Avis des utilisateurs

WORST. MOVIE. I could tell by opening credits this would be unbearable. I only watched 12 minutes and regretted every second.

So I too was tricked into thinking this would be good based on Alec Baldwin, the way the synopsis was written and Netflix advertising (#blah blah blah of Netflix today). And just like other people on here - about 20 minutes in I came to IMDB to see what have I gotten myself into and there it was - a score of 3. An accurate score of 3 and I don't even remembered how it ended.

This is the absolute WORST movie I have seen in a VERY LONG time. I wish I had read the reviews prior to wasting money and time! There is no dialogue for long parts of it just loud music. Not to put down movies which truly ARE artistic and beautifully done, but this "thriller/drama" neither thrills or has any drama. I wanted to throw my tv across the room at times. If I can stop one person from wasting a moment of their lives on this BORING, STUPID, DUMBFEST, it will be worth my time to post this. I can't believe they got very talented Sienna Miller and Alec Baldwin to film this. It's SO beneath their usual fare. They did the best they could in this HOT MESS!

I have never written a review....ever...anywhere for anything. This movie made me do it. Here's a short list of things I'd rather do than to have watched this movie. 1. Unblocked punch in the face by Mike Tyson. 2. Cross country trip with Ray Charles, he drives. 3. Barbecue with Jeffery Dahmer. 4. Attend college courses with Cardi B as my professor. 5. Use lit fire crackers as ear plugs.

I said short list, but I could go on. If they haven't done it already, I hope everyone involved in this movie has slapped themselves in the face....hard.

DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME.

Peace and love.

I wish we had looked at the ratings prior to watching. This doesn't even qualify as a film.

That was insanely terrible. What was Alec Baldwin thinking? Why the hell did he agree to be in this movie? I bet he was so pissed off after watching the final cut. It literally felt like torture getting through the opening credits and first scene. The trailer totally fooled me. This looked like it was going to be a pretty good movie. Nope! It was the exact opposite. I turned it off about 45 minutes in. I'm surprised I got that far. All this movie consists of is several scenes of drawn out dialogue. Nothing happens in this movie, nothing. Who actually likes movies like this? Do yourself a favor and pass in this one. 1 star 👎👎

Enough said. Except my review is too short, so uuuuugggghh

This is by far the worst movie I've ever watched. Complete waste of time. I am wondering how they got Alec Baldwin to cast, this movie decreases his credibility. The most entertainment I received from this movie was after it ended and I read these reviews saying how terrible it was. I regret not utilizing this app prior to watching, I would've saved an hour of my life. DO NOT WATCH! Thankful it was only an hour wasted. Als

This movie reminds me a lot of a job I had back in the '80s. I was one of the few people in the city to have decent video equipment and was approached by a writer/director to do the camerawork on what he said was "going to take the world by storm." I thought throughout the entire process that he was obviously on some potent drugs because his "movie" was a concoction of dysjointed scenes and meaningless dialogue - but hey, I was being paid very handsomely for simply pointing my camera at where he wanted it pointed, so I was in no position to complain.

This drivel we're faced with today though, I DO have reason to complain - rather than getting paid to make it, I had to pay (in both time and money) to watch it.

Just as my experience nearly four decades ago, "An Imperfect Murder" AKA "The Private Life of a Modern Woman" has only a feintly discernible story, far too many meaningless shots, far too much meaningless dialogue, and direction which suggests it was a mission of love by someone with zero cinematic (or even home movie for that matter) experience.

All in all, this would be great if it was a 5-10 minute short - in that environment the visual dysjointedness and minuscule story would be perfect. As it stands though at 71 minutes, it is utterly abhorrent and would've been a waste of resources even if it was committed directly to video. Even the average 30-second TV advertisement has more substance.

The actors did what they needed to do - their performances can't be faulted, though their willingness to work for such a pathetic production should be condemned.

The only person to be praised here is whoever supplies James Toback with his drugs - they must me damned potent to have elicited such a deep and complete disconnection from reality.

Netflix promised last year that the reason they would be raising their prices is to get better movies... Well this movie sucked big-time. I probably got maybe 5-10 minutes into it and I couldn't I couldn't do it. The opera music got so annoying.

