Wrong

Where to start on this one? ... Fate was my main reason for watching this film, but that's a whole other story! I can honestly say I probably wouldn't have watched this Wrong at all going by the DVD cover, but this is one of those occasions I'm glad I did take the time out to see a film.

Most of what you see in Wrong is wrong! If you try and make sense of it you'll just be frustrated, trust me. But amongst the weirdness of the stuff that's wrong there is a very good, humorous, story.

Its hard to compare Wrong to any other film... I'd put it in the same category as films like The Chumscrubber 2005, Lucky 2011, Careless 2007, etc... so if you like weird comedies that are filmed well on a lowish budget, this is one to watch.

Wow, is this a tough one to review. I mean, you usually have a pretty clear idea whether or not you liked what you've just seen. But in the case of "Wrong," I'm just not entirely sure what that is.

The first hitch: it's directed by the same guy who brought you "Rubber." I HATED "Rubber." I wanted to like it, but I just didn't get it. I knew it was requiring me to think outside the box, but I went into thinking it was a horror comedy about a killer tire and nothing more. I shouldn't have to think any harder than that, and it made me mad that it wasn't what I expected. At least this time the description was a little closer to the truth, and I was better prepared. I thought.

It stars Jack Plotnik-who I generally like-as a confused man who has lost his dog, Paul. That's the only easy part to explain. The rest involves weird characters, rain inside office buildings, dog detectives, a crazy nymphomaniac pizza business girl, an aggressive cop and absolutely nothing makes ANY sense. So if you demand logic from your movies, just move along-otherwise you're just going to be frustrated.

But I was determined to try and appreciate what the others who highly rated this saw in it. And some of their insights really helped-especially the person who felt that all of the weirdness was a manifestation of Plotnik's sense of complete loss. They may be on to something. However, getting all the way through that weirdness is the hard part and why it's hard to review. Because it's not a bad film. It really isn't. It's well shot with decent performances. It is fascinating even if you're totally confused. By the time I reached the third act I was okay as it seemed a little less gloomy, and the ending was satisfying.

But it DOES take patience and an open mind. If you have neither, this will not be for you. This is not a comedy but it's not exactly a drama, either. It is a well made film, but certainly in a catagory that's hard to define.

"Wrong" is the new absurdist comedy by Quentin Dupieux a.k.a. Mr. Oizo the French house DJ who serves as the director, the writer, the editor, the cinematographer and the composer. "Wrong" is the follow-up to the 2010 movie "Rubber".

Jack Plotnick stars as a seemingly regular guy who wakes up one day to discover his beloved dog gone. With such a casual premise Dupieux sets out into a very weird journey, trying to deny everything the viewers would think they knew about storytelling. Through a series of bizarre encounters with increasingly insane characters and situations, the protagonist finds himself more and more lost, as the movie grows more and more illogical and surrealist. Jack Plotnick is well-suited for the role of a neurotic guy always on the edge of losing his mind.

But don't be fooled, "Wrong" is not just about wacky characters and non sequiturs (even if it IS very funny). Dupieux never loses the satiric edge, the writing never feels boring or forced, instead it's always quite witty and original. To Dupieux life a nothing but a series of chaotic unpredictabilities, strange inconsistencies, pointless formalities and surreal misunderstandings, all rarely explored in your typical movie, and even if you don't quite share this almost paranoid notion, I think Dupieux' vision is so strong and ingenious, it's very hard not to embrace it.

Wrong is a very unique movie that shows a lot of promise for Quentin Dupieux's future work. I'm actually quite excited to see what he does next, as I found this movie to be a surprisingly big improvement over his previous movie, "Rubber", especially in terms of writing. He really has found his unique style, which I could describe as Monty Python meets Michel Gondry.

Verdict: a pretty funny movie.

Let me start off by saying this, if you have taken a look at the movie poster and shown interest from that alone you will enjoy this film.

Yes its mental and most of the time makes hardly if any sense but still some how delivers.

All the seriously demented one star reviews must be clueless movie hunters to not have seen what was coming. Did they simply see the title with no trailer or poster and then watch the film. Had you no idea what you was getting into? I am a huge fan of movies from the likes of "Nohing (2003)" and although this is not as good its much more mental. The quality of the production was mint and the content is strangely amusing enough to keep you watching. Unless your a one star reviewer that can only live and breath on mainstream crud.

Overall if you have the time or want to freak out a party of friends that do have patients and don't fear the strange please watch this film.

"I want 90 minutes of my life back" Sure thing why not use your next 90 odd minutes to go see the fast and repeated 6 or Twilight 26 where i heard Bella gets neutered.

Surreal, absurd, bizarre... and boring. I wonder if he really had something to say, or he just wanted to be surreal, absurd and bizarre. If he had, I missed it.

5/10