May 31, 2006, 9:25 a.m. CST
I'll be seeing the first show!
May 31, 2006, 9:28 a.m. CST
I understand it was changed from when i saw a test of this back in February.
May 31, 2006, 9:35 a.m. CST
Although the film might be good, the way it's being marketed is totally misleading given what you've stated above. I bet a lot of people will be disappointed. Also, it doesn't sound like it would be much fun to watch this with your girlfriend.
May 31, 2006, 9:37 a.m. CST
Does anyone else think that Aniston must be a nightmare to deal with in real life? I always thought she played herself on Friends.
May 31, 2006, 9:41 a.m. CST
My g/f hates Hollywood 'romantic' 'comedies.' Because they are usually neither. This sounds like the kind of stuff we like - we'll be there.
May 31, 2006, 9:42 a.m. CST
The trailers are misleading, and people will go in expecting a Wedding Crashers type of film. It's not going to be the hit a lot of people think it will be.
Very nice review, Massa. I gave you a ration of shit for the X-3 review (not for your like or dislike of the film, but for the review itself), which I still feel was warranted, but this is a return to form. Well done! Informative, spoiler free, and articulate. I'm more likely to see this one now. Much thanks
Didn't Hollywood reshoot the ending because the audience felt bad for Jennifer Aniston?
May 31, 2006, 9:55 a.m. CST
you know the one i'm talking about. jennifer aniston: is she or isnt she? i heard on conan that she is in this movie... just saying
May 31, 2006, 9:57 a.m. CST
The scene with Vaughn doing his tour bus shtick right outside the NBC Tower. The ONLY reason I'm seeing this is because it was shot in my city.
May 31, 2006, 10:06 a.m. CST
Isn't this the movie that Aniston was supposed to be nekkid in? Or was it a different one? All I remember is she's doing a movie that *ALLEGEDLY* has some full frontal Aniston in it. But this is PG-13...
May 31, 2006, 10:06 a.m. CST
John Favereau is #1. Isn't the bit where Vaughn bonds with Aniston's new boyfriend supposed to be zany fun? It looks that way in the trailer. Does Alen Tudyk show up for no reason like he did in Dodgeball?
May 31, 2006, 10:09 a.m. CST
It's currently at a stellar 0% positive reviews over on rottentomatoes.com. Granted, only about 10 or so reviews have come in.
May 31, 2006, 10:19 a.m. CST
Three of the guys in the a cappella group in this movie are from my group (Vocal Chaos). I came this close || to being in it myself, but the casting agency couldn't convince the producers to cough up just a little more money for a ninth member of the group. Too bad...
May 31, 2006, 10:24 a.m. CST
Pumpkin, you're dating an asshole.
May 31, 2006, 10:24 a.m. CST
Apparently you see Aniston's ass in it. At one point it may have been more than this, but now I am hearing it is only her ass. Also, getting JASON Bateman's name wrong is a shame, as he really is quite brilliant, and the fact that Wayne Jarvis from Arrested Development is also in this, only raises the appeal. It looks pretty funny, and I'll probably check it out.
May 31, 2006, 10:31 a.m. CST
Only 6 reviews, but it does not bode well: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10005561-break_up/
May 31, 2006, 10:33 a.m. CST
May 31, 2006, 10:36 a.m. CST
so i'm not sure if i trust this review. wait, is al gore in it?
May 31, 2006, 10:41 a.m. CST
by Harry Weinstein
Then again, I delight in the idea of a bunch of shitheads who loved FRIENDS and WEDDING CRASHERS rushing to the theaters to see this and getting their souls slammed in a car door repeatedly. Anything that makes FRIENDS fans miserable is fine with me. Awesome, even. This will maybe find an audience down the road on video, once people have a clearer idea of what sort of film it actually is.
May 31, 2006, 10:43 a.m. CST
by Tony Mike Hall
And hope we get more than just Aniston's bare ass in it. Otherwise, couldn't possibly case less about seeing this fetid piece of cinematic dung.
