+J. Craig Anderson Me too, but being an avid collector I'm concerned about their value depreciating due to damage. However, I believe I have solved the problem by storing them in my "Remains of the Day" lunchbox.
Now that's not right. I understand that nothing ever happens on Mars, but that doesn't give those fellows the right to get their kicks by just taking your stuff like that. Those Martians are real bastard people.
So glad to find this old clip of Siskel & Ebert who both seem wildly enthusiastic about the film. Ebert is correct about Andre Gregory's storytelling abilities: the mind conjures up images as Gregory relates his adventures. Its been years since I've seen it but I still recall so much of it: the description of the Beehive, the symbolic burial and resurrection, seeing a faun at a Long Island mass, Wallace Shawn enjoying the simple pleasures of life like curling up in his electric blanket while reading Charlton Heston's autobiography. The ending, with Shawn visibly moved by the experience of this fascinating conversation while not wholeheartedly embracing Gregory's New Age wackiness, easily doubles as the audience's reaction to the film they've just been seeing. There's truly never been another film like it.
Absolutely! They were excellent and not in the least bit biased. We are now living in a new era in which their show would not even be possible. People would get bored because S & E were actually film critics (I even hate to use the word "critics" because of what critics have become). We've actually lost far more than we've gained as a result of all of our never ending, unchecked "progress".
Yes that opening is strangely hypnotic, and so is the ending when Wally's in his cab watching out the window. Thinking about his world in a whole new light.
I grew up in New Jersey, and I'll always be grateful to Siskel & Ebert for showing me that there was more to movies than big blockbusters. And the rewards of seeking out smaller, indie, or foreign films. I remember watching this review at age 12, and it stuck with me.
Definitely worth a watch. It is an unusual experience because while you are watching this movie you are experiencing another one when Andre Gregory is talking. Your mind fades away to what Andre is talking about. I have yet to see a film do what this film accomplishes. This is a fantastic movie.
I thought it was interesting that this "spiritually enlightened" man is condescending and almost rude to the waiter. I think both men's interactions with the waiter say a lot more about them then the conversation.
Spot on, I remember seeing this when I was a teenager and it blew me away, just melting into the scenes Andre describes and only then realizing whoa, that was a guy talking.
There's a great performance by both leads in this film but I love the dynamic of the conversation. Wally is just knocked over at first with all this new age stuff Andre is going on about but by the third act he's regained his footing and pushes back a bit. Very interesting to watch.
I saw this film in the 70's or 80's but my attention was not completely there. I always new that I had to watch it again some day. 40 something yrs later I finally gave it my full attention and it was an emotional experience.
It's weird but I remember in my childhood. My parents would talk with relatives and friends for hours. They would get so into their conversation that it seemed like time would go by without them realizing it. It kind of sad how we live in a generation that has forgot the art of conversation. I know I am guilty of this, I find myself tuning out in conversations and thinking what I want to do next.
Every time I go back to watch this movie again I am almost surprised that it is just them sitting at a table talking, the imagery that their conversation creates is so powerful that I imagine having actually seen it.
One of the greatest hidden treasures of this film (I rewatch it every year, usually in summer) is that it invites you to participate. I always cook myself a nice steak with potatoes, open up a bottle of red wine and join them at the table. As I eat and drink, I feel like I am with them in that restaurant and quietly just listening. It's always a wonderful evening.
"Andre" is certainly one of the greatest movies ever made, but Gene, if EVERY movie was like this, just two guys describing something, don't you think it'd get pretty boring after awhile? Its uniqueness is what makes it so special.
Well, yes. If EVERY film was like that, but more can be made without taking anything away from it. Especially if there's more bookends to the dinner than this film has.
I sat transfixed watching this film in New York City in 1981. Jean Lenauer’s performance as the waiter was memorable. Louis Malle, the director, was Candice Bergen’s husband until his death in 1995.
