Summary: I had to see it twice, I confess. The first time was alright. Second was better because whoever follows some of Araki's work won't understand why he did this. I'm gonna give my best shot here. The movie is original because it is a comedy with a screwball stoned character caught between very serious situations without pretension of disbelief.
Summary: I completely disagree with many of these bad reviews. My personal opinion: if you smoke, definitely see this movie. But not while you're stoned--it will make you paranoid about everything! If you have never smoked pot, or are against it, don't even bother. Honestly, the whole movie is kind of like an inside joke. If you don't get high or haven't gotten high, you won't think it's entertaining, and you probably won't get it.
An air of innovation verses your typical run-of-the-mill stoner movie.
31 March 2008
Summary: I've read a lot of angry comments about this movie, claiming it's "bashing" on "stoners" and anti-pot propaganda. This is not the case. If you're familiar with Araki's directing and themes in creating movies, it would be easy to recognize this as a satire. Obviously things of this extreme nature don't happen to people who smoke pot, but I like my comedies to have an entertaining plot.
Summary: WOW, do i love a good stoner movie! Maybe it has something to do with me loving to get high myself and being able to relate to how the main character deals with situations. There seems to be a lot of people here who have to over analyze even the simplest movies. I'm not a typical stoner.
Summary: Anna Faris is, in my opinion, the funniest young comedic actress out there today. In "Smiley Face", she is extremely entertaining (and completely unconcerned about vanity) as Jane, the much-too-stoned pothead. I just love her (and I'm not even gay)! The story has me scratching my head a little bit. I can't decide if it's just some mindless, silly stoner movie (which works for me!), or, as another reviewer put it, some sort of 70's anti-marijuana training film.
Summary: I can't believe there are so many negative reviews for this film. I guess it's either you love it, or hate it. Personally this was a comic portrayal of pot use and it's not supposed to be taken as seriously as some of the reviewers have made it seem. Jane (Anna Faris) did a great job being blissfully stoned throughout the movie. She made good use of all the stoner stereotypes and I loved the expressions that she used throughout the movie.
Worth a watch, if you're into these kinds of films!
7 January 2008
Summary: I saw this movie on a whim because it had some actors I knew, and looked like something similar to Napoleon Dynamite or other quirky films. One critic on the DVD box says "it's like Harold and Kumar but with a chick". Personally, I found it only slightly similar, if even that. Possibly because I wasn't craving a white castle burger the entire time (FYI, the nearest one is over 5 hours away from my home). For starters, this is a very unique film.
Summary: I don't get it either, how many people here didn't like the movie. I guess it just confirms my theory, that the worse a movie is rated, the better I find it. THe acting was great. I laughed almost the entire movie. Maybe the people that didn't understand it, should eat some cannabis and then see what happens. To say it is boring is complete nonsense.