifully, there are a few highlights. The consistently excellent Oscar Isaac provides a charming liveliness and the promising young Noah Jupe delivers a helping of humanity to a movie that is mostly starved of decency.
Alongside the scam family's disarray, a more disturbing story takes place as the town's first black family arrives (remember, this is the 1950s). The quiet and respectable family is tormented, subtly at first, rapidly escalating to a mob scene complete with violence, vandalism and fire. What is this disgusting side story doing in the movie? What purpose does it serve? Seemingly none. It's condescending and obnoxious. The father of the tormented family doesn't even receive a single speaking line. This story's inclusion a clumsy attempt to depict racism that uses the black actors as mere showpieces, rather than meaningful, developed characters.
The racial subplot is so vague and shallow that it winds up feeling empty. The rest of the movie isn't much different. This movie was not worth any of these stars' time and it's certainly not worth yours.
Why do people think this movie is terrible?
dawnlscherer29 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I was really disappointed when I started seeing all kinds of bad reviews for Suburbicon pop up. I was so excited to see it! I finally watched it today and I don't know what you guys are talking about. I felt it was a pretty spot on dark comedy. I didn't think it was overly gruesome. I didn't think it was confusing. I didn't think loose ends were left. On the social plane, I've seen reviews that accuse the movie of being racially inflammatory. I've also seen reviews that took the opposite stance and said that the black and white story lines never came together and the black story line was simply used as a backdrop. I don't agree. I thought it was rather entertaining that this white- washed community just attributed all the violence taking place to the new black family in the neighborhood, rather than realizing they had a couple of white sociopaths living next door. It showed how prejudice just promotes ignorance. Pretty solid message if you ask me..
Unfairly Reviewed
johnharapa26 January 2021
I have a policy that I won't watch a movie unless it has an IMDB rating of 6 or more. With a 5.7 rating, I almost gave this movie a wide berth.
That is, until I learned the Cohen brothers wrote this, George Clooney directed, and of course it's difficult to not enjoy any Matt Damon flick -,period.
Near impossible to walk away from all that - no?
I'm so glad I chose to ignore the 5.7 rating. Everything is teriffic, wonderful script, director doesn't dominate the direction and the kid is sublime. Stole the show,
Matt Damon doesn't disappoint either.
Was gonna give this a solid 8 but I'll change to 9 to nudge to 6+ where it deserves to be.
WATCH IT - YOU WON'T REGRET !!
That is, until I learned the Cohen brothers wrote this, George Clooney directed, and of course it's difficult to not enjoy any Matt Damon flick -,period.
Near impossible to walk away from all that - no?
I'm so glad I chose to ignore the 5.7 rating. Everything is teriffic, wonderful script, director doesn't dominate the direction and the kid is sublime. Stole the show,
Matt Damon doesn't disappoint either.
Was gonna give this a solid 8 but I'll change to 9 to nudge to 6+ where it deserves to be.
WATCH IT - YOU WON'T REGRET !!
How Bad Could it Be?
prisberg-4071827 October 2017
Let me start by saying I love movies, I love Coen Bros, Wes Anderson style cinema. My family has watched at least 2 Coen Brothers movies each holiday season for many years. We quote lines literally, all of the time. Suberbicon is so slow, so meaningless, so gratuitous, that it is actually confusing to me as to why Matt Damon and George Clooney would have consented to the screenplay. Do the Coens now possess such cult like power that they can make a movie this bad, with great actors who must just shrug and say, "It must be great. otherwise the Coens would not film it"
Why is it so bad? It is slow, not funny or satirical, but sad and predictable, with dialogue straight out of a Marvel Comic book, and character development to match. Walking out of the theater, the comments were far more interesting than the movie. My favorite, a simple loud booo when the credits started to roll. Clearly, the worst effort the Coen Brothers have hatched.
Why is it so bad? It is slow, not funny or satirical, but sad and predictable, with dialogue straight out of a Marvel Comic book, and character development to match. Walking out of the theater, the comments were far more interesting than the movie. My favorite, a simple loud booo when the credits started to roll. Clearly, the worst effort the Coen Brothers have hatched.
