I originally saw Bobby about 4 months ago and hated it. After reading some positive reviews coming out of Venice, I thought I should give it another chance. I saw another test screening of Bobby again tonight, and I wish I could have back the 8 hours (including waiting on line) of my life that I have wasted on this piece of garbage.
Not even the addition of some additional news footage of Bobby Kennedy can save this hollow, vapid film. These good reviews talk about it being meaningful with powerful insights. I don't see them. Every last character is a hackneyed cardboard cutout. They are supposed to represent a microcosm of America, but they are so badly conceived and written they offer nothing beyond a superficial type. There is the angry young black man, the starlet, the tramp, the racist, the deferential negro, the dumb kids, the drunken star, etc. I could go on and on.
The script is unbelievably bad. The structure is slipshod. It feels like they threw the scenes up in the air, spread them around on the floor, gathered them up and then put the movie together in that order. The individual character plots are asinine and predictable. It comes as no great shock William H Macy's hotel manager *spoiler* comes to the rescue of Christian Slater's racist kitchen manager when he is shot , even though they have fought the entire movie. Ugh. The characters are also unbelievable. Is anyone really going to buy Joshua Jackson as the head of Bobby's California campaign? I didn't think so. Ashton Kutcher as a small time drug dealer who operates out of a suite at the posh Ambassador Hotel? Sorry, no.
The dialogue is laughably bad. Ashton Kutcher actually utters the phrase "No you shut up" to an orange! Heather Graham has what is perhaps the most random segue ever when she walks up to Helen Hunt's character (whom she doesn't know) at the party, and says "Oh my God, I love your shows. My friend just left me for some guy, so I'm here by myself". LMAO.
They added in a few scenes involving Martin Sheen and Helen Hunt (Sheen was good as always), but their storyline like all the others is pointless and devoid of any meaning. It basically consists of Helen Hunt trying to figure out which shoes to wear.
Estevez's direction is lazy and unfocused. He hasn't mastered basic camera moves and blocking. Many scenes are clumsily staged and awkwardly put together. The pace doesn't really lag so much as the film jumps around so randomly you never have the chance to get comfortable watching any one scene.
Estevez's use of music is awful. He chooses the most obvious '60s songs to underscore what he wants to be powerfully moving moments. For instance, right before Bobby is murdered, Simon and Garfunkel's The Sounds of Silence plays over silent news footage. This heavy-handed literal use of the song is insulting to Bobby, Simon and Garfunkel and the audience. Estevez uses Mark Isham's bombastic and sentimental score to telegraph EVERY SINGLE "emotional" moment.
The acting is still mostly bad. I had to rank the performances on the info sheet they gave us afterwards. The choices were excellent, very good, good, fair and poor. Most ranged from fair to poor. I had to create a new box labeled "horrible" for Ashton Kutcher.
The poor include Demi Moore, Emilio Estevez, Heather Graham, Nick Cannon, Joy Bryant, Svetlana Metkina, Brian Geraghty, Shia LeBouf, Christian Slater, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and David Krumholz.
The fair included Helen Hunt, William H Macy, Anthony Hopkins, and Harry Belafonte. I liked Laurence Fishburne more this time around but he has such a small part it hardly matters. Freddy Rodriguez and Lindsay Lohan were still very good. Sharon Stone impressed me even more this time around, perhaps that's because the rest of the film was that much more painful the second time.
I will give credit to the costume designer and production designer, who do credible recreations of the era.
The film is at its best when it lets Bobby speak for himself. His words and voice are so commanding and powerful. Unfortunately he is used so very little. He was a great man, and it is a shame this horrible movie was made in his name. He deserved much better.
Not even the addition of some additional news footage of Bobby Kennedy can save this hollow, vapid film. These good reviews talk about it being meaningful with powerful insights. I don't see them. Every last character is a hackneyed cardboard cutout. They are supposed to represent a microcosm of America, but they are so badly conceived and written they offer nothing beyond a superficial type. There is the angry young black man, the starlet, the tramp, the racist, the deferential negro, the dumb kids, the drunken star, etc. I could go on and on.
The script is unbelievably bad. The structure is slipshod. It feels like they threw the scenes up in the air, spread them around on the floor, gathered them up and then put the movie together in that order. The individual character plots are asinine and predictable. It comes as no great shock William H Macy's hotel manager *spoiler* comes to the rescue of Christian Slater's racist kitchen manager when he is shot , even though they have fought the entire movie. Ugh. The characters are also unbelievable. Is anyone really going to buy Joshua Jackson as the head of Bobby's California campaign? I didn't think so. Ashton Kutcher as a small time drug dealer who operates out of a suite at the posh Ambassador Hotel? Sorry, no.
The dialogue is laughably bad. Ashton Kutcher actually utters the phrase "No you shut up" to an orange! Heather Graham has what is perhaps the most random segue ever when she walks up to Helen Hunt's character (whom she doesn't know) at the party, and says "Oh my God, I love your shows. My friend just left me for some guy, so I'm here by myself". LMAO.
They added in a few scenes involving Martin Sheen and Helen Hunt (Sheen was good as always), but their storyline like all the others is pointless and devoid of any meaning. It basically consists of Helen Hunt trying to figure out which shoes to wear.
Estevez's direction is lazy and unfocused. He hasn't mastered basic camera moves and blocking. Many scenes are clumsily staged and awkwardly put together. The pace doesn't really lag so much as the film jumps around so randomly you never have the chance to get comfortable watching any one scene.
Estevez's use of music is awful. He chooses the most obvious '60s songs to underscore what he wants to be powerfully moving moments. For instance, right before Bobby is murdered, Simon and Garfunkel's The Sounds of Silence plays over silent news footage. This heavy-handed literal use of the song is insulting to Bobby, Simon and Garfunkel and the audience. Estevez uses Mark Isham's bombastic and sentimental score to telegraph EVERY SINGLE "emotional" moment.
The acting is still mostly bad. I had to rank the performances on the info sheet they gave us afterwards. The choices were excellent, very good, good, fair and poor. Most ranged from fair to poor. I had to create a new box labeled "horrible" for Ashton Kutcher.
The poor include Demi Moore, Emilio Estevez, Heather Graham, Nick Cannon, Joy Bryant, Svetlana Metkina, Brian Geraghty, Shia LeBouf, Christian Slater, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and David Krumholz.
The fair included Helen Hunt, William H Macy, Anthony Hopkins, and Harry Belafonte. I liked Laurence Fishburne more this time around but he has such a small part it hardly matters. Freddy Rodriguez and Lindsay Lohan were still very good. Sharon Stone impressed me even more this time around, perhaps that's because the rest of the film was that much more painful the second time.
I will give credit to the costume designer and production designer, who do credible recreations of the era.
The film is at its best when it lets Bobby speak for himself. His words and voice are so commanding and powerful. Unfortunately he is used so very little. He was a great man, and it is a shame this horrible movie was made in his name. He deserved much better.
Tell Your Friends