VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,6/10
6120
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaAn oddly naive man-child stalks his childhood best friend and tries to reconnect with their past.An oddly naive man-child stalks his childhood best friend and tries to reconnect with their past.An oddly naive man-child stalks his childhood best friend and tries to reconnect with their past.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 6 vittorie e 12 candidature totali
Recensioni in evidenza
First of all, given the fact that it is labelled as "comedy", I was expecting something along the lines of "There's Something About Mary", but nothing could be further from the truth. It's not a comedy at all. "Drama" and "tragedy" would have been a more accurate label.
Quite a sad story, indeed. Excellent pacing and very competent acting by the leading characters; particularly the Buck character - a 27 year old man-child who's unable to move on with his life after his childhood friend, whom he reunites with at the start of the movie, rejects his sexual advances.
This movie reminded me of "One Hour Photo", "The Gift", and (most of all) "Enduring Love", as all of these movies feature a likable "stalker", who has no malicious intentions towards the target and you actually sympathize with him.
A unique, well-made, thought-provoking movie that does a great job at avoiding clichés. Recommended.
Quite a sad story, indeed. Excellent pacing and very competent acting by the leading characters; particularly the Buck character - a 27 year old man-child who's unable to move on with his life after his childhood friend, whom he reunites with at the start of the movie, rejects his sexual advances.
This movie reminded me of "One Hour Photo", "The Gift", and (most of all) "Enduring Love", as all of these movies feature a likable "stalker", who has no malicious intentions towards the target and you actually sympathize with him.
A unique, well-made, thought-provoking movie that does a great job at avoiding clichés. Recommended.
It's very difficult to classify a movie like "Chuck & Buck". It has elements of a comedy, but is not laugh-out-loud funny and is quite disturbing throughout. It could be a suspense thriller about a stalker, but the story takes on a different angle and shows just how pathetic the said stalker is. Overall, it's a genre-bending film that, while bizarre and creepy in its story and character development, keeps you watching because it's strangely intriguing. The only problem lies in the last 20 minutes, where the actions of the main characters simply don't make any sense.
Before the ending, however, you're introduced to Buck (Mike White), a 27-year-old who still lives with his mother. When his mother dies of lung cancer, Buck invites childhood friend Charlie Sitter (Chris Weitz), whom he knew as "Chuck", to the funeral. It is only through Buck's interactions with Charlie where we learn how much Buck really hasn't grown up. Whereas Charlie has moved on with his life as an up-and-coming record executive who is engaged to beautiful Carlyn (Beth Colt), Buck is clearly in a state of arrested development.
Mike White, who also wrote the screenplay, is heartbreakingly convincing as Buck, and was very brave in playing such a vulnerable role. While we never find out exactly why Buck is so nostalgic for his pre-adolescent years, White's giddiness in seeing his childhood friend speaks volumes. He is very clingy in every manner from the way he hugs Chuck to the way he sucks his Blow Pops, which he does throughout the movie.
The film gets decidedly darker when Buck moves out of his mother's house and to L.A., where Chuck now lives. It's when Buck stands outside Charlie's place of work where we really feel for Charlie, but Buck's unhealthy obsession with Charlie does not stop there.
There is one jaw-dropping thing Buck says when he visits Charlie and Carlyn at their home. I won't give away what he says, but it happens when Carlyn goes to bed, and it involves certain childhood experimentation that Charlie put behind him, but Buck clearly has not. Charlie's reaction to Buck's statement is very understated given the circumstances, but would have motivated this critic to issue a restraining order immediately.
Buck is by far the most pathetic cinematic stalker since Rupert Pupkin, Robert De Niro's character in "The King of Comedy" (1983). Both characters are equally motivated by their own delusion and their search for love in all the wrong places. However, Buck is a lot creepier than Rupert Pupkin is, and probably would benefit from intense psychiatric counseling.
It was interesting how Buck began being active in the local theater across the street from Charlie's office. He befriends Beverly (Lupe Ontiveros), who is unaware of the true autobiographical nature of Buck's play, "Hank & Frank". A subplot like this would have felt out of place in a "Cape Fear"-like psychological thriller, but feels strangely welcome in an indie film like this one. It still contributes to Buck's unsettling delusion.
It is the resolution of this story where the film loses its ground, and ends on a very questionable note. The way Charlie ultimately decides to deal with Buck is very much out of left field, and was not so much a cop out as much as unrealistic given the circumstances. The last scene also feels half baked and inconclusive. Maybe it is the audience's wish for an alternative fate for Buck which leads to this feeling. Up until that point, however, the story was very intriguing and the characters incredibly well-fleshed out. Mike White's writing has always been quirky and weird, but it is always original and full of characters you feel for even when you don't agree with them. It just would have been better if such characters reached a better conclusion.