May 31, 2006, 10:52 a.m. CST
Then count me in. Finally a romantic comedy with not a single thing romantic or funny it. Well you know what I mean.
May 31, 2006, 10:58 a.m. CST
wouldn't have thunk it. Hilarious, though, because the suits definitely needed to appeal to that goofy Wedding Crashers and Friends crowd for this. Are they in for a rude awakening? I'll be seeing this with the girlfriend and I'm secretly looking forward to her reaction now. Is that bad? I'm a big fan of both of these actors for awhile now and the supporting cast looks great. God forbid someone makes an insightful and realistic romantic comedy these days. Man, I can't wait to see the faces of the couples this weekend. hah! Of course, this movie could set of some sort of chain reaction where no one gets any ass this weekend. Strange.
May 31, 2006, 11:07 a.m. CST
Like WAR OF THE ROSES or THROW MOMMA FROM THE TRAIN.
May 31, 2006, 11:10 a.m. CST
I think I won't protest too much when the lil' lady wants to see this...
May 31, 2006, 11:17 a.m. CST
May 31, 2006, 11:19 a.m. CST
I have to agree it isn't a bad movie at all, here is the link to my review: http://www.movietack.net/r787-break-up-the-movie-review.html
May 31, 2006, 11:23 a.m. CST
May 31, 2006, 11:36 a.m. CST
by andrew coleman
Hilarious I was laughing a lot in the movie. Mind you though three woman in front of me booed at the ending because it doesn't have the typical dating or chick flick ending, which I loved. I think guys will actually like this movie more than woman because of that.
May 31, 2006, 11:56 a.m. CST
May 31, 2006, 12:06 p.m. CST
by earl of sandwich
Saw this one last week and was fairly dissapointed. Not that I was really looking forward to it, but I was hoping for more laughs and less stupidity. The movie is dark, in the sense that it goes to places that most rom-coms will never tread. But the characters are just plain shallow and aren't really given much to express themselves with, other than stupid "Three's Company" tricks to win back or piss each other off. Want to get your almost gone boyfriend jealous, wax your beaver and parade it in front of him....THEN go out for a date with a rich guy to rub it in (hopefully before the stubble grows back). Who installs a disco ball in their apartment & invites lapdancers over to piss off their snarky almost ex-girlfriend? (Admitedly, that scene plays real dark. Boozed out Vaughn looking almost violent when Aniston comes home to find him barely even registering the stripper chicks). Everyone is correct that the marketing of this film is totally misleading and word of mouth will kill this film. Making any allusions to this being a great film, just cause it's not what the marketing says is wrong. It's a badly made movie with shallow main characters that act like asses for 3/4's of the movie, and it's not really that funny. The final 10 minutes is the only time anyone isn't bullshitting their way through the lame script. Rock on Peter Billingsly though..."Randy lay there like a slug, it was his only defense" Still gold after all these years.
May 31, 2006, 12:17 p.m. CST
...because I know people HATED that movie when it first came out, and I love 95% of it -- in its scab-pulling, funny way. I know folks who think it's just too painful to watch; not me, boy. I had zero intention of seeing THE BREAK UP, but if it's in the ballpark of KoC satire, I'm there.
May 31, 2006, 12:19 p.m. CST
... movies like this have no place on here, no geek value whatsoever.
May 31, 2006, 12:27 p.m. CST
Eh, anything with Vaughn and what's her face should be immediately skipped.
