The Angriest Man in Brooklyn
Released: 2013.
Director: Phil Alden Robinson.
Cast: Robin Williams, Mila Kunis, Peter Dinkladge.
Plenty, apparently. Especially if you are Henry Attman (Robin Williams). Since he lost his son he hates everything. Ironically, his anger does create some comedy, however if he wants to be angry at something he should be angry at the script. Or the sub optimal support acting.
The film centres around two main characters, Henry Attmann (Williams and Dr Sharon Gill (Mila Kunis). Attman, as the title suggests, is angry. At everything. Everything in Brooklyn. Apparently this concept is hilarious. Gill is a doctor who finds herself telling Attman that he has 90 minutes to live, even though he does not. Apparently this is also conducive to mirth. Or at least I think thats the idea.
The film follows Dr Gill as she chases Attman around Brooklyn to confess that she lied on a hilarious whim and to convince him to go to hospital as, low and behold, he is actually ill. And so we follow them around Brooklyn, just missing each other until they eventually cross paths. Attman has to face up to some truths, some good, some bad along the way.
There are some genuinely funny moments in the film but these are few and far between. The calibre of the main actors mean this film should of been much stronger than it is. It falls short of the comedy standards that we are used to from Kunis and Williams. Williams character feels two dimensional in this film and the viewer can struggle to identify or believe the character. It's a far cry from Mrs Doubtfire. It feels like more of a Flubber. This can be put down to the quality of the film premise and the script, rather than Williams abilities. There is a sense that he is making the most of a mediocre product.
Kunis is more believable as the slightly overwhelmed director, however you get a similar feeling that she is flogging a dead horse. As with Williams, this is far from the standard we have seen in her best film ventures such as Ted or Friends with Benefits. One saving grace is her final angry outburst during the finale of the film. Potentially the funniest point of the whole picture.
Despite this, the film may be viewed as an easy Sunday evening watch. Little investment is needed to be able to enjoy (that might be too strong a word) the simplicity and basic 'Own Brand Value Product' feeling that the film emits. In fact, too much investment may result in you turning the film off. It may even make you angry.
Released: 2013.
Director: Phil Alden Robinson.
Cast: Robin Williams, Mila Kunis, Peter Dinkladge.
Plenty, apparently. Especially if you are Henry Attman (Robin Williams). Since he lost his son he hates everything. Ironically, his anger does create some comedy, however if he wants to be angry at something he should be angry at the script. Or the sub optimal support acting.
The film centres around two main characters, Henry Attmann (Williams and Dr Sharon Gill (Mila Kunis). Attman, as the title suggests, is angry. At everything. Everything in Brooklyn. Apparently this concept is hilarious. Gill is a doctor who finds herself telling Attman that he has 90 minutes to live, even though he does not. Apparently this is also conducive to mirth. Or at least I think thats the idea.
The film follows Dr Gill as she chases Attman around Brooklyn to confess that she lied on a hilarious whim and to convince him to go to hospital as, low and behold, he is actually ill. And so we follow them around Brooklyn, just missing each other until they eventually cross paths. Attman has to face up to some truths, some good, some bad along the way.
There are some genuinely funny moments in the film but these are few and far between. The calibre of the main actors mean this film should of been much stronger than it is. It falls short of the comedy standards that we are used to from Kunis and Williams. Williams character feels two dimensional in this film and the viewer can struggle to identify or believe the character. It's a far cry from Mrs Doubtfire. It feels like more of a Flubber. This can be put down to the quality of the film premise and the script, rather than Williams abilities. There is a sense that he is making the most of a mediocre product.
Kunis is more believable as the slightly overwhelmed director, however you get a similar feeling that she is flogging a dead horse. As with Williams, this is far from the standard we have seen in her best film ventures such as Ted or Friends with Benefits. One saving grace is her final angry outburst during the finale of the film. Potentially the funniest point of the whole picture.
Despite this, the film may be viewed as an easy Sunday evening watch. Little investment is needed to be able to enjoy (that might be too strong a word) the simplicity and basic 'Own Brand Value Product' feeling that the film emits. In fact, too much investment may result in you turning the film off. It may even make you angry.