Before the ending, however, you're introduced to Buck (Mike White), a 27-year-old who still lives with his mother. When his mother dies of lung cancer, Buck invites childhood friend Charlie Sitter (Chris Weitz), whom he knew as "Chuck", to the funeral. It is only through Buck's interactions with Charlie where we learn how much Buck really hasn't grown up. Whereas Charlie has moved on with his life as an up-and-coming record executive who is engaged to beautiful Carlyn (Beth Colt), Buck is clearly in a state of arrested development.
Mike White, who also wrote the screenplay, is heartbreakingly convincing as Buck, and was very brave in playing such a vulnerable role. While we never find out exactly why Buck is so nostalgic for his pre-adolescent years, White's giddiness in seeing his childhood friend speaks volumes. He is very clingy in every manner from the way he hugs Chuck to the way he sucks his Blow Pops, which he does throughout the movie.
The film gets decidedly darker when Buck moves out of his mother's house and to L.A., where Chuck now lives. It's when Buck stands outside Charlie's place of work where we really feel for Charlie, but Buck's unhealthy obsession with Charlie does not stop there.
There is one jaw-dropping thing Buck says when he visits Charlie and Carlyn at their home. I won't give away what he says, but it happens when Carlyn goes to bed, and it involves certain childhood experimentation that Charlie put behind him, but Buck clearly has not. Charlie's reaction to Buck's statement is very understated given the circumstances, but would have motivated this critic to issue a restraining order immediately.
Buck is by far the most pathetic cinematic stalker since Rupert Pupkin, Robert De Niro's character in "The King of Comedy" (1983). Both characters are equally motivated by their own delusion and their search for love in all the wrong places. However, Buck is a lot creepier than Rupert Pupkin is, and probably would benefit from intense psychiatric counseling.
It was interesting how Buck began being active in the local theater across the street from Charlie's office. He befriends Beverly (Lupe Ontiveros), who is unaware of the true autobiographical nature of Buck's play, "Hank & Frank". A subplot like this would have felt out of place in a "Cape Fear"-like psychological thriller, but feels strangely welcome in an indie film like this one. It still contributes to Buck's unsettling delusion.
It is the resolution of this story where the film loses its ground, and ends on a very questionable note. The way Charlie ultimately decides to deal with Buck is very much out of left field, and was not so much a cop out as much as unrealistic given the circumstances. The last scene also feels half baked and inconclusive. Maybe it is the audience's wish for an alternative fate for Buck which leads to this feeling. Up until that point, however, the story was very intriguing and the characters incredibly well-fleshed out. Mike White's writing has always been quirky and weird, but it is always original and full of characters you feel for even when you don't agree with them. It just would have been better if such characters reached a better conclusion.
We saw this movie because we heard great critic reviews. It certainly was interesting and different; enjoyable to my artistic senses. But funny? No! I don't know how they can call this a comedy. I call it a drama. If folks are laughing, they're laughing at mental and/or emotional illness in a somewhat realistic plot - what's funny about that?!
7W_L
I agree this movie had dark undertones. The look and feel was definitely low-budget but the story stood up well. It definitely made me feel uncomfortable at times---kinda like when you want to say to a character in film "No, PLEASE, just DON'T do that!" I felt so sorry for Buck, he did not mean to be the way the was...he just didn't know any other way. This definitely is not a light-hearted fun movie. It makes you think and feel a lot. A tiny bit too short, by today's standard's but it got the point across well.
What a surprising beautiful and tragic film that Mike White has created. I say Mike White instead of the director (who also did an exemplary job) because it was his penmanship that crafted this film into such a powerhouse. When I rented the film, I did not expect to be so submerged with so many bold styles and emotional thematic elements. I was not expecting to see such a high caliber of acting and storytelling mixed together into one small Sundance winning picture. In other words, I wasn't expecting really anything when I placed this film into my DVD player, so when the film finished and I picked my jaw off the floor, it became instantly clear that I would never experience another film like this one again. From the way that it was filmed, to the small budget of the production, to even the taboo subject it presented, Chuck & Buck is one of those films that will shock, amaze, and really pull at the strings of your heart. It is a film, first and foremost, about friendship and the destructive impact that childhood moments can have on our futures.
I cannot speak of this film without mentioning first the brilliant mind of Mike White. Not only did he accomplish the first challenge of this film writing it, but he also stole the entire film by also playing one of the leads, Buck. While most film watchers, sadly, will remember him as Jack Black's friend in School of Rock, his true talents are completely showcased in this film. He completely looses himself in this character and it is absolutely obvious to those of us watching the film. During all of this film, I never once saw Mike White, the actor, but instead I saw the character of Buck. That is a rare accomplishment in the acting world. Nine times out of ten in these types of films, you are handed moments where the actor or actress is simply themselves with a different type of voice. That is not the case with Mike White, he completely embodies his character. From the hand motions, voice, and even reactions, he is Buck. He is the character he has set out to play. This can happen because you can tell he is very compelled to this character. He is not into the story for the money, but instead to tell the story as honestly as possible. This was very obvious throughout the film. These actors, now directors and writers, placed their heart and soul into this picture, and it seeped through the television. This is truly one of those rare instances where you could see why people decide to make films.