May 31, 2006, 12:55 p.m. CST
That's a pretty damning statement to make about any movie. The sweeping generalization that a A-/B+ star-level studio flick has no geek value is misleading and not entirely accurate. FOr instance, the movie stars Vince Vaughn. Last I checked, he is a mid-to-high-level geek draw thanks to Swingers, Old School, Wedding Crashers, and a dozen cameos. It's got the hint of Aniston nudity, and actress nudity is always a geek draw...after all, there are people who actually paid to see Swordfish. I'm not calling your statement stupid--on the surface it would appear to be true. But one must remember that geek value is not measured by the genre, it is measured by the geek itself. The so-called "Film Geek" who only gets a hard-on for genre pics, specific directors, or "cult" reasons (Bruce Campbell, Troma, Rick Baker, etc...) is not necessarily a pure "Film Geek" at all, but a Categorized Geek. Sure, I poo-poo most rom-coms on principle. Mainly, they're shit. I get dragged to them all the time by my "Sex and the City"-loving GF, and any time I hear of some new S.J. Parker POS coming out, I cringe, because I have to make the concessionary trip to see that kind of tripe to even out the fairness of movie selection (and it guarantees a lay.) I don't want to see this movie, but then, I am not a true film geek. I geek out for Star Wars, comic books, good comedies, and general science fiction...you know, the "Weekend Geek." We "Weekend Geeks" are like the dentists and accountants who leather up and ride Harleys on the weekend like they're Hell's Angels. Although technically Geeks, the Weekend Geek holds back from true immersion in certain things. Whether it is a time constraint, a matter of money, or simply the fear of being called "immature," "nerd"--or worse "fag," the Weekend Geek will stick to what he knows and piss on the rest to avoid being lumped in with the rest of the immature nerdy fags he looks down upon. I'm as guilty of it as anyone. Anyway, to get to my point, to say that a movie like this has no geek value is misleading. Some geeks may wish to see Vaughn and Favreau reunite. Some may wish to check out Aniston's bony ass (I personally am repulsed by Spinosaurus-skinny women with visible vertebrae.) But aside from that, there is a certain kind of geek who will see this...the PURE FILM GEEK. The Pure Fovie Geek sees EVERYTHING, good or bad, reviews be damned. The Pure Film Geek knows everyone at the local theater because they are there 3-5 days a week, watching every single new release. They are at Best Buy every Tuesday, picking up an armful of new releases, and then stopping at the video store on the way home to pick up anything they missed in it's theatrical run...that they didn't trust enough to buy sight unseen, which probably happens often as well, particularly with well-reviewed Anime and other foreign films that the Pure Film Geek may have limited access to. Harry is a Pure Film Geek. So are many of the AICN staff. I've known at least two of them in my day--I used to work at Blockbuster, and there's always one on staff. SO to say that this movie, whether it be crap, gold, or more likely mediocre and forgettable, has "no geek value whatsoever" is misleading. Sure it has no geek value to the "Weekend Geek." It has no value to the exclusionary and overly-loyal-to-his-choices "Hater Geek." It has no value to the bitter and cynical "Genre Geek." But what of the moderate "Comedy Geeks?" What of thse who will see anything with Vince Vaughn in it, ala Bruce Campbell? And yes, what of the PURE FILM GEEKS, those who watch anything and everything, waiting to be swept away by the magical world of movies, occasionally disliking, often passing judgement, but never faltering in their quest to SEE IT ALL. I cannot be one of them. I do not have the patience to see EVERYTHING. Cthulu bless the Pure Film Geek, for though they are often pale, unkempt, and occasionally lack social skills, they are the fuel that stokes the fire of fandom. You are not grossly wrong, IAmLegolas...but your statement is a little misleading. Anyway, this is what happens when I have coffee on my day off. I ramble.
May 31, 2006, 1:09 p.m. CST
by I Dunno
I've been through enough drama with women in my life, I don't need to pay to see it acted out in a movie. When I go to the movies I want to see superheroes, pirates, space battles, snakes on planes and the occasional intellectual or political piece, not some bitter twats sniping at each other. And how sad is the Swingers reunion? Mike and Trey are fat bastards now, especially Favreau. That alone would depress the hell out of me. Pass.
