A Verdadeira Dor

I was really impressed by this movie. In my opinion it's a really original story. It's strength lies in it subtlety. It very accurately depicts the duality of people's character. The beauty and the shadow. I found it very interesting to see how what looked like "negative" behavior turned out to have some positive effect. How nothing is black and white. How being very direct also means being honest for example. It really makes you think.

The dynamics in the group were also interesting and heart-warming to watch. It shows how people can really connect over a short period of time.

Definitely worth the watch for those who are interested in the complexity of humans.

Jesse Eisenberg's second effort as writer-director sets out to be something unconventional. There's something of Richard Linklater's BEFORE trilogy in the DNA of A REAL PAIN, with some recognizable inheritance from Michael Winterbottom's TRIP series also apparent. The perambulatory pacing, the languorous cinematography that asks you to look beneath the surface of touristy sights, the dialogue that meanders through an unpretentious and unstructured unpacking of the meaning of life, the total absence of any "bad guys," the near total absence of any outright conflict, the barest hint of any goal guiding the plot aside from the completion of a simple itinerary... A Real Pain shares all these realistic features with those earlier, more spirited, life-affirming films. Yet somehow... it doesn't quite work.

I'm not sure what was at fault with why I never really got into this movie. I think a large part of it has to do with all the supporting characters (i.e. Everyone besides the cousins played by Eisenberg and Kieran Culkin). Will Sharpe's non-Jewish tour guide, the Rwandan convert, the old couple, the sexy divorcee... the characters are all very basic, very conventional, very boring. The actors who play them are fine, but there's not much they're given to do, and so they seem unnatural and lifeless, more like set decorations than people. Eisenberg knows how to direct a camera, I think; he knows how to put the proper cinematic elements in place. But perhaps he doesn't know how to direct actors, or maybe he just doesn't know how to write characters. There's never anything to suggest that these people exist beyond the moments we see them in, which perhaps could've been fixed with some more spontaneous improvisation from the actors.

Eisenberg and especially Culkin are better in this regard, but there's still something rather stilted and "written" about a lot of what they say and do. Eisenberg's "workaholic salesman with OCD" is largely one-dimensional, and the few times where his character expands beyond that facade seem more like forced acting than any kind of genuine glimpse into something deeper. Culkin is wonderful--a glimpse perhaps of his Succession character if Roman Roy actually cared about people--but I think that's just a credit to Culkin's talent; he somehow manages to transcend what he's been given to work with.

This is a decent indie film with a few good laughs, a couple of interesting ideas, a memorable tour of Poland, and a solid performance from Culkin. From the trailer and the reviews, I was expecting something much funnier and emotionally impactful, but I'd still recommend the movie to anyone interested in it.

I just finished this film and I have to say I'm surprised reading some of the bad reviews about it, I know film perception is subjective but I don't understand how someone could dislike this film. It was so interesting to me, and the thing is, nothing big really happens, you just follow these two cousins along their trip, it's normal, it's almost casual. There are not going to explain everything to you because there's no need for it. We have access to the superficial, to the bare minimum because that how the characters relate to each other, there so much they don't understand and so much that they don't say. The performances are all incredibly, especially Culkin. I was left crying by the end. Maybe you need to have dealt with depression to connect with it more. Maybe you need to have seen someone you love survive (or not) this painful illness. But I'm happy for this type of movies to exist. This stories also need to be told. As rare and unfitted for some people may seem.

I won't cover what others have already said. This isn't a comedy or a road movie and it's not some commentary on the horrors of war.

For me this quaint indie (feeling) flick is really an observation about living with someone with mental illness. If looked upon from this angle it is well observed and touching and uses its three acts to unfold all the different dynamics in the cousins relationships using the backdrop of the road trip and the visit to the concentration camp. It deliberately subverts expectations by not providing a defined ending (often the case in this situation) and the scenes often don't lead to expected outcomes. That's what life can be like when your are dealing with that issue.

For me this made the film an interesting (if flawed) study that was definitely worth the watch. YMMV.

Although the movie explores personal pain, it wnds with no real purpose or resolution. In fact, it could have been fedt out entirely.

No character evolves or learns from the exprience, and the concentration camp sequence is only there for shallow effect.

The McCulken character "Benji"is unbelievble and overplayed, and really just makes you angry. He is so much of a jerk. Eisenberg's character doesn't ring true.

Frankly, the rest of the cast were quite interesting, more than the two lead characters. I wish we had learned a bit more about each of their stories.

So... The movie just played on empty emotion for me.