About a door-to-door coupon salesman who eats popcorn & eggs off the folded-out-door of his kitchen oven.About a door-to-door coupon salesman who eats popcorn & eggs off the folded-out-door of his kitchen oven.About a door-to-door coupon salesman who eats popcorn & eggs off the folded-out-door of his kitchen oven.
- Awards
- 2 wins & 1 nomination total
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
This is a film about a few New Yorkers who are struggling in life. It is actually very good at moments, but not great at others. The tone of the film is very uneven and unbalanced, which is not necessarily a bad thing, but it feels unintentional here. At first we think maybe this is a comedy but we realize slowly that it is not.
The acting is actually very good. It feels strange at first until we realize that these are not the kinds of characters we normally see in films. But they exist in real life and here we get a chance too see them on the screen.
The writer and director of this movie stated that he was influenced by the highly acclaimed film Naked, and it is clearly evident here. In both films the characters speak fluently to each other about philosophy and their opinions on life. I felt like it actually felt more real in this one. It was better done. But it never felt completely real in either film, in my opinion. But maybe that's just because I don't encounter people who talk like that in real life. Maybe they're out there.
I like the camerawork a lot. The film felt a lot like Slackers at times, but maybe that's just because of the grainy 16mm look and the clothing the characters wore. The characters at times felt like they could have come from the world of that film, but at other times they felt like they belonged more in a John Cassavetes film.
It feels a bit like a Cassavetes film in several ways, particularly toward the end. The ending is very good and gritty and raw and not your typical Hollywood ending by any stretch. And while I feel like the story itself could have been revised and made better, the story as it was could not have been told any better.
The acting is actually very good. It feels strange at first until we realize that these are not the kinds of characters we normally see in films. But they exist in real life and here we get a chance too see them on the screen.
The writer and director of this movie stated that he was influenced by the highly acclaimed film Naked, and it is clearly evident here. In both films the characters speak fluently to each other about philosophy and their opinions on life. I felt like it actually felt more real in this one. It was better done. But it never felt completely real in either film, in my opinion. But maybe that's just because I don't encounter people who talk like that in real life. Maybe they're out there.
I like the camerawork a lot. The film felt a lot like Slackers at times, but maybe that's just because of the grainy 16mm look and the clothing the characters wore. The characters at times felt like they could have come from the world of that film, but at other times they felt like they belonged more in a John Cassavetes film.
It feels a bit like a Cassavetes film in several ways, particularly toward the end. The ending is very good and gritty and raw and not your typical Hollywood ending by any stretch. And while I feel like the story itself could have been revised and made better, the story as it was could not have been told any better.
Ronald Bronstein wrote and directed this movie. He is one of my favorite screenwriters, best known for his collaborations with the Safdie brothers. Here he tries his hand at directing as well, and while he's not in his finest form, that's okay. You can see the mark of a strong storyteller here, and his work since this one has proved that he learned from this one and just kept getting better.
In a year of pretentious muck like "Synecdoche, New York" a film born out of Charlie Kaufman's own self-indulgence, comes a film that is similarly hard to watch but about three times as important. "Frownland" is a labor of love by the crew, the actors and the filmmaker, shot over years by friends. It traces a man who cannot communicate through his thoroughly authentic, REAL Brooklyn world. The people that you see are a step beyond even the stylization of the "mumblecore" movement. They are real people, painfully trapped in their own self-contained neuroses, unwilling to change, unable. The real world to them is their own set of delusions and because this is a film about people who are so profoundly out of touch, it is very difficult to watch. It is 16mm film-making without proper light, money or any of the other factors that would make a film "slick", but its honesty can not be understated, a fact that would cause a room full of people to dismiss it and for Richard Linklater to give it an award as he did at SXSW. This does remind of films like "Naked" or the best of the "mumblecore". It is a film that is not for everyone, but one that challenges you to watch and grows on you the longer you think about it.
I found the film quite expressive , the way the main character was lost but at the same much more clear about certain things in life than people who mocked him ( his flatmate for example ) .
he was tortured and you loved to watch him being tortured ! it had this perverted side which was frightening but we were all happy to see him come out of the misery again .
it was like a game character or pan-man through a mine-land or to enemy and we love to watch him under sniper attack or fire but then at the end we are happy to see him survive ...
.
he was tortured and you loved to watch him being tortured ! it had this perverted side which was frightening but we were all happy to see him come out of the misery again .
it was like a game character or pan-man through a mine-land or to enemy and we love to watch him under sniper attack or fire but then at the end we are happy to see him survive ...
.
It is beyond my imagination how much of a conceited hipster you'd have to be to give this movie a 10 out of 10. "Frownland" is like sewage that's been distilled into something worse -- like the jenkem of cinema. If you're a total masochist you might enjoy this.
Strange as it may seem, I really was trying to get into this 'film'. I understand what it is trying to show me and how it wants to show it, but I hate it. At every corner it just turns you off and makes you feel sick (almost literally). The cinematography makes it even more difficult to watch, unless you enjoy unnecessarily close and shaking camera shots throughout a 106-minute film. There's really not much else to say. This movie is awful.
Strange as it may seem, I really was trying to get into this 'film'. I understand what it is trying to show me and how it wants to show it, but I hate it. At every corner it just turns you off and makes you feel sick (almost literally). The cinematography makes it even more difficult to watch, unless you enjoy unnecessarily close and shaking camera shots throughout a 106-minute film. There's really not much else to say. This movie is awful.
Did you know
- TriviaDirector Ronald Bronstein and Dore Mann havent't spoken to each other in years as a result of having made Frownland together.
- ConnectionsFeatures Frankenstein et le Monstre de l'enfer (1974)
- How long is Frownland?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Gross worldwide
- $16,573
- Runtime1 hour 46 minutes
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.66 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content