arthurdaley69
Wide Open Spaces is one of the UNfunniest comedies I have ever had the misfortune to watch. Gerard Ring (Owen Roe) is a chancer of the highest order with seemingly an endless supply of failing get rich quick schemes. The latest of these being a 'Famine Theme Park'. Myles (Ardal O'Hanlon) and Austin (Ewan Bremner) are flatmates who owe people a lot of money after selling fake merchandise on e-bay and they land jobs with Ring setting up his park.Characters are introduced all over the place at random with seemingly no thought and all are idiotic. Inevitably disappear just as randomly and with little or no explanation. The dialogue is flat, boring and pointless. The plot is non-existent. The only good things about this movie are the Neil Hannon soundtrack and the fact that it's mercifully short. If you have this DVD and haven't watched it yet pop on the special features and go through them. The bits they have there are ten times better than the movie itself.
J.S. Dijkstra
Coming to this film by way of having read that Neil Hannon put some music to it, and being familiar with the Father Ted series, I had expected to see a funny light movie. I was therefore not entirely sure what to make of it at first, it being kind of slow and sombre. If it hadn't been for me wanting to hear the music I might not have finished it, as it was somewhat lacking in clear plot lines and momentum. However, I'm glad I did, because all in all it is a very enjoyable movie, with a humble sense of humour, attention to people, landscape, light and weather (think Bela Tarr, but less depressing). It may have been that seeing this movie in 3 or 4 parts and not in one continuous sitting, has given it more time to sink in and be absorbed (see 15 minutes, pause for making coffee, see some more, sleep over it, and finish on a quiet Sunday, then think about it some more). It will then possibly leave you with a melancholy longing for desolate quarries in the company of one or two acquaintances after having done nothing important but experiencing a kind of satisfactory feeling. Looking forward to a DVD with slow commentary and a making of.
lav13
I'm not sure exactly what this is.It's like someone has watched a couple of Beckett and Pinter plays then a Carry On film and decided to have a go themselves.It's full of inexplicable silences and overblown slow prop mishandling. There's an over- current of drabness with a lot of very affected acting. There's the conversations that go nowhere and have no purpose. All of these things can be great, if done well... and a lot of it has been done well but still isn't great. There's a mystery here somewhere as to why this has gone wrong; it's hard to point a finger at. Can't fault the actual performances and it's an interesting enough story...It just somehow doesn't work. If I had to make a stab at it I'd say that there is something in the execution that puts a distance between me and the film. It's the putting together that's made the problem maybe.I'm coming to the conclusion that they meant to do a play and accidentally ended up making a film. I could see it working as a play, but it just doesn't as a film.
Jim_and_Glenda
I couldn't work out if the slacker characters in the dreich muddy locations, with a hard and boring job, sleeping in a cold and boring tin hut, being ripped off, with no interesting future in front of them were: a. a metaphor for me and the rest of the audience b. having more fun than me and the rest of the audience.I also worry about the careers of the actors and screen-writer and I hate posting such a negative review, but I feel quite cross about my wasted afternoon.This was purportedly a dark comedy, but being a bit dull with a couple of gags that raised a mild titter from the audience leaves it short on both counts. There are very mild echoes of Withnail and I, none of Father Ted, and an overall impression that nobody really believed in what they were doing.
AD