May 31, 2006, 1:10 p.m. CST
by Massawyrm 1
Yes kids, this is what happens when you down a pot of coffee in under an hour, write faster than you can think, then put down your review and edit it hours later when you can barely keep your eyes open. DUMBASS. DUMBASS. DUMBASS. I'll get that corrected. Sorry Mr. Bateman. As said by someone else, you deserve better. But...could you at least CONSIDER changing your name to Patrick? I mean, I'm sure you get it all the time.
May 31, 2006, 1:13 p.m. CST
Too much coffee+rushed writing=typos out the ass. I mean look at my stupid little post. What the hell is a "Fovie?"
May 31, 2006, 1:19 p.m. CST
you just made me want to see it. Btw... been listening to the Dead Milkmen lately?
May 31, 2006, 1:42 p.m. CST
As a sad member of the Pure Film Geek group, this movie(from Massa's review) now sounds really interesting to me. That's the main reason why I come to this site because of the sick and twisted mind of the Pure Film Geek, a Geek that has to write a review and watch just about anything. They have this insane knowledge of years upon years of movies that they can become overly aggresive when criticzing and downright agonizing to sit next to in a movie theatre. I go the passive route and sometimes attend movies by myself, because no one in their right mind would attend a movie theatre as frequently as me. That's the sacrifice and ugly truth about the Pure Film Geek route. Luckily, I have someone of the opposite gender to attend movies like this, but the sad thing is is that I would have attended this movie alone if need be, just to see how they could of pulled off the mixed marketing and then slap you in the face dark romantic comedy twist. So, it's been curbing my sad frequent moviegoing trips. But, Uber Film Geeks need to embrace this thought of a movie and Massa's review really helps out the intrigue factor for nerds like us.
May 31, 2006, 1:46 p.m. CST
by Big Bad Clone
May 31, 2006, 1:48 p.m. CST
It's getting panned on RT. Big time. So far not a single good review. I've never been interested in this one, but it's not a good sign that this is supposed to be an "indie" style film, yet every tiny bit of the trailer screams bland and pedestrian.
May 31, 2006, 1:55 p.m. CST
...that is all. Carry on.
May 31, 2006, 2:07 p.m. CST
Stop the madness.
May 31, 2006, 2:28 p.m. CST
As others have said, when they tested it w/an ending where they didn't get together, audiences LOATHED it. So I assume they changed it to where they DO get together...is this true? That kinda copout would normally piss me off, but in this case, I'll swallow it cuz I hope the film does OK. It's actually ambitious, dare I say groundbreaking, in trying to portray popular 'icons' as different & "real". In inerviews, Vaughnist...oh fuck..both of them are being honest & telling people it's clearly not a 'crashers-esque" comedic romp. I think Massy's right..it sounds like it's not a summer flick. But I still hope it does well. BTW...WORST 'BAIT 'N SWICTH' EVER? I have to go w/Cronenberg's 'Dead Ringers'...the movie was GREAT, but it was BLATANTLY marketed as a sci-fi mystery/thriller, not a psychodrama about madness. I'm still pissed about the marketing...the film, not so much. I guess that "emily rose" possession movie had a lot of that too, but I didn't see it.
May 31, 2006, 2:34 p.m. CST
teenage girls standing in line all day wearing "Team Aniston" t-shirts..this is only fair because last year at this time they were makeing fun of all the chubby 30-something guyes (i.e. Me) standing in line all day holding toy light-sabers...sigh..I need to get laid.
May 31, 2006, 2:44 p.m. CST
Because the trailers look pretty conventional. Funny and worthy of my money, but not indie-quality non-summer-movie-ish. I'll see it anyways. Vaughn is legitimately hilarious. I just went through a break up of my own, so it'll probably hit fairly close to home.
May 31, 2006, 2:55 p.m. CST
by ripper t. jones
Thanks man, just what I needed to know about this flick.
May 31, 2006, 3:11 p.m. CST
by Nairb The Movie
Was the stupidest, most contrived, boring, piece of lame comedic attempts I have ever seen in my life. I fault wronged by both Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn by the end of the film... The fact that it has gained such fame... Kills me as well...