Good dark drama, I'm glad it triggered the racists
anthony-lysenko30 November 2017
You can tell by the amount of vitriol posted here that the racists are triggered by the portrayal of actual 50's racism, as depicted in the film. The film deals with a lot of dark undercurrents of the 50's society - racism, mafia/contracted hits, family secrets etc that dwell beneath the white picket fence facade of 50's suburbia. The racist trumptard reviewers are upset that the film shows how given the "state rights to discriminate" a white community turns onto minorities - with violence, bigotry and discrimination. "Them blacks need to educate and better themselves" - this tag line often said by someone without high school diploma - could have been twitted by Trump. Very thought provoking and adroit film for those with IQs over 80.
Did not reach full potential
ssstbob2 August 2019
Glad the ticket was free, wish I got paid to endure it though.
akinchris8424 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
OK, I just got out of the advanced screening of this movie, I saw the IMDb ratings drop a few points in the time it took me to drive home. I can't blame the voters. In fact, as we were leaving the staff asked if we had any comments about the movie, I winced as if in pain, my buddy was perplexed, and the guy in front of us said and I quote, "Don't make a part two."
This movie should not hit theaters, maybe go to cable t.v. On a boring Tuesday night when nothing else is on.
Now, I put the spoiler warning and I bet you are wondering what the movie was about. Well, that is how you feel in the movie. The plot takes forever to kick in.
The quick run through, 1950's/60's suburbia (can catch that in the name) black family moves in the town. Town goes in an uproar, someone breaks into Matt Damon's house kills his wife.
Yes, there is zero correlation between the black family moving in and Matt Damon's wife getting murdered. In fact, you watch the movie and you will see the black family actually plays no significant part in the movie, they are just there for filler and to politicize the movie.
So now the wife is dead and you are wondering why. You actually spent the first half of the movie wondering why. Spoiler, life insurance scam.
Matt falls in love with his wife's sister, Matt hires hit-man, hit- man kill wife, Now the hit-man want their money, the life insurance company sees through the scam. People start dying, and the credits begin rolling.
You have no connection to the characters on the screen, you try to feel bad for the kid in the movie, but he is so emotionless you can't really feel bad for him. It makes it even more difficult to feel bad when your brain is confused because the writers/actors/director can't decide if they want the movie to be funny or serious. In fact the only person I thought was even remotely interesting was Uncle Mitch, but he only has about 2 minutes of screen time.
If I could speed summarize this movie, I would almost want to call it a murder mystery with a men who stare at goats twist, but it doesn't really click with whatever this movie was.
Rated 2 because the acting was decent at least.
This movie should not hit theaters, maybe go to cable t.v. On a boring Tuesday night when nothing else is on.
Now, I put the spoiler warning and I bet you are wondering what the movie was about. Well, that is how you feel in the movie. The plot takes forever to kick in.
The quick run through, 1950's/60's suburbia (can catch that in the name) black family moves in the town. Town goes in an uproar, someone breaks into Matt Damon's house kills his wife.
Yes, there is zero correlation between the black family moving in and Matt Damon's wife getting murdered. In fact, you watch the movie and you will see the black family actually plays no significant part in the movie, they are just there for filler and to politicize the movie.
So now the wife is dead and you are wondering why. You actually spent the first half of the movie wondering why. Spoiler, life insurance scam.
Matt falls in love with his wife's sister, Matt hires hit-man, hit- man kill wife, Now the hit-man want their money, the life insurance company sees through the scam. People start dying, and the credits begin rolling.
You have no connection to the characters on the screen, you try to feel bad for the kid in the movie, but he is so emotionless you can't really feel bad for him. It makes it even more difficult to feel bad when your brain is confused because the writers/actors/director can't decide if they want the movie to be funny or serious. In fact the only person I thought was even remotely interesting was Uncle Mitch, but he only has about 2 minutes of screen time.
If I could speed summarize this movie, I would almost want to call it a murder mystery with a men who stare at goats twist, but it doesn't really click with whatever this movie was.
Rated 2 because the acting was decent at least.
Good Noir Movie
fierroluciano26 July 2018
It´s so funny to see people giving this movie 1 star and others 10 or 9 stars.
As in most cases, the true lies in the middle. To me is a 6 to 7 out of 10
Suburbicon is a good noir movie.
