Firstly, the fundamental honours should go to Sam Rockwell. For me he is like a "Mana x 100" card in movie industry. Every movie with this guy goes immedietely few steps further in terms of dealing with humanity captured in frames. It's hard to find another so comically and dramatically tallented actor in hollywood, who can transfer such amounts of humanity to the screen on the basis of almost any script. His Mr. Right feels natural, funny, charming, and - despite complete absurd filling every scene of that movie (which is by the way not a flaw in any sense) - very believable on a psychological level (of course, mind the convention - it's not New Wave French Drama). I would risk saying that this flick could be even unwatchable if not Rockwell's charisma. In my six-star rating, two stars were earned by his talent - in my opinion without him it's only a four-star movie.
Why so harsh? Because the way this movie is directed, shot and produced leaves some space for improvement. Sadly, it feels low budget - in that not good way, when you can clearly see what the director was AIMING FOR in that particular scene and how big the gap between that and what he actually ACHIEVED is. There are many scenes here and there which feel just cheap, but would like to be percieved as an A-class hollywood material. It is very anoying especially in fighting and special effects scenes - considering low budget, the director could have made other aesthetic choices, to avoid such traps, and deliver the vibe, the soul of the scene in other form, more suitable for production's scale.
Aslo, other reasonably cheaper scenes, not demanding any special expensive "movie magic", seem for me a bit vague in terms of direction sharpness - they are ...OK rather, than extraordinary, and their potential seems to be a bit wasted. Sam Rockwell, Tim Roth and Anna Kendrick do their best and squeeze those to the last drop, but that only... increases my appetite. And it gets worse, because the movie has GREAT script (with extraordinary dialogues), so you almost feel pain when it is delivered so uninspiringly from scene to scene.
Cinematography also lacks the spark - shots are lightened in a bit TV fashion (with only few decent exeptions), and every slow-mo, or trick shot feels somehow amateur, "wanna-be" like. That spoils the fun for me. I would rather see that movie made aestetically with much... less attention to the form, or - to put it in better words - with much more storytelling visual class. "Brick" (2005) - a post noir crime story by Rian Johnson delivers much "less stylish" (in the meaning of "less is more"), yet still very attractive form, quite suitable for "Mr. Right" in my opinion. Other great example of class - and this time from the same dark comedy subgenre as "Mr. Right" - is John Dahl's "You kill me" (2007). Both of those movies share the same storytelling charms, which "Mr. Right" lacks - they seem mature, modest, accurate, wise, and STILL entertaining.
But overall "Mr. Right" is ...alright. You WILL find in it some portions of soul, humanity, humour and pure entertainment.
Why so harsh? Because the way this movie is directed, shot and produced leaves some space for improvement. Sadly, it feels low budget - in that not good way, when you can clearly see what the director was AIMING FOR in that particular scene and how big the gap between that and what he actually ACHIEVED is. There are many scenes here and there which feel just cheap, but would like to be percieved as an A-class hollywood material. It is very anoying especially in fighting and special effects scenes - considering low budget, the director could have made other aesthetic choices, to avoid such traps, and deliver the vibe, the soul of the scene in other form, more suitable for production's scale.
Aslo, other reasonably cheaper scenes, not demanding any special expensive "movie magic", seem for me a bit vague in terms of direction sharpness - they are ...OK rather, than extraordinary, and their potential seems to be a bit wasted. Sam Rockwell, Tim Roth and Anna Kendrick do their best and squeeze those to the last drop, but that only... increases my appetite. And it gets worse, because the movie has GREAT script (with extraordinary dialogues), so you almost feel pain when it is delivered so uninspiringly from scene to scene.
Cinematography also lacks the spark - shots are lightened in a bit TV fashion (with only few decent exeptions), and every slow-mo, or trick shot feels somehow amateur, "wanna-be" like. That spoils the fun for me. I would rather see that movie made aestetically with much... less attention to the form, or - to put it in better words - with much more storytelling visual class. "Brick" (2005) - a post noir crime story by Rian Johnson delivers much "less stylish" (in the meaning of "less is more"), yet still very attractive form, quite suitable for "Mr. Right" in my opinion. Other great example of class - and this time from the same dark comedy subgenre as "Mr. Right" - is John Dahl's "You kill me" (2007). Both of those movies share the same storytelling charms, which "Mr. Right" lacks - they seem mature, modest, accurate, wise, and STILL entertaining.
But overall "Mr. Right" is ...alright. You WILL find in it some portions of soul, humanity, humour and pure entertainment.