May 31, 2006, 3:44 p.m. CST
by frank cotton
kudos on your most excellent post - please consider making coffee a staple on all of your days off
May 31, 2006, 3:57 p.m. CST
I appreciate your geek manifesto.
May 31, 2006, 4:07 p.m. CST
by Massawyrm 1
And to further apologize I'd like to say that Bateman was actually the most underused of the cast - but Bateman fans will no doubt love every moment he's on screen. Great stuff.
May 31, 2006, 4:18 p.m. CST
by Massawyrm 1
What's wrong if a man likes a little Phil Collins now and then?
May 31, 2006, 5:43 p.m. CST
about this in the states but I still think it looks good,I'm looking forward to it, when it comes out in the UK-in fucking August.
May 31, 2006, 6:18 p.m. CST
by Little Beavis
I'm there, dude.
May 31, 2006, 7:18 p.m. CST
The trailers make it look like War of the Roses lite to me, but without the absolute brutality of the earlier flick. How does it compare?
May 31, 2006, 8:48 p.m. CST
It was realistic and bittersweet, so i wrote on my test card "So we'll never see this ending again except on DVD, huh?" Looks like i was right.
May 31, 2006, 8:56 p.m. CST
are among the worst i've seen as far as mismarketing a movie. honestly, theres about 5 minutes worth of screen time devoted to fighting over the apartment. the movie is really about aniston trying to get vaughn back any way she can think of with the help of the ever annoying joey lauren adams. bateman, hauser, and d'onofrio have about 10 total minutes of screen time. its a drama with comedic elements, and in turn is one of the better examples of its kind. but the misdirected marketing will probably cost it in the long run, which is too bad because then no one will try to make a somewhat different romcom again for awhile, and instead make the exact type of movies one would expect the break up is from its ads.
May 31, 2006, 10:43 p.m. CST
He voted for Bush and watches Fox news! How can we take his point of view seriouslly?!? THERE WERE NO WMD'S! Impeach Bush and...Sorry, just kidding Wyrm. I figured you didn't get enough irrelevant, ignorant bashing in the Inconvenient Truth talkback. (I'm a Democrat and even I thought those people were idiots). Anyway, what'd you say about Jennifer Aniston or something?
May 31, 2006, 11:30 p.m. CST
by Hell's Cigarette
Massawyrm is right...people are going to hate the shit out of this movie and label it "boring" or bitch about how all you are going to get out of it are a bunch of ways to get back at the person you are with. But, since the marketing is making it out to be the fun-loving rom-com it isn't, I'm sure it will have a decent opening weekend. Now all we need to do is get Vincent D back on L&O: CI full time for the full 22 next season.
June 1, 2006, 2:36 a.m. CST
by andrew coleman
Woman I know who saw screenings of thise loved most of it but hate the ending SPOILER: They don't really get back together but it's hinted sort of. Woman were groaning they wanted happy stupid Friends bull shit. Most of the cast is very funny and the movie at least has a real comedic vibe unlike a lot of garbage comedies out recently.
June 1, 2006, 8:05 a.m. CST
Amen, it is one of my favortie Scorsese films (along with Who's That Knocking at My Door) and is terribly underrated.
June 1, 2006, 8:21 a.m. CST
Didn't she say at Letterman she was wearing some kind of nude undies ??? So we probably get to see her in a flesh colored thong ... big deal ... ah well ...
June 1, 2006, 8:36 a.m. CST
Now I'll actually feel pretty good about seeing this Saturday with my wife. It may restore the portion of my soul that was deadened when I had to sit through Rumor Has It. Also: I agree with Trazadone in the thought that Anniston is a pain in the ass in real life. Total sourpuss. Kinda girl that would, after a night of you boozing it up and talking trash, pour all of your good liquor down the drain and break down into shitfit hysterics. Still, I'd knock the bottom out of that thing if I had the chance (tee-hee).
