The Size of Watermelons

It starts like a fine goof movie, but the more you watch the more you feel like you will have an headache because of the endless dialogs and inner speeches.

That's OK to have too many dialogs in a movie about people who just talk but do nothing, but i would really prefer to see something really going on other then just listening. What I mean is, you hear the guys mention about playing pool to make some money once or twice, but you actually see them playing pool to the end of the film. Or you see the Alex guy talking to Lizzy about how he supported her about her career choice, but you just wish you had seen a scene about it. After all, you watch a movie to see things are happening, not listening, right?

I think acting was good, but I'm not very sure about directing. I understand the director has experimented some weird angles, but sometimes it becomes disturbing as it was in the pool game scene I've just mentioned above.

This movie was terrible on so many levels. It's basically a rip off of Kevin Smith's life. It's about a slacker who can't figure out what to do in life. So he decides to make a movie but has no idea how. I know there's a bit more to this movie but after the first 50 minutes I stopped watching. I don't know how Kevin Smith could allow this to be made. It's like watching the making of Clerks or something. Witless dialogue, stiff acting and just painful to watch. The only interesting character was Patrick played by Donovan Leitch.

So overall don't waste your time on this unless you have never heard of Kevin Smith, seen a Kevin Smith movie or you just like lame half-assed slacker movies. Which i guess you can't expect much from.

There are two great features of this movie: it's yet another great nihilistic slacker movie, this time about a pathetic no-nothing loser who is trying to make his first movie (one can only hope this is not self-referential). It also has a great title. When I saw it at the Toronto Film Festival, it attracted a mixed crowd: those who had read the reviews and those who hadn't. The latter wore trench coats and left after the first five minutes.

Watermelons demonstrates what can be achieved with low budget films. First class writing and acting performances aside, the universality of the theme is this film's strongest point. The universal man, somewhat naive to the world, somewhat dumb, somewhat torn by his own base desires in opposition to his intellectual growth, never-the-less holds to a dream. Although not tantalizingly close, the dream to make a filmic masterpiece IS tantalizing, and is the mountain he must climb despite distractions from within and without. That such a large theme is contained within a very average world and provides such deft entertainment speaks volumes for the abilities of writer, cast and crew.

This movie has become quite hard to find lately, but if you do find it (most likely on a region 4 DVD... Australians seem to be the only ones who still care for it) then it is definitely worth watching. I majored in art and lived on the Venice beachfront for a while when I was younger, and I feel this movie captures the atmosphere of my early 20s. The plot itself is nothing to write home about, but the good performances, quirky live music and the very 90s feeling of it all more than make up for it. Also, Paul Rudd's cuteness and adorableness is at a high here.