In order, if you liked this movie, be sure to see: "Before Sunrise, Before Sunset, Before Midnight." Same 2 people in each basically doing the same thing, having quality conversation. Strips away the Actors & we see 2 Human beings, which is relatable to most, & fascinating. Not for every1, including MdwA.
I loved the bit where he says Hollywood is spending TENS of millions of dollars to make movies, when now movies costing over $100 million is no big deal.
How so much different "Sneak Previews" was compared to "Siskel & Ebert" where film clips were much more extensive and more numerous and the critics were allowed to expound more exhaustively on their reviews because of the absence of commercials.
I watched it three times the week I discovered the movie, I was blown away by it. However, when I referred it to a friend of mine, a really smart guy, he found it unwatchable, and stopped watching it after 20 minutes. Not for everybody!
Solid E, I'm the third guy you don't see at the table. After ten minutes of listening to Andre tell stories that fascinate him, I mention that I need to use the restroom, politely excuse myself, and leave.
I also don't get why they're all giddy over the fact that the movie's action is just two people talking. It's really not that innovative by 1981. I'm kind of surprised by the inference that neither of these guys have ever read any Tennessee Williams or anything? Plenty of 'just talking' in theatre.
This could actually be siskel and ebert (my dinner with Andre is almost just like these 2 debating everything) and god chicago was lucky to have the weirdest and best film critics, I love and miss them!
I didn’t mind the setup of My Dinner With Andre. But, I do think the movie is a bit overrated. And the fact that things like the Findhorn Foundation are pushed is pretty weird.
The first hour of this movie was pretty boring, and then it started to get a bit interesting. Not my favorite movie, but it pays off in the end if you hang in there.
I saw this movie when it came out. I was a physics graduate student, and although it was an interesting setup, I found Andre's credulity and lack of discernment to be really annoying. It felt like you could tell Andre anything when he was in the right frame of mind and he would believe it. The fact that a supposedly intelligent person would say the things he did was unbelievable. I usually liked Siskel and Ebert, so this completely mixed up my calibration for them. For much of the movie, I thought he was purposefully acting as a self-parody. But I do believe he was playing the part straight. I might try the movie again as a golden ager to see if I have become less judgmental in my later years. I will have to say that I like the movie very much from a visual point of view, with the waiter standing by.
So Wallace Shawn would prefer to stay home and have his girlfriend cook him something, but she can't because she's a waitress because they need extra money, so he goes out to dinner? Quite a plot hole, no?
Man I am old I guess I remember going to the alterna-movietheatre in Seattle as a young man. I'd totally forgotten this film wish I'd bought the action figures too.
Why not a sequel with just Wally? "My Dinner with Andre 2 - My solo TV dinner without Andre, just myself" - and we see him eating slowly, chewing his food... and every 15 mins he sighs, and goes on...
To me, the first monologue had me veering off with my attention. There’s a parallel to The Before Trilogy-it’s been said before. But here’s why ‘Dinner’ isn’t as good. There’s no ticking clock, there’s no variation of locations, and most importantly, there’s no love story, which is historically more of an engaging relationship. My Dinner With Andre-though with a couple good monologues-is ultimately overrated.
I have found that you can tell a lot about a person using this movie as a gauge. What ones reaction and level of understanding to this film are, if they “get it” or not, and to the level of how much they “get it”. It really says and reveals a lot about a person.
nah, this movie's corny and out of date. we need a remake of this with total hotties and where dinner is KFC™ and it takes place on Zoom™ instead. also, they should talk about not such wussy stuff. they should talk about MANLY stuff like SPORTS. it could be called _My Dinner with Andrew Cotter._
@@KatWoodland Funny you mention attention, contrary to your opinion I think you need a lack of it to properly enjoy this movie. The whole idea is to have a soft focus on the action on screen, and imagine the stories being told in your mind's eye, Ebert even brings it up in the video. If you are paying close attention, though, you can notice pretty easily that Andre's stories of luxury and exoticism, that turn into misanthropy by the movie's end, are incredibly trite (especially when he gets into how he believes "people these days" just live, instead of really *living*) and his domination of the conversation is boorish. Also funny you mention being young, because watching it I was reminded of an earlier time in my life, maybe early 20s, when I too was making attempts to be a struggling playwright, thinking to myself with a cringe that I probably would have been taken in by the vague noises of intellectualism that the pair make. Now I roll my eyes at the flagrant classism, affectation, and pretension.