If you liked movies like Fargo, blood simple you´re probably going to enjoy this one too. Yes, it´s true it starts a little bit slow but overall has a decent rhythm
Matt Damon, Julian Moore and Oscar Isaac deliver a solid performance and George Clooney does his best to make the brothers Coen proud.
So, is Suburbicon a masterpiece? No. Is Suburbicon a bad or awful movie? The answer is no neither
Deeply Disappointing
glavonnetay27 October 2017
Full of unresolved conflicts and senseless scenarios. Drags along with no payoff on any level. One of the main issues throughout this movie was never hinted at in previews I saw. Had I known this topic would be so pervasive, I'd had never considered seeing this movie.
Potential for a good movie was lost by failure to bother tying in, resolving, explaining, or reconciling any of the multiple story-lines. I could find no redeeming qualities in this movie. Moreover, it's an unforgivable waste of Matt Damon, Julianne Moore, and my time.
Potential for a good movie was lost by failure to bother tying in, resolving, explaining, or reconciling any of the multiple story-lines. I could find no redeeming qualities in this movie. Moreover, it's an unforgivable waste of Matt Damon, Julianne Moore, and my time.
nowhere near as bad as you may have heard, but not without problems
Quinoa19848 November 2017
Let's get some buts out of the way: Suburbicon is a bit of a Frankenstein's monster of a comic, sincere, horror, revenge-noir-dark insert-word-here sorta racial satire, but it's not as monstrous as one might expect given the reviews. This is clearly the work of two sets of creative teams - Joel and Ethan Coen, and then George Clooney and Grant Heslov - but it's not so stark a difference as to make the Coen's contribution seem so diminutive (as was the case with Unbroken, which still puzzles me how they got a credit on it). What works in the film most feels the most Coens-y, but at the same time we live in a world now where three seasons of Fargo the TV series exist (though with the Coens as exec producers, it's really the brain-child of Noah Hawley) which, while not perfect, delves into that same distinct world of wretched people mixed with some good people in shady-horrible crimes and moral uncertainty. In short, I'm not surprised this didn't do well.
I think part of the problem for me goes to the premise, since it's established but seems a bit unclear: there's this Pleasantville-ish(?) town called Suburbicon in the 1950's (I should think it's after Rosa Parks but I'm also not sure how much actual history goes into play here), where people from all across the country - yes, including Mississippi, though an accent can't be found - and it's as white as the driven snow. So, naturally, when the one black family moves in to town, they make Rock Ridge in Blazing Saddles look rather pleasant and corn-pone. No, somehow many, many white people spend every day/night outside this black family's house and act like there's the second coming of Lucifer (because, you know, there's those things like miscegenation and mixing of the races). Meanwhile, there's an inconsistency early on (not major, but it's there) when little Nicky's mother (or Aunt, they kinda look the same, y'know) tells him to go play catch with the new black boy just across the way since, well, shouldn't that be the last thing she tells him and he finds the boy his own way?
But nevermind - this is where the movie doesn't work, but I get the intention of it, of course I do, since the signs are as bright as Batman's light through your window. Right now the racial tensions in America are exploding again, and I'm sure there's still plenty to mine for satirical purposes (lord knows we got a great dose of it earlier this year with Get Out). But the black family, except for the little boy who, uh, finds a small snake (symbol!) and is pleasant enough, don't have any character to them, and everything with this is presented as metaphor.
It doesn't jibe with the rest of the film, which is dark and comic but still presented as realistic and with characters who are drawn to such a point as we know the Coens are terrific at. Why not make them actual people instead of stand-ins in an allegory? If you strip away the crime plot on its own, it could work much better with some writing - or, better yet, not have the conceit of this town in the first place, which is meant to also have the air of fantasy but... what's the context? *Where* in America *is* this? Pleasantville didn't need to address that, but Suburbicon does (and, to be fair, that may be on the Coens too).
On to the main story, where Damon and Moore (and Moore - again, Fargo just sort of did this last season, but I digress) and son one night get a home invasion, they're chloroformed, and the mother dies. Tragic, and it leads into what one might suspect is coming: Damon and (sister/living, Rose) Moore are scheming to get life insurance money and as for Nicky, well, he might have to be rid of too in some way. The framing at least is right, Clooney knows that much, and since it's primarily from the kid's point of view this works well. I like the Coens dark view of the world, and this may be one of their darkest. That's another thing that may be turning people off, whether it's critics or audiences: even compared to their other work, this is bleak as all get out.