Aside from being pointless and painful to watch, this "film" is insanely pretentious. It entails a laundry list of pseudo-intellectual devices: The cacophony of loud opera music; the dizzying use of split screens to forcibly inject the Haywain Triptych into the plot; protracted dialogue scenes that involve actors telling each other how clever they are (likely needed since no other evidence of their supposed intelligence exists within the plot). This was like a poor student film.

Yes, the word painted was intentional since the paintings and the music at the opening were rather compelling. Sienna Miller's Vera character was beyond provocative, believable and quite compelling. Alec Baldwin and Charles Grodin were interesting, unique and also pretty compelling. No other actors would have interpreted their roles quite the same way. And no film with that many compelling aspects deserves a three out of ten star rating.

The dialogue was also quite good and believable, throughout. The situation was a touch over the top but credible enough for anyone to say that it could realistically happen. It could, and it almost did happen to someone I'm close to, many years ago. She would not be happy if I got into specifics on a public page but the fact is, when she was in a similar situation, she thought hard about doing what Vera did. I'm sure she wasn't the only one.

With all respect to this great writer, who I truly admire and respect, the fault in this film, and the reason for the bad reviews, in my opinion, is James Toback. Not James the author, of course. The writer of brilliant films like The (original) Gambler and Bugsy, at his worst is still far superior to most screenwriters of today, at their best. The problem is James, as an actor. His character was grating and annoying and I couldn't wait for his tedious scenes to end so we could get back to the compelling characters, the excellent dialogue and the rather interesting film.

Honestly, I think Toback's scenes could be cut out completely without losing anything, except length. It almost feels like the film was too short so he shot some last minute scenes with himself playing opposite the leading lady. Yes, the film was one of the shortest dramas of its kind, at least since early talkies. Editing anything out would make it into more of a short film than a feature. However, editing out every hint of Toback's character and leaving the rest exactly as it is would make this into a much closer to perfect film.

When I think about all the good Charles Grodin roles, I'm actually surprised there were so many. The Heartbreak Kid, Seems Like Old Times, Heaven Can Wait, Heart & Souls and Midnight Run were all pretty fantastic. His one scene here, in his final scene, shows his acting chops as well as any of them. If the film had been regarded higher, Grodin's performance might have actually been considered for awards.

So my question for Mister Toback is, would you prefer a three star seventy two minute short feature or an eight star fifty minute extended short? Try it without your scenes, release it to festivals and my bet is, it receives high praise. My own eight star rating is for every scene in which the truly gifted and eminent writer, James Toback, doesn't try to be an actor.

I often come to IMDB after watching a movie I find special for some reason. Just for its public score. I was not expecting too much for this one but I was surprised by the thrashing. I wonder what most people expect from cinema. This is an originally crafted film that I watched eagerly. I woke up the next morning reviewing mentally some of the scenes and the director's/writer's decisions. The film is relatively short and staged practically in one large beautiful apartment room. Acting is mostly great. Even when it is almost non acting as in the case of the Carl character/real person. The concept of the movie is very simple and anyone can relate to it: your conscience is your fiercest warden. The succession of scenes is not exactly chronological. But if you do not try to make sense of everything immediately it flows naturally, even if at the end you are not able to answer all the questions about the movie. There is a side topic which seems to be wedged into the the film: old age and natural human decay. But if I think of how it goes into the plot I can find a defensible theory of why it is there and why the Carl character is also about conscience, crime and getting on with your life (or not). Note: I watched it on FilmIn, a platform for quality/alternative/international cinema and series. So, I guess the movie was what I was looking for, despite being an American one with a mainstream actor such as Alec Baldwin.

After suffering through the opening credits, this movie continues to disappoint. My wife and I think the lines might have been made up along the way. I don't see how any actor would read the dialogue and agree to be a part of it. We should have stopped watching five minutes in. We paid $7.99 to rent it. I would pay $100.00 to have my wasted time back. The worst movie ever!

When I'm old and my grandchildren ask me, "Grandma, what was 2020 like?" I'm gonna tell them, "First there was COVID, and we thought things were really bad. Then came this movie called 'An Imperfect Murder' and I knew nothing could ever be worse".