This film is painful to watch.... Almost as painful as watching critics pretend to like it. Like wine snobs pretending they can tell the difference in wines whem they cant
I can understand it's place in 1981 but I was born then and didn't first watch it until a year or two ago, and I was bored to tears, he tells good stories, but their absurdity in the modern age makes them feel unrealistic and borderline simple self serving garbage. Sounds like he's telling stories about what rich bored white people do to spend time since they've done everything else, I can't relate to that bullshit.
Chuck Lorre should get Andre Gregory to do a guest appearance on "Young Sheldon" so the character he plays can have a meal with Dr. Sturgis (played by Walace Shawn).
I wanted to like this film, but the topics of their conversation are sooo dry. I usually like movies like this, but it’s too easy to lose your focus while watching it. It’s not the length of the film, but the really uninteresting conversation. If this movie was one of the real greats, it would be on tv more often. But as it’s aged, you hardly ever see it.
I loved this movie so much that I went right out and bought the action figures.
+J. Craig Anderson Me too, but being an avid collector I'm concerned about their value depreciating due to damage. However, I believe I have solved the problem by storing them in my "Remains of the Day" lunchbox.
joshbusby47 I used to have one of those, but the Martians took it.
Now that's not right. I understand that nothing ever happens on Mars, but that doesn't give those fellows the right to get their kicks by just taking your stuff like that.
Those Martians are real bastard people.
joshbusby47 Yes they are! I threw a stool at them, but unfortunately I missed.
+joshbusby47 I hate those martians and their stupid ass face
And what's just as fascinating as watching Wally and Andre talk is watching Siskel and Ebert talk about watching Wally and Andre talk
Very well said. In fact I still enjoy S&E even more than Andre and Wally here on TH-cam.
oh shite nagga, you right
But nothing will top talking about watching Siskel and Ebert talk about watching Wally and Andre talk.
when you get interested in other people, people get interested in you...it takes humility to listen and learn.
HAHAHAHAHAHA! Nailed it!
So glad to find this old clip of Siskel & Ebert who both seem wildly enthusiastic about the film. Ebert is correct about Andre Gregory's storytelling abilities: the mind conjures up images as Gregory relates his adventures. Its been years since I've seen it but I still recall so much of it: the description of the Beehive, the symbolic burial and resurrection, seeing a faun at a Long Island mass, Wallace Shawn enjoying the simple pleasures of life like curling up in his electric blanket while reading Charlton Heston's autobiography. The ending, with Shawn visibly moved by the experience of this fascinating conversation while not wholeheartedly embracing Gregory's New Age wackiness, easily doubles as the audience's reaction to the film they've just been seeing. There's truly never been another film like it.
The Before Trilogy just left the chat.
He has a hypnotic voice, would be a great cult leader.
I'll always remember the ending music of Eric Satie.
Back in the day, when these two agreed on a movie like this, I always went to see it! No critics have that power anymore.
Unparalleled career of S and E! They were important journalists of film not just critics
Roy Piper I couldn't even name a movie critic today.
Absolutely! They were excellent and not in the least bit biased. We are now living in a new era in which their show would not even be possible. People would get bored because S & E were actually film critics (I even hate to use the word "critics" because of what critics have become). We've actually lost far more than we've gained as a result of all of our never ending, unchecked "progress".
They were great. But try looking up Mark Kermode.
