Brief Interviews with Hideous Men

I thought Jon Krasinski did a decent job considering how incredibly hard the source material actually would be to adapt into a movie. I appreciate Krasinski's use of variety with regard to the "interviews" and not just having them all the same. I thought the parts he wrote himself (tying together the interviews and giving a reason for them) were fine and I was glad he didn't go overboard with it. It wasn't perfect, but I don't know if any other adaptation of this could be done better.

Iwastrynawatchhideouskinkylmao+dontwannajustlaythereandbeworkedon+fuckeduprapestorylol

"Victory for the forces of democratic freedom!" By most standards, not a great movie, I suppose... it's rather jumbled and incoherent. But there are some excellent performances (unfortunately, John Krasinki's final, meant-to-be-devastating interview is not one of them), and there are David Foster Wallace's words. I'm a huge fan of his, so I think anything he has a hand in is worth experiencing.

Couldn't have been done better. The editing reflects the confused thoughts, feelings and experiences of the characters. The few scenes Krasinski added work well and tie everything together. Some of the monologues have been approached a bit too theatrically for my taste, but the actors' deliveries were all very good. (Krasinkis's may have been the best of them all.) The movie felt a bit like a short movie but let's not forget that it is an adaptation of a book of short stories.

Brief Interviews is uneven and a bit grandiose, but Krasinski and company's enthusiasm for David Foster Wallace's great work shines through.

...and this is why no one except for Charlie Kaufman or Hal Hartley should ever try to adapt anything by DFW. Unless of course you like the idea of haphazardly truncated and sanitized versions of his monologues being recited by a bunch of TV comedians plus, um, Ben Gibbard replete with faux-Jon Brion "quirky" music playing behind them. The weirdest thing is that this probably seems even worse if not entirely nonsensical to anyone who hasn't read the book.

Intellectual psycho babble fills an hour with disjointed conversations. The only thing really good about this movie is Julianne Nicholson's pretty face. The many rambling essays are tedious, obnoxious and pointless. The opinions and their outlooks on life are deviant and childish and neither refreshing nor insightful, but rather just pathetic. At least they did not lie on giving it the title about hideous men. I was hoping for much more, but it did not deliver.

An insightful look at how many men look at women. Often funny, but mostly poignant.

Thhhfhfhfhhbbbbbt

Thanks for ruining one of my favorite books, Jim.

Just got into DFW, read "a supposedly fun thing..", saw this, and now i'm about to read the book from which this film was adapted. Definitely got me excited about the book, tho like many here say a bit of a student-film project. great scenes here tho, prob worth a watch. but you know what they say, they're never as good as the book.. except Kaufman's "Adaptation" of course

"Brief Interviews is interesting in pieces, but overwhelming in its totality." - Andrew Schenker

Had to turn it off 20 minutes in. Read the book instead - read all his books for that matter, they are actually very good. If you're going to make a DFW film do Infinite Jest, it would be a failure of course, but at least it could fail in interesting or spectacular fashion. This one was just so plain student-film bad, avoid.

Good casting, some good performances, but the editing is all over the place and the narrative is just too epiphanic, too intense, too much "in-yer-face" without a solid ground. Also, I hate cameos, in this case the director-actor giving the final-shakedown-tears-filled performance.

Krasinski certainly didn't settle for an easy assignment in his first outing as a writer-director, choosing to adapt a collection of themed short stories by David Foster Wallace. Almost inevitably, the resulting film is meandering and clumsy. Much of the dialogue--especially that in the interview sessions--is stilted and overly verbose, the sort of thing that may be dandy on the page, but will fell all but the craftiest actors. Despite the thematic unity, the film feels assembled by spare parts.

It wasn't the worst movie I ever saw, but I kept waiting for something to happen. Also, breaking up the time line but switching every's hair is goofy

Interesting concept... but without proper execution, can turn to wildly uneven garbage. Look at my score and you get a sense of how I felt about the execution. Pretentious, boring and not even the best interviews can overshadow the rest.

The battle of the sexes monologues aren't terribly interesting for the most part and this seems more like a filmmaking exercise than a film.

"Feels like 25 very brief stage plays jammed together -- maybe five of which are worth sitting through."