Perhaps I shouldn't review a film I've only seen 15 minutes of (on this), but I need to further offset the (sort-of) favorable reviews here.
If one believes the Wikipedia article (qv), "A Fine Mess" was originally intended as an altogether different film that, after poor previews and studio interference, ended up as the humorless mess we see here. Edwards supposedly urged people /not/ to see it -- so why did he allow his name to appear above the title, as well as take writing/directing credit?
The script is mostly clichéd expository dialog of the sort screenwriters are warned to avoid like the plague. It's so unengaging it's surprising audiences didn't walk out after the first five minutes. (Perhaps they'd fallen asleep.)
This wasn't Edwards' last film, but nothing that followed was of any distinction. His last good film was "Victor/Victoria". For the rest of his career, he was running on empty.
If you have a chance to see "A Fine Mess", by all means do so. I doubt you'll be able to get past the first 15 minutes, even out of curiosity. If so, let me know.
If one believes the Wikipedia article (qv), "A Fine Mess" was originally intended as an altogether different film that, after poor previews and studio interference, ended up as the humorless mess we see here. Edwards supposedly urged people /not/ to see it -- so why did he allow his name to appear above the title, as well as take writing/directing credit?
The script is mostly clichéd expository dialog of the sort screenwriters are warned to avoid like the plague. It's so unengaging it's surprising audiences didn't walk out after the first five minutes. (Perhaps they'd fallen asleep.)
This wasn't Edwards' last film, but nothing that followed was of any distinction. His last good film was "Victor/Victoria". For the rest of his career, he was running on empty.
If you have a chance to see "A Fine Mess", by all means do so. I doubt you'll be able to get past the first 15 minutes, even out of curiosity. If so, let me know.