Where to even start with this tissue thin piece? Star Sienna Miller seemed very confused-not only about what was happening, but also how she wandered into her role as a meandering actress.

Trying to rationalize his four minutes or so here, apparently Alec Baldwin is worried all of his kids are destined for med school. Ivy League med school.

Just so you know my leanings (to the chagrin of an ex or two), I'm all over art house, experimental and sad clown of life films. Endings optional, short on plot, slow and/or talky, etc., I'll watch all manner of...stuff.

I'm not sure there was any real stuff here, with the exception of Miller's luxe apartment and a wrenching scene from Charles Grodin as Miller's crumbling grandpa. Do we buy the fab digs, yet nothing but on-street magical parking for her zippy Mercedes SUV?

About as much as I bought our actress without a point of view, living in the third person. I stuck with it, but lost interest before the ending of this brief but overlong nothing film, and suddenly the credits were rolling. Did I rewind it?

No. Because it was already obvious nothing happened. Poor, poor Charles!

We feel that this was originally an audition by Sienna Miller for a movie part and James Toback decided to go avant-garde with it. And was mostly successful. It's like almost the entire movie was ad-libbed.

Is the Renaissance art shown during the opening credits supposed to mean something?

Is the music supposed to help explain the story?

So: Vera's druggie friend Sal tries to shoot her but instead she manages to shoot him. She then then places his body in a steamer trunk.

From 12:59 to 23:08- Its' like watching a session with a psychiatrist.

At 32:14- Back in session.

I've had sleep issues the past couple of years. When I realized my Melatonin was gone I was worried I'd be up all night. Fortunately, I spotted this little gem on Netflix and the problem was solved. Fifteen minutes in, I was out like a light. Last night I tried it again. This time I made it almost twenty minutes before the Sandman paid me a visit. They must have shot this epic in one day and that's if they took a three hour lunch. Everyone made a cameo appearance except Sienna Miller and she probably wished she had too. When the most entertaining part is listening to an old guy with dementia babbling on, you know you've hit bottom.

The trailer was far and away the best part of this movie. Don't waste your time on this one. If I had to describe it in 1 word it would be BORING! It tried so hard to be some kind of intellectual thriller, but failed miserably.

What a waste of talent! Don't bother, would rather watch paint dry!

Look, it's easy to criticize a movie like this, and I will, but I thought the acting was decent. Another plus is that it's very short, and if you exclude the extraordinarily annoying (and literal attempt by the writer to portray himself as an art-lover) opening credits, you only need to suffer through about 60 minutes.

As others have noted, the soundtrack for at least the first part of the movie is akin to what I imagine waterboarding is like. I think the writer heard a piece of classical music and thought "hey, I'm gonna use that in a film - whatever my next film is."

The main character must be part of the Marvel universe, though this is never explicitly revealed. But the strength she would need to perform some of what she does is super-human.

The snippets of dialog are all unrelated, and appear to be nothing more than an attempt by the writer of the film to philosophize. It's not necessarily horrible dialog, but it has nothing to do with much of anything. Some of it is somewhat touching even so. It's funny that I had no idea who the writer was until I looked this film up after we'd suffered through it, but I had guessed the one character was the writer simply by the dialog that was being presented during his scenes. I imagine it was pretty true-to-life, as his character was a writer as well.

Unfortunately, there isn't any reason I'd recommend this film, unless you just was to see Ms. Miller in lots of close-ups.

Very wordy with lots of narration but the scene with Charles Grodin as an elderly man with dementia is worth the whole movie. One of the best scenes ever.

Maybe the movie did not have the best script , but Sienna Miller made an awesome performance with her character in my opinion , also i think the music in general is good enough so... i think it's a different film , and that's why is not for everyone.

Depending on your mood, I thought this movie was okay for a rainy lazy weekend in. It didn't try to be exciting or overly dramatic. It was just simple, yet captivating without trying too hard. I genuinely liked it. I think other reviewers are being way too critical. I have never written movie reviews, but this one deserves a bit of defending from all the excessively harsh critics

I couldn't get into the film because of that annoying loud music. I am a fan of most of sienna millers work,but omg girl please pick more wisely. So boring terrible story