I saw this film on cable few years later. I loved it . Two people just talking about anything is amazing.
Yes that opening is strangely hypnotic, and so is the ending when Wally's in his cab watching out the window. Thinking about his world in a whole new light.
This is such a Siskel picture lol
This film actually was going to close when they reviewed it, but because of their raves, it ran in NY for a year.
I grew up in New Jersey, and I'll always be grateful to Siskel & Ebert for showing me that there was more to movies than big blockbusters. And the rewards of seeking out smaller, indie, or foreign films. I remember watching this review at age 12, and it stuck with me.
John Dalton NJ upbringing too. Remember when they were first on PBS. I thought they were a couple.
Same here. I rented this movie about 10 years later and it sucked though. They just didn’t grab me.
@@samanthab1923 they were on PBS. Then syndicated on channel 11. Then their Buena Vista Disney show was on WABC.
@@johndalton3180 Right
❤❤❤
Tell, don't show.
This movie- along with Paris, Texas- is pure cinematic art.
Re: Paris Texas. It's a different genre but, as you say, real cinematic art. Another such Wim Wenders movie is "Wings of Desire."
A fun spoof would be Wally doing all the talking as he goes into endless detail about doing his laundry, shopping, ordering at the deli, etc.
Basically Seinfeld.
Your avatar is cancer.
Definitely worth a watch. It is an unusual experience because while you are watching this movie you are experiencing another one when Andre Gregory is talking. Your mind fades away to what Andre is talking about. I have yet to see a film do what this film accomplishes. This is a fantastic movie.
I thought it was interesting that this "spiritually enlightened" man is condescending and almost rude to the waiter. I think both men's interactions with the waiter say a lot more about them then the conversation.
Spot on, I remember seeing this when I was a teenager and it blew me away, just melting into the scenes Andre describes and only then realizing whoa, that was a guy talking.
And the actors are amazing in this movie, only great actors could do such performance. Incredible film
I loved this movie! And man, it's been years since I've seen these two. Those glasses are HUGE!! So 80's lol
Two 1980s intellectuals on film talking about how amazing a film about two 1980s intellectuals talking is. Amazing!
LOL
what does "talking is" mean?
Ebert mentioned how when Gene saw a movie he really loved, his spirits would be high for a week. I think this was one of those movies.
One of my all-time favorites. It's a film that stays with you, literally changed the way I look at the world.
They need to remake this movie now that the technology has finally caught up to the director's vision.
CGI forks
i admit it, you got me.
Honestly, I would like to see a 21rst century movie like this, regarding today's angst and exotic spots . . . .
Remake it as a scripted podcast.
Melvin Goes To Dinner is pretty decent
There's a great performance by both leads in this film but I love the dynamic of the conversation. Wally is just knocked over at first with all this new age stuff Andre is going on about but by the third act he's regained his footing and pushes back a bit. Very interesting to watch.
At last! An intelligent human. You. Excellent comment.
(Owen Benjamin is a comedian I appreciate too.)
I saw this film in the 70's or 80's but my attention was not completely there. I always new that I had to watch it again some day. 40 something yrs later I finally gave it my full attention and it was an emotional experience.
It's weird but I remember in my childhood. My parents would talk with relatives and friends for hours. They would get so into their conversation that it seemed like time would go by without them realizing it. It kind of sad how we live in a generation that has forgot the art of conversation. I know I am guilty of this, I find myself tuning out in conversations and thinking what I want to do next.
Every time I go back to watch this movie again I am almost surprised that it is just them sitting at a table talking, the imagery that their conversation creates is so powerful that I imagine having actually seen it.
The budget for this movie was the cost of a dinner at a restaurant.
Filmed in my hometown of Richmond, Virginia, at the then dilapidated Hotel Jefferson.
