fxdx4 Edmond is a film maker's experiment that focuses on dialogue and character at the expense of plot and logic. The themes of societal conformity as well as sex and happiness are explored with varied success and this makes for an overall poor film with some redeeming qualities. This is based off a play of David Mamets', best known for dialogue centered films such as Glengarry Glen Ross, and directed by Stuart Gordon best known for the mediocre Pit and the Pendulum. If a film that is effectively small dialogue filled rants by David Mamet sounds appealing, then this may be your film, but for any casual film watcher this film is a disappointment. William H. Macy plays Edmond a regular 'Joe' who hits a breaking point and journeys on a descent into darkness as he becomes increasingly more sex crazed and violent. Each step is a separate vignette featuring an array of big name actors from Denise Richards to Bai Ling and Bokeem Woodbine, and many lesser known, industry talents such as Jeffery Combs. These actors are sometimes brilliant, but often bad, and rarely are their characters any more than a back drop for William H. Macy. At first I thought the always good Macy was doing a particularly poor job in this film. The character is one of the least likable movie heroes (or anti-heroes) in my memory. He is rude, thoughtless, crass, sexist and racist, and particularly cheap. Some great acting has allowed these characteristics to be likable, but not in Macy's case – Edmond is not endearing or redeemable. However, soon I realized he is actually doing a great job of making Edmond so unlikeable. It is hard to be so despicable. A good comparison would be Michael Douglas in Falling Down. However where we sympathize with Douglas as the world is slowly corrupted around him, Macy is simply a jerk who does not deserve our empathy. We as an audience find it hard to be engaged with Edmond and his fall from sanity is sudden and unrequired. This I am sure is somewhat intentional, but is hard to watch as an audience. The directing is poor, and maybe that is partly the source material, but the loose 'plot' of the movie is severely limited. There are clues and symbols that are left unexplored, and the themes are left unbalanced and unexplored. This movie may be some 3rd year film maker's dream, and may speak to some people who applaud Macy for his acting or Mamet for his brave dialogue, or an array of other actors for their brave performances, but as a film it fails.

MBunge Most writers wish more than anything that they could develop their own distinctive voice, like famed playwright David Mamet has done. The problem with people recognizing the way you say things, though, is that it makes it really damn obvious when you've got nothing to say. Edmond is an empty, meandering, quizzical and fairly self-involved bit of blather. If this script didn't have Mamet's name on it, it likely would never have been produced and certainly wouldn't have attracted such a talented cast.Based on a stage play, this movie follows the journey of upper middle class New Yorker Edmond (William H. Macy) as he decides to leave his wife and sets out across the city to get himself laid. He humorously haggles over price with several strippers and whores, bangs a pretty young waitress, gets beaten up by some streetside hustlers, beats the ass of a deceitful pimp, commits a senseless murder and alternately rages and pontificates about predestination, social graces and the racial and societal preoccupations of upper middle class New Yorkers.The first observation to make about this film is that Edmond and the waitress he picks up for a one night stand are the only characters to have actual names. Everyone else goes unnamed during the movie and is listed in the credits as "Matron", "B-Girl", "Whore", "Interrogator", etc. It's my experience that when characters in a story don't have real names, it's usually a sign of either lazy writing or affectation. Either way, it's a bad sign and indicates what you're watching or reading is excessively contrived. That's true of Edmond, where unreal people say and do unreal things. They're never living their lives, only playing parts and mouthing dialog that isn't nearly as clever as Mamet believes and isn't at all insightful or thought-provoking.When you look deeper into this movie, you discover that there's no reason for anything that happens in it. Why does Edmond leave his wife? Why is he bitter and frustrated? Why is he so cheap when it comes to paying for sex? Why does he commit murder? There's no explanation for any of it other than "just because". Now, Mamet may have been attempting to make the randomness of human behavior the point of his story. That purpose still wouldn't make it interesting or entertaining.One of the jumble of things this film throws against the wall is white racism. It's nothing more than William H. Macy and Joe Mantegna spouting off bigotry both malevolent and condescending, only to see Edmond wind up seeking salvation from the late-night services of a black Baptist congregation. Again, Mamet may have been trying to say something about the clueless racial pretensions of white folk, but that intent doesn't produce anything meaningful or revealing.If you've ever watched good Mamet before, it'll be easy to recognize this as bad Mamet. Edmond has the same rhythms, tone and verbal ticks and habits being applied to an idea that doesn't go anywhere because it has nowhere to go. It's a bit like listening to a great singer belt out an awful song. Imagine Celine Dion doing a rendition of some nonsense rap song about women's butt cheeks. It would only be enjoyable as parody or satire, which this movie clearly isn't trying or intended to be.Edmond is blessedly short at just over 80 minutes long. That's still 80+ minutes that would be better spent doing something besides watching this film.

BA_Harrison After a fortune teller informs middle-aged businessman Edmond (William H. Macy) that he is 'not where he belongs', he leaves his wife and wanders the seedy side of the city to try and discover his true self. As the night progresses, years of social conditioning are slowly stripped away, revealing pent-up anger, resentment and bigotry, leading Edmond on a downward spiral that ends in madness and murder.For much of the time, Stuart Gordon's Edmond is like Joel Schumacher's Falling Down blessed with the dark fairy-tale vibe of After Hours, reason enough to seek out this brave and disturbing film from one of America's best 'unsung' directors. Sadly, this unique atmosphere is not carried through to the final credits: although the night-time scenes leading up to the murder are quite mesmerising, with stylish direction from Gordon, a bravura central performance from Macy, and excellent turns from a talented supporting cast, the film loses momentum towards the end, eventually buckling under the weight of writer David Mamet's awkward philosophising (something which belies the theatrical origins of the work).Still, the complexity of the plot and depth of the characters means that there is plenty to chew over after the film has finished, for those who enjoy that kind of thing: is our destiny pre-ordained; why does Edmond continually haggle over cash (especially when it involves having sex with Denise Richards or Mena Suvari); what is the relevance of the number 115; would you 'get on his body'? (if you've seen the film, you'll know precisely what that means); and is Edmond genuinely content with his lot at the end of the film or has he simply resigned himself to his inescapable fate—to be spooned every night by his cell-mate! Watch and decide.

kshitij (axile007) Edmond a kind of movie I would have loved watching anytime. David Mamet did an excellent job depicting the reality and troubles, an ordinary man has to face. It looks so close to reality where everything showed appeared true. Edmond is a story of simple man Edward Burke who left home on account of his boring life to seek some manly pleasure but end up getting bugged everywhere he went. Even after trying he failed to get himself out of the mess which eventually made him loose his nerves. The movie is quite sexy and passionate .But what I liked most about it was the question that Edmond put up..& his views about how human race is living,as he encountered the harsh world & very much are those questions make sense though they may seemed to be associated with some philosophical theories. William H Macy again showed how natural his acting is! In short, Edmond is really an impressive movie but I would confess that its equally shocking and disturbing as well considering it is quite near to the kind of world we try to survive in...