Trainwreck

This movie is like a lot of similar type of movies; meaning movies that aims to challenge preconceived notions of "what a lady should and should't be like". It quickly becomes banal, predictable and irritating. There's no depth of character here, because you sort of get the gist of the jokes before they're halfway delivered. Having said that; these kinds of movies can and have been saved by good performances. Unfortunately Amy Schumer doesn't deliver that. I don't know why scriptwriters and directors hit the same creative pitfalls every time a movie like this is to be made. We get it: here's an urban girl with a modern outlook on life who does what she wants, sleeps with whom she wants and doesn't apologize for it, etc etc.. good, but then what? A movie needs more than just a cliché of a character, predictable jokes and bad acting.

This was unoriginal and only saved by the characters that are actually funny people in real life. Written by Amy Schumer, she manages to have the worst character and performance in the film. And herein lies the ultimate irony: the worst performance in this film was also nominated for a golden globe. A collection of clichés and stolen one liners from Sex and the City... a really poor effort that is only worth watching for Bill Hader's performance and the supporting cast. John Cena's and Lebron's performances might be a sort of surprise but anyone who had watched interviews in laid back settings knew they had potential. Adding brilliant comedians to the cast who can ad lib and improvise is a smart move but doesn't add value to Schumer's work. I have been noticing in the last few years an effort to hype Amy and turn her into a sort of new Tina Fey or Amy Poehler, but nominating this disaster for golden globes is a disgrace and steals credibility to the awards.

I liked it, it's not like any other Rom-com i've seen before. It's obviously not a masterpiece but it does the job, it's entertaining, funny and different:

The characters are not the typical "model-looking"Rom-com cliché, they are normal looking and relatable characters. the movie is an exaggeration (for comedy proposes of course) of quotidian situations, thoughts, problems etc that happen everyday. People laughed ALL the time during the movie it's been long since I've seen people laugh so much.

I also discovered my new favorite comedian, the brilliant Amy Schummer. If you are looking to have a great laugh and a good time this movie is for you.

There are some makers who although talented in a specific way, move into a space that simply shows their talent to be little. Alexander Payne for example could be making stylized comedies with no problem, but as soon as he moves into elegy and meaning, it all becomes a sophomoric play. We've known Malick in that field and Payne is like a film school grad next to him.

So it would seem Apatow has an effervescent personality, at least enough to want to move out from his comfort zone. He could be cranking penis joke comedies till the cows come home but wants to move into more somber reflection about the pains of life. He has tried this a few times by now.

Here he tries a few switches. A movie about the usual slob who never grew out of adolescence but she's a girl. Men are almost entirely immature or idiots, and for some reason I can't begin to fathom, half of them gay, that is except for the knight in white armor who patiently helps her grow out of herself. He puts them in that New York movie romance where a couple are on and off again and might even think he's turning Woody Allen upside down. Indicative; the familiar romantic scene on a bench looking over at Brooklyn Bridge ends with a blowjob.

None of it sticks after a point and it's off-putting to think he might be thinking of any of this as transgressive. So he has moved out from the familiar safety of what he can do well, into a space that shows him to have trivial insights and odd hangups, from primarily a comedy about life where laughter sanctifies reductions, to primarily a drama about life where muttering dialogue and stereotypes rattle in the nothingness of not having anything to impart. He moves, even if ever so slightly, into territory that Woody, Bergman, and Altman have occupied. But in this space he's shown to be a dunderhead.

All the critics seem to be male, which I find interesting.

Here's a female point of view.

Maybe not all females have been in the protagonist's shoes, but it is very common for women to have problems with monogamy, just like men. Showing a woman who treats men the way most men treat women is not only realistic, but eye-opening. I think that's the problem most men have with the movie. No one wants to see the shoe on the other foot--it's uncomfortable, but guess what? It's reality.

I thought the movie was funny and touching. LeBron James is hilarious as himself.

For whoever says there is no real strong story-line? They obviously missed it. It's about maturing, about figuring out what a person's priorities are in life. It's about the realization that compensation isn't all it's cracked up to be.