One of the greatest hidden treasures of this film (I rewatch it every year, usually in summer) is that it invites you to participate. I always cook myself a nice steak with potatoes, open up a bottle of red wine and join them at the table. As I eat and drink, I feel like I am with them in that restaurant and quietly just listening. It's always a wonderful evening.
I am going to do just that!
This is a fabulous idea. I love this movie but had never thought of this. Thanks.
Sounds like a great idea 👍🏻
I can't decide whether my favourite movie is My Dinner with André or The Expendables.
And yet neither are as good as the unofficial sequel to this movie, My Dinner with Andre the Giant. That man had such heart.
Best comment I've read in years
The Expendables > My Dinner With Andre > The Expendables 2 & 3.
That's very possibly the most bipolar movie palette I've ever heard of.
@@Trismegustis You're talking about The Princess Bride? One of my wife's favorite films.
When I worked in a video store during the early 90's, this was a very popular rental.
Its basically a Podcast Movie.
Was gna say the same
Its like the first Podcast ever made!!!
It’s like the first podcast
Unfortunately both siskel & ebert are gone. But Wallace & Andre are still around.
I made it 12 minutes into the dinner conversation but then had to turn it off when I realized that Andre the Giant would not be coming.
Such a brilliant film.
The rape scene felt really out of place
I thought this movie sucked. The conversation felt so scripted. Maybe it was just the acting.
"Andre" is certainly one of the greatest movies ever made, but Gene, if EVERY movie was like this, just two guys describing something, don't you think it'd get pretty boring after awhile? Its uniqueness is what makes it so special.
I don't think he can reply you bro :/
Good point. Just rhetorical.
Well, yes. If EVERY film was like that, but more can be made without taking anything away from it. Especially if there's more bookends to the dinner than this film has.
Bruce Jackson it would be kinda funny if they did an action movie with just two guys talking about the action at a dinner table
It would be called "Joe Rogan Experience."
I sat transfixed watching this film in New York City in 1981. Jean Lenauer’s performance as the waiter was memorable. Louis Malle, the director, was Candice Bergen’s husband until his death in 1995.
Here's where Wallace Shawn should've yelled, "Inconceivable!"
HIs character actually does say inconceivable at one point during the dinner and you can't help but chuckle
In order, if you liked this movie, be sure to see: "Before Sunrise, Before Sunset, Before Midnight." Same 2 people in each basically doing the same thing, having quality conversation. Strips away the Actors & we see 2 Human beings, which is relatable to most, & fascinating. Not for every1, including MdwA.
I loved the bit where he says Hollywood is spending TENS of millions of dollars to make movies, when now movies costing over $100 million is no big deal.
Timmy Too Turnt Up *100 million
Because inflation
Did you see the graffiti on that subway car?
TELL ME MORE!
TRENCHANT INSIGHT!
BON MOT
I didn't see "Dinner" till just a few years ago. Guess I thought it would be boring.
It isn't.
Better than any movie made in the last 20 years with all the cgi and technology and huge budget
saw this one in '81, was already entranced by alan watts
this one rocked for me
How so much different "Sneak Previews" was compared to "Siskel & Ebert" where film clips were much more extensive and more numerous and the critics were allowed to expound more exhaustively on their reviews because of the absence of commercials.
The reason was that SP was on public TV where there were no commercials so they had to make the show longer.
Truly the glory yrs on PBS...loved it.
I watched it three times the week I discovered the movie, I was blown away by it. However, when I referred it to a friend of mine, a really smart guy, he found it unwatchable, and stopped watching it after 20 minutes. Not for everybody!
some peoples cognitive dissonance is two strong. Something the film talks about for a moment
When I saw this film I wondered which one of these guys am I?
Solid E, I'm the third guy you don't see at the table. After ten minutes of listening to Andre tell stories that fascinate him, I mention that I need to use the restroom, politely excuse myself, and leave.
The alternate ending to this film is when Andre does a backflip, snaps the bad guy’s neck, and saves the day.
ah! the director's snap is such an underrated masterpiece!
