|
|
Post by Vits on Jun 3, 2019 11:07:41 GMT
There's a common misconception about observational humor. You're not supposed to just reference something mundane; that's how you start. You then build a joke from it. In WINE COUNTRY, the characters go on and on about random meaningless things and, each time, the punchline seems to be the reference itself. There's also the issue of relevance. You see, during these past 15 years, it's become common to see comedies with a lot of ad-libbed dialogue. The actors are told the main idea of what the dialogue should be in each scene. They're told that, no matter how self-contained the scene may feel, there should still be something in the dialogue that ties into the main plot, which should still feel as complete and varied as any other comedy. In most of the scenes here, the setting is irrelevant. The comedic conversations could happen anytime and anywhere. It's like watching a series of sketches. Look, I'm sure these actresses had a blast working on SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE (I had a blast seeing them), but this is a different medium. Also, at least that show has high concepts and every joke is tied into them; it doesn't just rely on dialogue about random things. Even though I almost didn't laugh at all, a series of sketch-like scenes might've still been tolerable in a shorter movie but, at 103 minutes, it feels as long as the Wine Route 62. The lighting is so bright it's flat and the editing at times is amateur. You know how movies usually show the main characters having a falling-out right before the climax? In this movie, it happens when there are 40 minutes left. I was a little intrigued. I thought maybe the following scenes would subvert my expectations. Nope. The characters make up and have a similar fight when there are 20 minutes left. 1/10 ------------------------------------- You can read comments of other movies in my blog.
|
|