That could be why Clooney and Heslov wanted to tie it into to racial disparity, but maybe it's just too nasty already with its main storyline. America has the air of s***-headedness all around it, with this little boy, his uncle, and I guess the black family as the only decent characters around. It also works though that Clooney gets strong performances, which we'd expect, but Jupe is also a nice find as Nicky - he kind of has to be, as he holds much of the film on his little shoulders, and his arc, however slim it might seem, is there and is satisfying. Extra kudos should go to Oscar Isaac who has two scenes and, as one might expect, steals the show (the trailer made that clear - just a sip of a coffee cup does that).
I think that I actually left Suburbicon with more positive feelings than not based mostly on the fact that the script still has the tightness and drawing-you-in sense that the Coens can do with their dramas and thrillers (not as one of their best, certainly not Ladykillers though), but ultimately there is that weird backdrop that is screaming at you when it shouldn't. Perhaps if the black family and the racial strife had been played realistically, it could have made for a better contrast against the horrible-no-good Gardner household. But who has time for subtlety? I can hear the ghost of Stanley Kramer shouting, "dial it back a notch, fellas!"
I think part of the problem for me goes to the premise, since it's established but seems a bit unclear: there's this Pleasantville-ish(?) town called Suburbicon in the 1950's (I should think it's after Rosa Parks but I'm also not sure how much actual history goes into play here), where people from all across the country - yes, including Mississippi, though an accent can't be found - and it's as white as the driven snow. So, naturally, when the one black family moves in to town, they make Rock Ridge in Blazing Saddles look rather pleasant and corn-pone. No, somehow many, many white people spend every day/night outside this black family's house and act like there's the second coming of Lucifer (because, you know, there's those things like miscegenation and mixing of the races). Meanwhile, there's an inconsistency early on (not major, but it's there) when little Nicky's mother (or Aunt, they kinda look the same, y'know) tells him to go play catch with the new black boy just across the way since, well, shouldn't that be the last thing she tells him and he finds the boy his own way?
But nevermind - this is where the movie doesn't work, but I get the intention of it, of course I do, since the signs are as bright as Batman's light through your window. Right now the racial tensions in America are exploding again, and I'm sure there's still plenty to mine for satirical purposes (lord knows we got a great dose of it earlier this year with Get Out). But the black family, except for the little boy who, uh, finds a small snake (symbol!) and is pleasant enough, don't have any character to them, and everything with this is presented as metaphor.
It doesn't jibe with the rest of the film, which is dark and comic but still presented as realistic and with characters who are drawn to such a point as we know the Coens are terrific at. Why not make them actual people instead of stand-ins in an allegory? If you strip away the crime plot on its own, it could work much better with some writing - or, better yet, not have the conceit of this town in the first place, which is meant to also have the air of fantasy but... what's the context? *Where* in America *is* this? Pleasantville didn't need to address that, but Suburbicon does (and, to be fair, that may be on the Coens too).
On to the main story, where Damon and Moore (and Moore - again, Fargo just sort of did this last season, but I digress) and son one night get a home invasion, they're chloroformed, and the mother dies. Tragic, and it leads into what one might suspect is coming: Damon and (sister/living, Rose) Moore are scheming to get life insurance money and as for Nicky, well, he might have to be rid of too in some way. The framing at least is right, Clooney knows that much, and since it's primarily from the kid's point of view this works well. I like the Coens dark view of the world, and this may be one of their darkest. That's another thing that may be turning people off, whether it's critics or audiences: even compared to their other work, this is bleak as all get out.
That could be why Clooney and Heslov wanted to tie it into to racial disparity, but maybe it's just too nasty already with its main storyline. America has the air of s***-headedness all around it, with this little boy, his uncle, and I guess the black family as the only decent characters around. It also works though that Clooney gets strong performances, which we'd expect, but Jupe is also a nice find as Nicky - he kind of has to be, as he holds much of the film on his little shoulders, and his arc, however slim it might seem, is there and is satisfying. Extra kudos should go to Oscar Isaac who has two scenes and, as one might expect, steals the show (the trailer made that clear - just a sip of a coffee cup does that).