0:32 it looks like he has no shirt on.
Steven I know. I was disappointed when I found-out differently. I think Wallace Shawn is such a cutie. And he got way cuter as he grew older.
How about all that graffiti on the train. Those were the days.
The music was also amazing.
It has ONE song in it. And it’s not even original
“Tens of Millions of Dollars” 😂 Hollywood didn’t learn anything from this movie
It's good but no where near as epic as "Con air"
James Mack Con FUCKIN’ Air, bro.
Oh my lol
Cy-ah- nara!!
Emperor's New Clothes....this movie was terrible. The dialogue is insipid.
I also don't get why they're all giddy over the fact that the movie's action is just two people talking. It's really not that innovative by 1981. I'm kind of surprised by the inference that neither of these guys have ever read any Tennessee Williams or anything? Plenty of 'just talking' in theatre.
This could actually be siskel and ebert (my dinner with Andre is almost just like these 2 debating everything) and god chicago was lucky to have the weirdest and best film critics, I love and miss them!
Excellent point, Roger, the storytelling is very visual.
inconceivable!
ow me sides.. too much iocaine powder
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it does.
I didn’t mind the setup of My Dinner With Andre. But, I do think the movie is a bit overrated. And the fact that things like the Findhorn Foundation are pushed is pretty weird.
This was originally filmed for TV back in the day when they used to stretch an animal intestine over the camera lens....it’s kinda gone out of fashion
I loved this movie. I was the only one of my friends who did. I need new friends.
The first hour of this movie was pretty boring, and then it started to get a bit interesting. Not my favorite movie, but it pays off in the end if you hang in there.
I loved this movie…
…although I don’t think they actually ate anything.
First time I ever heard of Wallace Shawn was Princess Bride, where he was funny. I didn't know he was a writer until much later.
amazing how this critique predicts the unanticipated success of long form podcasts
Eye opener
Yes, I agree, Andre and Wally really paint a picture
I saw this movie when it came out. I was a physics graduate student, and although it was an interesting setup, I found Andre's credulity and lack of discernment to be really annoying. It felt like you could tell Andre anything when he was in the right frame of mind and he would believe it. The fact that a supposedly intelligent person would say the things he did was unbelievable. I usually liked Siskel and Ebert, so this completely mixed up my calibration for them. For much of the movie, I thought he was purposefully acting as a self-parody. But I do believe he was playing the part straight. I might try the movie again as a golden ager to see if I have become less judgmental in my later years. I will have to say that I like the movie very much from a visual point of view, with the waiter standing by.
The movie is just basically a podcast
So Wallace Shawn would prefer to stay home and have his girlfriend cook him something, but she can't because she's a waitress because they need extra money, so he goes out to dinner? Quite a plot hole, no?
André picked it up
Well, there you go - French ingeniousness.
What Ebert says at 5:32 that's what brings the "action" to the viewer/listener's imagination.
Movie seems "inconceivable!"
It’s a podcast before there were podcasts.
I love this film, but now I can't watch without expecting the Joker clown-mask mob to run in and start trashing the place.
Why?
Why was there not a Sequel????!!!!!
Too shallow story tellers.
I thought the rape scene was a bit weird and out of place
It’s a boring film.
Anyone else here because of Community?
It's available for free on TH-cam.
Man I am old I guess I remember going to the alterna-movietheatre in Seattle as a young man. I'd totally forgotten this film wish I'd bought the action figures too.
Could you imagine this type of film being made today?
It’s called a podcast
Thankfully, no.
I an not so sure people nowadays are deep enough
Podcast: The Movie
Why not a sequel with just Wally? "My Dinner with Andre 2 - My solo TV dinner without Andre, just myself" - and we see him eating slowly, chewing his food... and every 15 mins he sighs, and goes on...
there is one : "Vanya on 42nd Street" Shawn is amazing and funny...
