That was an excellent one.

Too much about the plot just didn't add up, the writing was bad, some of the scenes were cringey and awkward,

Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

The only true reaction one can have after watching Charlie Casanova is a neutral reaction. You won't love it or hate it. A couple of moments will stick in your head. One moment in the picture is hilarious. You will however feel duped. You will feel duped because the film is talking to your head and not to your head, heart,gut and lets just say some other places.Charlie Casanova - The Emotional Experience (Take Two) Charlie Casanova must and I mean must be seen for a second time. Once you watch it again the female and male characters make more emotional sense and their own personal situations are heartbreaking and gut wrenching. Of course your heart won't break but the dams of your eyes will.Like all great films; "Charlie" is a sensual experience - it uses the senses well. The use of sound and silence is used quite well in the film. The attention to detail of male/female behaviours is well brought out.People will highlight certain scenes to champion "Charlie" but as always like "Midnight Cowboy" the scene after the famous scene will be the most memorable. Moments of female anquish and male chameleon contorsions will be bypassed as secondary on first viewing "Charlie" but like cream, will rise to the top on the second viewing and will emotionally stun you. This puppy was stunned by the male chameleon contorsions first time round and was emotionally floored by the female anquish scene the second time round. I had to pause the screen.Charlie is the joker in a joker society and we love the joker. The joker has replaced the royalty but the joker is taking royalty payments.We desire the joker and want to be the joker and that is cool but we need to infuse the joker with wisdom, charisma and intelligence in that order to free us from the sexual insanity that is trashing our bodies and our minds.

I like to keep an open mind when going to the cinema. I generally avoid all reviews and press relating to movies on show, depending on word of mouth and personal recommendation instead. I arrived at the cinema expecting nothing, and it dutifully delivered. It was easily the worst film I've ever had the misfortune of seeing. The only positive I could draw from this movie is that it is mercifully short, although seemingly endless when you have to sit through it. Most people didn't bother (there were probably 20 people at the beginning of my showing and around 12 by the end). The dialogue was unintentionally hilarious at times, but mostly cringe-worthy. The acting is of an impossibly low standard. The story line is confused and forgettable. Even the movie itself looks extremely amateur. I'd imagine they were intentionally going for a dark and gritty look, but the technical expertise obviously wasn't there to pull it off.Avoid this film at all costs. N.B.: Aside from the disingenuous 10 star reviews of the film on this very site, the IMDb score is also massively misleading. It has the same ratio of 10* reviews as The Shawshank Redemption, IMDb's number one film of all time. If only real votes were counted, I'd say it would be in the 2 star range.

Up to the point of me getting along to the Irish Film and Television Academy premiere of Charlie Casanova, the hype had been immense, much to the credit of Writer, Director and Producer, Terry McMahon, who kept pushing forward with his challenging, and yes, abrasive exploration of morality. Not just talking the talk of controversy for the sake if it, he has created a piece of independent, Irish cinema that we have not seen before, and will, I certainly believe, elevate to cult status for future generations to dissect, critique and quote from. And it seems, Terry's incredible gift as a writer, as well as his tenacity, is paying off. To the right of him, there is the camp of fans that love the film with such enthusiasm, that collectively, they have become a major marketing tool in spreading the word. And to the left of him, the ones who hate the film; don't get it, walk out on it, fear it, or simply can't understand what the hell this character is on about. Whatever their feelings, they are still managing to generate just as much hype!Terry describes his film as being a fractured narrative about a fractured man with a fractured mind. His description is very appropriate, and it got me wondering as to how many of his audience would go home with fractured thoughts of their own! As a film-goer, my quest, for ninety minutes or so, is to empathize, to live vicariously through another life, to walk in their shoes as I re-imagine through the writings of another. Why then, as I settled in to watch this movie, could I not shake an annoying discomfort? I did not like Charlie from the get go, but he's a sociopath, so that's a no-brainer! And kudos to Emmet J Scanlon for his skill of transformation; from a well-heeled, over-educated, arrogant, yet strangely charismatic man, to a dangerous, viscerally ugly psychopath, and with such unrelenting realism that I truly believed the madness that was unfolding behind his eyes.Leaving Charlie aside however, I could feel no empathy for any of the other characters. I did not like his wife, her responses to Charlie irritated me. Same for his friends, couples themselves in different forms of crisis. Why were they all so trusting of Charlie, so easily led by him? It irked me, a lot! So what the hell was I still sitting there for, in a cold, half-filled cinema, as the director said himself, for an hour and half of my life that I'll never get back? What kept me hooked? Yes, I got it, the subtext and metaphor that Terry has spoken of many times, his reflection on society, and how, as a nation, we have allowed previous governments, without accountability, to kick the shite out of us, the immorality, and amorality of the continued criminalization of the poor, the very fabric of 'family' constantly under attack, and how we, as a society, continue to allow it, with no consequences and very few raised voices. So, in the thematic knowing of the piece, why was I feeling a tad troubled, yet compelled enough to stay on for the final gut-wrenching scene? (Even if it does end with the hauntingly beautiful and pure lament of Damien Dempsey!)The answer? FEAR…the recognition of the trait that ironically, was the reason I so disliked the characters in Charlie's life. So here's my tuppence worth of fractured thought, brought to the fore by the menace to society that is Charlie Casanova. Terry made reference to the fact that the characters in the film needed to be in their thirties, because to be older, they would have experienced the Ireland of the eighties, and therefore, they would have known too much. Through the decades of the boom, a large proportion of the current middle classes (now the hidden poor, in many cases) have come from the working classes of that decade, as indeed, did Charlie's people, so for me, the nail on the head has been truly hammered, and perhaps is where my own discomfort came from. In knowing too much from our past experiences, we can hardly bear to see it happening again. Even though it is happening. And if we cannot bear it, then we cannot face it, and so we bury the unease and carry on, minding our own and protecting what we have left with a societal and political lethargy that keeps that hammer raining down on us. And of our future, and that of our children, we blindly trust the universe, and get up each morning to salvage what hope we have left. Yes, we are fractured, as is our nation, but even in fear, it is the man and woman who get back up every day, get the kids to school and get on with their crappy paid and taxed-to-the-hilt jobs, who will keep that hope alive; but in the doing of the active citizen, the fear of change, and of fear itself, will also continue to thrive…Footnote: I was recently at a writer's event, where Terry, in his unique delivery, and I paraphrase here, stated that some people would like his film and some wouldn't, and if they didn't, F***k them! I have to admit, the comment riled me up. If I didn't like it, then it would be right back at him.I DID like the film, very much, so f**k you anyway, Terry!http://carolinefarrell.wordpress.com/2011/11/

In spite of a ridiculous rant by a sad and pathetic fool called 'billy the hick' (Aptly named) I will keep this short and state that this groundbreaking movie has taken many of the staid opposition to change in any form by surprise. With the result that they can only comment on the negative. OK not everybody will enjoy this movie. (I hated 'The sound of music') but for a first time low cost incredibly well written, acted and directed film Charlie Casanover, has opened a door of hope for so many independent film makers with the courage to present their work on their own terms. you can like it or loath it, but you can't ignore Charlie Casanova.