I think that I actually left Suburbicon with more positive feelings than not based mostly on the fact that the script still has the tightness and drawing-you-in sense that the Coens can do with their dramas and thrillers (not as one of their best, certainly not Ladykillers though), but ultimately there is that weird backdrop that is screaming at you when it shouldn't. Perhaps if the black family and the racial strife had been played realistically, it could have made for a better contrast against the horrible-no-good Gardner household. But who has time for subtlety? I can hear the ghost of Stanley Kramer shouting, "dial it back a notch, fellas!"
They tried but failed...
mikipryor-123 October 2017
This was just awful.... tiresome, predictable and boring. I wanted to love it, but there was nothing to even like. Top talent in every category but it fell flat, like a soufflé that did not rise. Satire should be funny, but there were few laughs. Irony may be too sophisticated to pull in an audience. It felt like something was just off - timing? Editing? It dragged on and on without reason. So sad, it coulda been a contender.
Another "Blood Simple" and a bit more
Monsieur_Rioux7 February 2018
Warning: Spoilers
IMDB really must try and do something about "reviews that just attack movies for so called political bias. Same thing happened with The Post.
This was a highly enjoyable movie from the entertainment value to the "makes your blood boil" counter story.
It really was like watching another Blood Simple, also by the Coens.
Another review asked "Is this a social commentary about racism in suburbia? Or in this a murder mystery of some sort?" and then said it tried to be all and was neither.
How about it was actually both, with the attacks on the black family while in the neighbourhood there was something evil going on under their noses perpetrated by a white family?
How about it was actually both, with the attacks on the black family while in the neighbourhood there was something evil going on under their noses perpetrated by a white family?
Interesting Plot.
chris-555255 November 2017
A great movie. Don't understand why it got bad reviews. Interesting plot. Somehow a mirror of the US society in the fifties and even today. A typical Cohen Brothers scenario. An excellent acting performance by the boy. The recreation of the atmosphere of the fifties is very accurate. Overall a good production that keeps you focused.
The Coens should really direct their own scripts
AlsExGal28 October 2017
In general, I think the Coens are best when they have full auteur-like control over the tone, dialogue, and direction of a movie. They write clever snappy scripts, but they tend to fall flat for me without their direction. I actually enjoyed the main story for awhile, but every beat was so predictable. Also the storyline about the African American Meyer family, whose presence in white 50s suburbia horrifies the neighbors when they are the most normal people in the neighborhood, feels like it should have been its own movie instead of a subplot. Especially knowing that they were based on a real family does them injustice since we didn't get any character development at all, making it hard to care. Oddly, the Meyer family subplot wasn't in the original Coens' script. You can tell there are the makings of an interesting film just beneath the surface, but that is not what made it to the screen.
The Coen Bros. are probably my favorite screenwriters, so this was a must see for me. Being said, this is just a budget Fargo that was all Clooney'd up. This would have been a better movie if it starred Oscar Isaac as a claims investigator trying to figure out what happened to Matt Damon's wife. He could even be crooked. The way we learned information was so boring an un-cinematic.
Clooney has fallen a long way from Good Night and Good Luck. It's a good thing he was already selected for an AFI Life Achievement award before this was released.
I give it 3/10 for great acting which was, alas, to no avail, and good cinematography.
The Coen Bros. are probably my favorite screenwriters, so this was a must see for me. Being said, this is just a budget Fargo that was all Clooney'd up. This would have been a better movie if it starred Oscar Isaac as a claims investigator trying to figure out what happened to Matt Damon's wife. He could even be crooked. The way we learned information was so boring an un-cinematic.
Clooney has fallen a long way from Good Night and Good Luck. It's a good thing he was already selected for an AFI Life Achievement award before this was released.
I give it 3/10 for great acting which was, alas, to no avail, and good cinematography.
An extended metaphor that thinks you're stupid
blatherskitenoir28 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
First: the trailer does not match the film. I thought it would be Wes Anderson meets Last House of the Left, and many people will walk in to the theater expecting a zany, if dark, revenge comedy and be utterly disappointed with the serious social commentary picture this film actually is.
Suburbicon is presented as an ideal, modern society in a nicely wrapped, suburban package. It's clean, it's new, there is no poverty, and nothing really bad happens there, just good clean American values.