You can win bets at parties on whether or not Siskel and Ebert both loved a Troma film.
Why is it just audio?
To me, the first monologue had me veering off with my attention. There’s a parallel to The Before Trilogy-it’s been said before. But here’s why ‘Dinner’ isn’t as good. There’s no ticking clock, there’s no variation of locations, and most importantly, there’s no love story, which is historically more of an engaging relationship. My Dinner With Andre-though with a couple good monologues-is ultimately overrated.
I'm so glad you uploaded this! Thank you. This movie is life-changing for many. There's never been a better time than the present (2020)!
I have found that you can tell a lot about a person using this movie as a gauge. What ones reaction and level of understanding to this film are, if they “get it” or not, and to the level of how much they “get it”. It really says and reveals a lot about a person.
If they like it, stay away from them
If they don’t like it they are shallow, stay away from them.
nah, this movie's corny and out of date. we need a remake of this with total hotties and where dinner is KFC™ and it takes place on Zoom™ instead. also, they should talk about not such wussy stuff. they should talk about MANLY stuff like SPORTS. it could be called _My Dinner with Andrew Cotter._
Complete trash of a movie I would never sit and have dinner with someone that talks so much I would have such a headache
You are too young and your attention span is small perhaps?
@@KatWoodland Funny you mention attention, contrary to your opinion I think you need a lack of it to properly enjoy this movie. The whole idea is to have a soft focus on the action on screen, and imagine the stories being told in your mind's eye, Ebert even brings it up in the video. If you are paying close attention, though, you can notice pretty easily that Andre's stories of luxury and exoticism, that turn into misanthropy by the movie's end, are incredibly trite (especially when he gets into how he believes "people these days" just live, instead of really *living*) and his domination of the conversation is boorish. Also funny you mention being young, because watching it I was reminded of an earlier time in my life, maybe early 20s, when I too was making attempts to be a struggling playwright, thinking to myself with a cringe that I probably would have been taken in by the vague noises of intellectualism that the pair make. Now I roll my eyes at the flagrant classism, affectation, and pretension.
This film is painful to watch.... Almost as painful as watching critics pretend to like it. Like wine snobs pretending they can tell the difference in wines whem they cant
2 shallow boring story tellers.
I remember the arcade game of the film
The Nostalgia Critic (who Ebert was a fan of) posted a particularly touching tribute to him.
"INCONCEIVABLE"
I can understand it's place in 1981 but I was born then and didn't first watch it until a year or two ago, and I was bored to tears, he tells good stories, but their absurdity in the modern age makes them feel unrealistic and borderline simple self serving garbage. Sounds like he's telling stories about what rich bored white people do to spend time since they've done everything else, I can't relate to that bullshit.
It was 2 shallow boring story tellers. It made $15,000. A box office flop.
@@mikesmith6461 Yeah but it's raved about constantly, I honestly don't find the charm other people seem to.
@@canuckster24 those people are locked in a basement. Lol.
Will New York City ever recapture the glory it had around the time this film was made? I really, really hope so.
Chuck Lorre should get Andre Gregory to do a guest appearance on "Young Sheldon" so the character he plays can have a meal with Dr. Sturgis (played by Walace Shawn).
Finding out what Andre has been through and being challenged by Wally more in the second half made the movie complete.
Yeah it's satisfaction movie watching.
Rol,,.. Rollover ..Rollover is a 1981 American political thriller film directed by Alan J. Pakula and starring Jane Fonda and Kris Kristofferson.
Double RIP
RIP Roger. :-(
Sir Hatchporch Gene too.
I wanted to like this film, but the topics of their conversation are sooo dry. I usually like movies like this, but it’s too easy to lose your focus while watching it. It’s not the length of the film, but the really uninteresting conversation. If this movie was one of the real greats, it would be on tv more often. But as it’s aged, you hardly ever see it.
Well, it IS a French movie, you know.