June 1, 2006, 10:54 a.m. CST
by Skyway Moaters
Huh huh me and my AICN buddies don't normally go for well written, thoughtful romantic comedies. But Jen's tits?! Har har! Count us in for this one! Drool, slobber, plthbt...
June 1, 2006, 11:37 a.m. CST
by Miami Mofo
According to the other posts, no t's, just ass -- which is still quite nice. Somewhere in this house is that 'Rolling Stone' with Jen's tuchas on the cover. Must go find. See ya at the Club. ***Great post, MCVamp!
June 1, 2006, 11:40 a.m. CST
Sorry to dissapoint but there were no Anistits in this movie. Aniston does look great in the film though. The film is really good - actually somewhat surprisingly so.I understand why there's bad buzz but it's totally unwarranted. The ending is exactly what it should be. Critics complain about things being too formulaic then they complain even more when a movie like this comes around, hits all the right notes, and dares to try to be something different. IMO about 99 % of this movie is grand slam, upper deck, out of the ballpark good. The relationships are all great, the cast might be one of the best in a romantic comedy in several years and the ending perfectly suited the film. Actually I discussed with my wife afterwards why I thought the ending was maybe the best scene in the film - I think it works that well. Vaughn and Favs are great together as usual (once you get past how huge Favs has become - and not ego huge) and there is one scene near the end of the film that really shows how good these two actors can be together. Vince and Jens relationship is amazingly written and if you've ever been in any relationship where you've spent more than 6 months living together a lot of the dialogue will make you laugh very hard and possibly even scare you a bit. I swore that some of the arguments were lifted verbatim out of transcripts of arguments my wife and I have had. At some points the fights turn into full on verbal abuse and after the first fight we really know that this isn't just going to be your typical kooky funny rom com. Go see it - ignore the critics. I really hope some critics start getting this film though because I think it's one of the better romantic comedies I've seen in a while. Just remember it's not trying to be Wedding Crashers 2.
June 1, 2006, 12:09 p.m. CST
by earl of sandwich
I'm amazed at everone's love for this movie. After I saw it I said it would tank. Once the online reviews started rolling in & confirmed my suspicions, I was sure talkbackers would crucify it. Never underestimate a talkbackers rusty & infrequently used ability to be optimistic. Hope you guys actually enjoy it when you get a chance to check it out. I laughed 4 times, and one of those was only cause I like the band Yes. "LOOSE yourself...."
June 1, 2006, 12:42 p.m. CST
I try to be the best Pure Film Geek I can, I really do. I would like to think my DVD collection is a varitiable treasure trove of film knowledge and enthusiasm. I have everything from AFI recognized classics and out of print Criterion editions to Bubba Ho Tep and the 3 disc Canadian edition of Brotherhood of the Wolf. However, as hard as I've tried not to, I still lapse into the ex jock/ ex fratboy past I've tried to leave behind. Tomorrow afternoon I'll be back to playing golf, swilling cold beer and snickering at the stale Caddyshack/Swingers/Old School references when I should be at home watching my copy of Django that I've never opened. Shame on me. That said, good review Mass. I had minimal interest in seeing this before reading your take, but now I'm in. Good thing the Mrs. still thinks it's going to be a standard rom com. By the way, for what it's worth, Vaughn is a Republican according to Anniston. GO 'CANES!!!!
June 1, 2006, 2:07 p.m. CST
by Skyway Moaters
June 1, 2006, 2:46 p.m. CST
by snow scorpion
If not, I ain't going. /not that anyone gives a crap. Even me.
June 1, 2006, 6:04 p.m. CST
Reading this review has changed my opinion of this film from 'indifferent' to '...maybe'. Sounds pretty interesting: a realistic romantic comedy...so you just know that "My Super Ex-Girlfriend" will outgross it. Fuck.
June 1, 2006, 8:22 p.m. CST
by 'Cholera's Ghost
I guess I'm the "One Weekend a Month, Two Weeks a Year" Geek.