This is where the Gardner family lives. Hardworking husband with a good job, loving stay at home wife, little baseball-loving Nicky, their son, and a doting auntie. A perfect little family.
But there's a feeling of Stepford-wrongness that just keeps increasing.
A peaceable black family moves in to the white enclave and the friendly neighborhood swiftly decays into a screaming pit of racist violence.
Meanwhile, just across the street, truly evil acts are being ignored.
The Gardner's are held hostage in their home by thugs, and what seems like a tragedy is just the lid coming off a rotting pile of putrid garbage that keeps getting deeper and deeper.
While the minorities are hounded and blamed for every wrong by the mobs, the nice, white family literally murders someone in the streets--and no one notices or cares.
Heavy-handed with the biblical symbolism, and shoving the blatantly foiled families in your face, the film would have been workable, though smug with itself, if the film makers hadn't given in to the temptation of the obviously symbolic ending that turns the film from edgy and disturbing to preachy and overbearing.
It's upsetting how close this film comes to being one of the truly great movies, while still falling so short.
Suburbicon is presented as an ideal, modern society in a nicely wrapped, suburban package. It's clean, it's new, there is no poverty, and nothing really bad happens there, just good clean American values.
This is where the Gardner family lives. Hardworking husband with a good job, loving stay at home wife, little baseball-loving Nicky, their son, and a doting auntie. A perfect little family.
But there's a feeling of Stepford-wrongness that just keeps increasing.
A peaceable black family moves in to the white enclave and the friendly neighborhood swiftly decays into a screaming pit of racist violence.
Meanwhile, just across the street, truly evil acts are being ignored.
The Gardner's are held hostage in their home by thugs, and what seems like a tragedy is just the lid coming off a rotting pile of putrid garbage that keeps getting deeper and deeper.
While the minorities are hounded and blamed for every wrong by the mobs, the nice, white family literally murders someone in the streets--and no one notices or cares.
Heavy-handed with the biblical symbolism, and shoving the blatantly foiled families in your face, the film would have been workable, though smug with itself, if the film makers hadn't given in to the temptation of the obviously symbolic ending that turns the film from edgy and disturbing to preachy and overbearing.
It's upsetting how close this film comes to being one of the truly great movies, while still falling so short.
One of the must-sees of the year
TheDragonTrader6 December 2017
Racism and hypocrisy boiled down to one town called Suburbicon. A "friendly" place where everyone is a (excuse me) jerk, where no one can be him-/herself and where fake facades hide the rotten truth underneath. Slowly the movie strips down this mask piece by piece until all is exposed.
It's an hilarious satire with an Hitchcockian tension.
After Clooney brought out 'Hail, Caesar!', I seriously doubted whether his next would be any better (because let's face it, that one was just not what it could have been), but this years "Suburbicon" really made my evening tonight. Not only did the Coen brothers do a great job with the screenplay, and not only did George excel in directing this one, but also we see Matt Damon and Julianne Moore at their best. And let's not forget to give some credit to the always brilliant Alexandre Desplat who took care of the music that - also this time - perfectly sets the tone for the scenes.
Go see it for yourself!
And yes, I know, why take my word for it. After all, there are many terribly negative reviews to be read. Just don't listen to them. First go see it for yourself and then you can judge. Come on... what are you waiting for? Get out of you lazy chair or bed or... wherever you're reading this review from. Go see it and just enjoy it.
It's an hilarious satire with an Hitchcockian tension.
After Clooney brought out 'Hail, Caesar!', I seriously doubted whether his next would be any better (because let's face it, that one was just not what it could have been), but this years "Suburbicon" really made my evening tonight. Not only did the Coen brothers do a great job with the screenplay, and not only did George excel in directing this one, but also we see Matt Damon and Julianne Moore at their best. And let's not forget to give some credit to the always brilliant Alexandre Desplat who took care of the music that - also this time - perfectly sets the tone for the scenes.
Go see it for yourself!
And yes, I know, why take my word for it. After all, there are many terribly negative reviews to be read. Just don't listen to them. First go see it for yourself and then you can judge. Come on... what are you waiting for? Get out of you lazy chair or bed or... wherever you're reading this review from. Go see it and just enjoy it.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
