I gave it a 7.5 out of 10

Am I Missing Something?

Absolutely Fantastic

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Jerome (Max Minghella) is a geeky self-important Art nerd. He's always drawing and always being bullied. His great hope is Strathmore College where he could start a new life. Only Strathmore is a rundown crumbling institution with disinterested teachers. He's enamored with beautiful nude model Audrey (Sophia Myles). Oh and there is a serial killer.I love the skewering of the art world and art education. It has a dark edge. Max Minghella is not the most compelling actor but he masters the feel of a pompous art nerd. John Malkovich is great as a professor. Sophia Myles is beautiful. I could see her as an object of desire. The only problem is that I don't think Jim Broadbent is the right actor for the role. Overall, this is a good black comedy.

Lets figure it's cast and shooting has started so we are stuck with the existing characters and actors. No way to edit out of this mess; it will take re-shoots. So the male lead is a bumbling passive insecure weasel, so he is now the antagonist. The fluff babe might carry the film but that is a risk, so that leaves the jock/cop. So lets go Hitchcock and let the audience know he is a cop right at the start. The snarky art-school send-up is no Zoolander and snark is boring and sophomoric. So lets stick with serial killer plot. Stick with Hitchcock too, so we know it is the art bum right from the beginning.So the flick starts out with the murder...no, two murders a few months apart. The jock/cop goes in to investigate undercover. The fluff babe starts to get suckered in by the whiny sensitive cockroach, until she sees how his art looks like the dogs you are supposed to copy to "win" entry in the comic book and matchbook cover art schools. Later she will see how needy and clingy he is, and then when the dweeb claims he wants to be the greatest artist in history, she can fleck him with spit as she laughs in his face and run to the arms of the jock/cop.They were nice enough to have the jock/cop's art get better, and we should make sure it gets way better so he is a decent artist by the end. The dweeb will tease and ridicule the jock/cop so we will be glad to see the dweeb lose.And let the dweeb lose big. Just as the jock/cop figures its the art bum that killed the students, the dweeb steals the bum's art and maybe burns the place down by accident and maybe on purpose to cover his plagiarism. The jock/cop can't prove the arson, so he frames the dweeb for the murders. Lets have some convicts break the dweeb's fingers as a welcome to prison, before marrying him to the man with the most cigarettes.Meanwhile the jock/cop is getting fed up with his bitch wife and jerk cop co-workers, so he gives into temptation and makes love to the fluff babe with the rich daddy. Then his art gets way better, he divorces his wife, and quits his job as a cop. We end the film with the dweeb in prison, his hands in casts, and walking bow-legged. He turns and sees the fluff babe and gets all excited until the jock/cop comes into frame and gives her a big wet kiss while roughly fondling her left breast. He laughs and says "Hey, enjoy life in prison you dork, and remember its illegal to make any money off your crime, loser." The fluff babe laughs with delight, sticks out her tongue at the dweeb, and grabs the jock/cop's butt as they skip out the door. The jock/cop looks over his shoulder and says, "Thanks for giving me a beautiful life." Eighty-five million domestic gross and the action figures and watercolor art set merchandising will clear a few million more.Oh, and lets not have a film about art students make fun of homosexuals and documentary film makers. Talk about stupid and self-destructive. I knew they were in trouble when they made out the scribble face portrait to be crap and it was the best thing in the whole movie. We can have the cop draw that as a portrait of the fluff babe at the end. He can unveil it at his gallery opening, explaining, "This is how she makes me feel."

I watched this movie at the recommendation of a friend. Honestly, I feel like I've more or less wasted my time with it. I'm an art student, so I'm not talking from outside of this world. Now, I understand that this movie is intended as a bit of a parody, but it fails to deliver that. It's filled with clichés and just disappointed me. From the very start, I didn't like Jerome. Badly written character. He lacks depth, personality, and is weak. He so easily changed his mind about life after talking to Mr. Serial Killer that I almost laughed. Suddenly, everything is dark and brooding, while the movie didn't set the pacing or the atmosphere for this kind of mystery flick. Besides, the ending being left unexplained doesn't "make me think" as I imagine was intended, it just leaves me dry and uninterested. The only reason I'm giving this a 6 is some of the secondary role actors who were good in their place, and some scenes that sparked my interest. Maybe my expectations of this were too high.

I think if nothing else this film had ONE purpose and did it well, that is it exposes the elephant in the room that no art student or art-minded person claims to notice, that is just how annoying pretensions in art school can be sometimes and how Art Professors seem to be less and less apt to cultivate skill and push students to "open up" without understanding the fundamentals they wish to break down. Case and point, many original "art rebels" going back 100 years had very formal training and no conceptual minds to guide them -YET they are the most imitated and emulated. Today what you have are ALL conceptual minds doing the teaching and NO little or no formal training being offered. Students are fed a diet of Western art history and idealism -veering away from the very skills that began it all. Mediums, brushes, how to mix color, understanding how paint behaves.I think many of the reviews that are the most negative are from those that just didn't like to see this particular subject parodied. Oh yes you have stereotypes and things that don't really happen but -There is truth behind it. Art students all feel the pressure and desire to be great -as an all or nothing proposition at an insane long shot -so how could you make that funny? You make some generalizations, caricature a few "types" that might actually be based on some truth. I love the critiques for example -and everyone getting an "A" -on one hand you want to know you earned it but on the other you know that if you turned in something that really sucked (like that of a certain classmate) you might still get that "A".Then again I know nothing of film or of the career paths and history of the director for that matter -BUT I can't help but to wonder if all the "high speech" and "expert" clinical analysis about this film is not a little biased on account of those that don't want to see art students laughed at. Those that would laugh more at artsy people might also favor another kind of comedy -like "American Pie" or "Meet the Fockers" - it's too dark to be mainstream but for the "aficionado of film" it makes fun of the WRONG people - "Heathers" was a hit because it made fun of Jocks and small town thinking after all.