The Leisure Class

I think that once a little time has separated THE LEISURE CLASS from the trumped up drama and cheap "reality" of Project Green Light, the film will be treated a little more fairly.

Not that it's a good film. It mostly isn't.

The whole first half is filled with unearned character motivations, plagued by pacing problems and tedious to the point of boredom, particularly anytime Tom Bell is talking. Bell's character is almost insufferable. An alcoholic so destructive to any social situation he's in that he must be mentally I'll. This could be seen as a pretty ambitious character for a social satire, except that it's all meaningless, which is most evident when he turns out to be a good guy in tune with his flaws for the tidy ending. So the bell character ends up neither being enjoyable nor consistent.

Where the film does deserve some credit is in its thematic ambition, its mean spirit and... the hunting room. Now this is the scene everyone complains about the most, but it's the only part of the movie that actually worked on a substantive level for me. Once the tone of the film grows darker and the cast descends into the basement the film tilts towards the brilliant. This is in large part due to the amazing performance by Bruce Davison. To be fair, Davison is the only actor with a real character to work with in this film. A character that's been hiding his true ugly-resentful-misogynist nature all along. He is the leisure class. Corrupt, selfish and old- world to a fault. And as he reveals himself, Davison gives it his all, almost saving the movie for me.

But don't worry, after that it's pretty much back to its sloppy ways as it rushes towards an unearned resolution.

A side note, Bridget Regan turns in a strong performance that lives almost entirely in her subtle reactions, mostly because she doesn't have a lot to work with.

I just finished watching HBO's latest season of Project Greenlight and it's resulting movie, The Leisure Class. Because of editing, and well you know TV, I'm not sure whether the director or the producer was the bigger problem with this endeavor. The show was entertaining, the movie was not. While the acting was solid, with decent performances all around, this dark comedy was not funny. The story was not interesting or new but you could see the actors trying to work with what was essentially a stale script. It looked like exactly what it is, a low budget film from a first time director who thinks way to highly of himself.

I'd watch the show and skip the movie. Yet another big "Meh" a for Project Greenlight film and this falls completely on the director and producer.

Like nearly everyone I watched PGL and had to finish the thought by seeing the final product. The first time I sat down with it I couldn't get past the first 15 minutes, but when I returned later I got through the whole film somehow, mostly comparing PGL content with screen content.

For me, it just wasn't funny. At all. I didn't really like any of the characters (except perhaps the over-the-top Dad) and much of the dialogue was just odd and unrealistic. I got very tired of Leonard (Tom Bell) and I think he was supposed to be lovable and quirky but instead was annoying and overwhelming in every scene. It seemed he was the star, not Fiona or William/Charles or even the story. I dunno, even writing about this lackluster bland-fest has left me unmotivated to even finish this review. Skip this one folks.

I have watched this movie 4 or 5 times on HBO However, it was only after noticing one or two scenes that looked somehow familiar first viewing that we realized it was the Green Light movie project. The films title wasn't mentioned very much in the Greenlight series..it was just "the film"

The critics of this movie seem to be Greenlight Runners Up who failed to get the award. Since all their comments have nothing to do with the movie but are a critique surrounding its creation. The plot scenario is hilarious,.... the British humor is where I grew up.

Lots of sour grapes in rotten tomatoes.

,

...It's a Reality TV Programme.

Jason Mann was cast as the Bad Guy / Scaepgoat and sometimes so was Effie. The real villains were Marc Joubert and perhaps Ben and Matt - who all did everything to appear nice, level headed rather than honest. Effie suffered for being to honest and blunt. We all have agendas and she was too willing to show all her cards which worked against her a lot.

The reason why this film has been rated so low is because people are mixing their personal opinion of Jason and the Film. These are two separate things. Jason is no different to any other director - yes he had a vision and he was very single minded about it and most good directors are. Sometimes that works out and other times it does not. His only problem is that of course he was entitled but you're only as entitled as what others allow you to be and Matt, Ben and HBO all colluded in that self delusion.

Nonetheless lets talk about the film. It isn't very funny, that's true. In fact it's quite boring and laborious to watch. It's not a stinker though and isn't as bad as people have painted it. I've seen far, far worse first time films and the directors have gone on to make other more competent films.

Basically the biggest problem is that it feels as though they shot a first draft of a screenplay rather than something more advanced. The weakest part of the film are the two leads, especially Ed Weeks (Charles) who is so limited as an actor that I was baffled he was picked as a lead. In the original Short an actor called David Manson played the lead - more successfully I feel. Ed Weeks failed to bring any life to the character and failed to have more than 2 expressions throughout the movie. Everything seemed non-consequential to him. Because he couldn't act at being in love properly and his performance wasn't believable then he had to say it through clumsy dialogue...lazy acting.

Bridget Regan who plays Fiona made the best of poor dialogue and character development . Props to Bruce Davison who it felt like he was carrying the whole thing. He has been criticised for over-acting but at least he brought some kind of absurdity to the piece. I think he deserves credit - also for a poorly written character.

The film does look like a film - it looks expensive. So that's a plus and I think underneath there - perhaps a few drafts later was a good film. Right now it's forgettable. I think Jason is capable and I am sure he'll be given lots of opportunities to make right in the future. With more time and working with realistic limitations he might come up with something decent.

One last point: Going back to the series - I hope this is a lesson learnt that White dudes picking other white dudes to make film does not a good film make - let's try looking elsewhere next time - let's see what surprises we discover as surely they have nothing to lose now.