While I wasn't overly impressed with the acting ability of Chris Weitz (since Mike White overshadowed him), he did help contribute to the overall scheme of the story. This is a thrilling tale, and it is difficult to see it as the comedy that IMDb has labeled. This was a completely human story told with such precise honesty and honor that I have no doubts that anyone that watches it will walk away with a different perspective. This wasn't your typical "stalker" film, there were so many different and deep layers to this story that you could easily watch it three or four times a day and still get caught up in a different aspect. I don't know if this makes sense or not, but there were moments when I could see the friendship, the insanity, and the sorrow. The ending brought the story full circle and really had me in suspense until the final moments. Nothing is handed to you right away, as the story develops, you are shown more and more until the utter power of this film is hanging on your own shoulders. It is deep and amazing, and I cannot stop using that word "amazing" enough.
Overall, I thought this was an exceptional film for 2000. I think that White should have been handed more and more acting roles throughout the years, but it still makes me happy to see him writing. This was a film about friends who never quite left their childhood years, and have been waiting for that one moment to close the door of to their past. This is not a film for everyone, but if chosen to explore will reveal some thickly layered characters with superb acting by Mr. White. This is a drama that carries relevance in today's society and will continue forever to be a cultural staple in the film world. I loved it, and hope others will see the powerful nature of Chuck & Buck.
Grade: **** out of *****
I cannot speak of this film without mentioning first the brilliant mind of Mike White. Not only did he accomplish the first challenge of this film writing it, but he also stole the entire film by also playing one of the leads, Buck. While most film watchers, sadly, will remember him as Jack Black's friend in School of Rock, his true talents are completely showcased in this film. He completely looses himself in this character and it is absolutely obvious to those of us watching the film. During all of this film, I never once saw Mike White, the actor, but instead I saw the character of Buck. That is a rare accomplishment in the acting world. Nine times out of ten in these types of films, you are handed moments where the actor or actress is simply themselves with a different type of voice. That is not the case with Mike White, he completely embodies his character. From the hand motions, voice, and even reactions, he is Buck. He is the character he has set out to play. This can happen because you can tell he is very compelled to this character. He is not into the story for the money, but instead to tell the story as honestly as possible. This was very obvious throughout the film. These actors, now directors and writers, placed their heart and soul into this picture, and it seeped through the television. This is truly one of those rare instances where you could see why people decide to make films.
While I wasn't overly impressed with the acting ability of Chris Weitz (since Mike White overshadowed him), he did help contribute to the overall scheme of the story. This is a thrilling tale, and it is difficult to see it as the comedy that IMDb has labeled. This was a completely human story told with such precise honesty and honor that I have no doubts that anyone that watches it will walk away with a different perspective. This wasn't your typical "stalker" film, there were so many different and deep layers to this story that you could easily watch it three or four times a day and still get caught up in a different aspect. I don't know if this makes sense or not, but there were moments when I could see the friendship, the insanity, and the sorrow. The ending brought the story full circle and really had me in suspense until the final moments. Nothing is handed to you right away, as the story develops, you are shown more and more until the utter power of this film is hanging on your own shoulders. It is deep and amazing, and I cannot stop using that word "amazing" enough.
Overall, I thought this was an exceptional film for 2000. I think that White should have been handed more and more acting roles throughout the years, but it still makes me happy to see him writing. This was a film about friends who never quite left their childhood years, and have been waiting for that one moment to close the door of to their past. This is not a film for everyone, but if chosen to explore will reveal some thickly layered characters with superb acting by Mr. White. This is a drama that carries relevance in today's society and will continue forever to be a cultural staple in the film world. I loved it, and hope others will see the powerful nature of Chuck & Buck.
Grade: **** out of *****
Lo sapevi?
- QuizIn a 2010 interview with the New York Times, Jeff Bridges said that Mike White's performance as Buck in this movie was the best acting performance of the 2000s.
- BlooperThe secretary says Chuck's office is on the sixth floor, but when Buck goes up to meet him he is on the third floor (look at the elevator doors when Buck changes his mind and leaves).
- Citazioni
Buck O'Brien: We could play that game, where I stick my dick in your mouth, and you stick your dick in mine... Chuck & Buck, Suck & Fuck!
- Colonne sonoreFreedom of the Heart
Written by Gwendolyn Sanford
Performed by Gwendolyn Sanford, Smokey Hormel and Joey Waronker
Produced by Joey Waronker
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Chuck & Buck?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 250.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 1.055.671 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 72.831 USD
- 16 lug 2000
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 1.182.065 USD
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Chuck & Buck (2000) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi