Fogbound

Of course, that basically means it's not enjoyable at all, however I'm sure the writer or director or both or whomever was going for some kind of artistic merit or to make one of those psychedelic movies, though there was nothing psychedelic about it. It just wreaked of independent film. So, if you're into that, where the story progression is so awful you need to check Tinder, where 3 stories are suppose to weave and make sense, where things do happen but do they really?, ugh, then maybe you'll enjoy this one. I was just not in the mood for it, just wanted to watch some Luke Perry acting. The acting was decent, well played even, by all parties, but it just went nowhere. I had to sit through a trite, boring couples therapy for 90 minutes which felt like longer. I feel bad giving this film the review I'm giving because maybe it's just my mood. Maybe it's a great artistic piece or commentary and I'm just not in the mood to give it a chance, looking for the same old Hollywood 3 act story and therefore I'm not giving this film the credit it deserves just because I'm in the mood for a different kind of movie. Maybe, but then if that were true, how come nobody else ever reviewed this film for the first 14 years of it existing until now? I imagine it wasn't well received. Therefore I imagine I am correct. Heck, I loved Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, I enjoyed Being John Malkovic. I can get into weird movies. This must just be then, bad.