The Paperboy

Perhaps in time we will reevaluate this as we have with Showgirls, recognizing the value within its tawdry delights. Then again, maybe we reevaluated Showgirls incorrectly and yeah, no, it's terrible.

This is everything that John Waters ever dreamed off had he a bigger budget and quality actors (but I guess Waters wouldn't want a bigger budget or quality actors). A trashy, sleazy cavalcade of cringey set pieces that tackle racism, homosexuality, BDSM and more, set under the umbrage of some kind of weird Tarantino remake of To Kill a Mockingbird.

With a feel like a sleezy pulp from the 50's, you'd think that "The Paperboy" would be a foregone conclusion for me, but there's strange lack of depth despite it's breadth of character.

The Paperboy is a complete mess that I should despise. Its hard to summarise how regrettably awful yet unexplainably enjoyable this is. Lee Daniels loses complete control of what at times feels perfect. The direction and cinematography is some of the best and worst I've seen. Absolutely every element can be judged good or bad in fact. Undoubtedly though Nicole Kidman gives an extraordinarily bold performance. At times I was in complete disbelief at what I was watching. And I still dont know now.

This is literally insane. At least now i have something to show as a drunk double feature with Zandalee...

You're left not giving a flying toss about any of the characters or their motives or their stories. Nix. It's really not worth bothering with, a nothing film. Although perhaps it's worth a short peep to check out Kidman's portrayal of a hot trashy slut!

It seemed as though each scene was that much worse than the one that preceded it, to the point of intolerability. Contrary to critical opinions that may have come your way, performances in this movie that are bad include those by such luminaries as: Nicole Kidman; John Cusack. The brunt of responsibility, however, must surely fall on the perverse, yet uninteresting and incompetent, shoulders of the helmsman. "Trashiness" may have some appeal, but not when it's all so very phoney and hysterical.

moist.

What a terrible movie.

You'd think that, what with a scene where Nicole Kidman actually pees on Zac Efron, this movie would be a bit more of a brilliant mess than it is, but I don't know if it ever gets satisfactorily pulpy for me. There's definitely something missing here.

Read all about it! Zac Efron was placed in this movie to get girls interested in this movie. They kept him in his skivvies for most of the length of the film. I did like his interactions with his maid. Plus this was a pretty adult role for him. Kidman, Cusack and McConaughey all did very well too. The writing was also pretty spot-on as I took note several times that the lines were well written. Sadly I think the direction took this movie through some quicksand. It felt slow and boring at times.

Finally, Daniels creates a story solid enough to let us in -- and not just a compilation of fearless sex and violent scenes --, thanks to Nicole's mesmerizingly steamy performance. If in Shadowboxer, sons kill their fathers, here the main desire is to replace your mom with a hot woman who you can love as your (first) school girlfriend. Paperboy is a hell of a primal sexploitation film -- and Daniels' most well-crafted feature, with a catchy 1970s visual --, but also a vapid, purely dull ride.

It's a mess. But yeah, most of the cheap elements are obviously intended. And in fact, it even gets pretty fun at times.

Starts off alright but eventually devolves into a non-sensical, exploitative mess. Solid performances by Kidman, McConaughey, Glenn and Gray are wasted by Daniels' over-the-top sexploitation filmmaking. Maybe he should have spent less time obsessing over showing Efron in his undies and focused on making the film somewhat involving.

This film feels as sweaty as the characters looked, with the images literally melting into each other under the weight of impossible desires. Pretty good.

zaman zaman eğlendiren çöplüğüne ve film boyu izleyeni pis hissetmesini sağlıyor olmasına rağmen anlamlı bir bütüne ulaşmayan, fazla zorlama bir iş.

90

There are some good performances in this film. Nicole Kidman's performance in particular really stands out. The script is not that good overall. There are some interesting moments but overall this movie is a little bit disappointing.

Horribly affected in writing and direction

Star Rating: ★★★★

Pulp story with some odd casting, odder performances and occasionally some -extremely- odd editing. Watched it in the small hours after a long day, if it was going to work any time that was it.

I'd rather watch Eat, Pray, Love... Boring, unwatchable, unbelievable. I don't care if it's real.

What did I just watch?! Never thought I would say it, but John Cusack scares the shit out of me.

Absorbing film with over-the-top performances that captures the mood of the late 1960s without turning into a nostalgia trip.

50.500

It's trash. Occasionally trashy fun thanks to Nicole Kidman but it's still trash that doesn't amount to much.

This is a really entertaining movie. The worst parts have to do with the frenetic experimental editing, bouncing between seconds and confusing the on screen action. Mostly solid performances throughout, except by Zac Efron, whose southern affectations falter hilariously throughout. Nonetheless, very cool stuff.

I think the script makes this film more complicated then it has to be. The narration all the way through is really unnecessary and doesnt add anything to the drama. The cast is really impressive and they all put in solid performances. Zac Efron is a standout and shows his range as an actor. I think the film is rough around the edges but was definitely worth watching for the performances alone. There is a mysterious tone to the film which keeps you captivated throughout.

I just remember a running commentary in my head of, "What even am I even watching right now?" but it's not as bonkers as all that. Although it feels like it's trying to be oh so edgy, without much substance to back that up.

Well it's definitely not boring; a compelling wallow through Southern Sleaze, the likes of which hasn't been seen on screen for years. This kind of seedy trash can never really be 'great' but Daniels and his cast attack with guns blazing, especially in regards to Cusack and Kidman, both "as you have never seen them before", especially in one memorable seduction scene from opposite ends of the room! Gray also scores strongly as the all-knowing narrator.

The word surrounding this movie appears to be 'trash'. Yes, for all our soapbox-standing when it comes to the treatment of sex versus violence in films, when we get a film like The Paperboy most of you get flustered and drop your monocles in your wine glasses. It's not a great film, no, but it has more than enough going for it (strong cast, flashy direction, fascinating plot) to not be a bad film. But then, I'm the last person who's gonna complain about Zac Efron in skivvies for two hours.

Thrillers and dramas are definitely the suiting role for McConaughey, not the chick flicks. Brilliant performing, surprisingly from everyone (yes, I had my doubts for Zac Efron). They gave a bit too much focus on the peeing scene and Nicole Kidman desperately wanting to piss on him. I get why it was a moderately important scene (for the built of the father's character and the idea of the newspaper business), but still - overplayed it. Everything else was just the enough dose gruesome.

Okay, so it's not nearly a perfect movie. And it Daniels makes some really stupid decisions along the way. But the atmosphere and acting both work in a sublime way. Zac Efron really surprised me, and Nicole Kidman delivers her best performance in years (also counting 'Rabbit Hole').

http://gorgview.com/the-paperboy

Between this and Killer Joe, I am apparently a huge fan of the genre of sleazy-as-fuck Matthew McConaughey white trash movies. This is delightfully excessive, but to keep it short, here's a truncated list of The Paperboy's depravities: interracial gay S&M gangbangs, public urination on an unconscious Zac Efron, prison masturbation, animal mutilation, jungle fever and homosexual hysteria...the list goes on. It's camp from start to finish, pitched higher and higher until the very end.

Trashy, pulpy melange of sex, crime and southern heat. It's lurid, ridiculous, and an unquestionable mess of genres, and yet it's bloody glorious in its own perverse way. Fantastic performances, lush cinematography, wonderfully fucked-up movie.

Trashy, lurid and over the top. It may be pulpy, and populated by grotesque caricatures, but it is seldom dull, and the filmmaking is first rate with great cinematography, editing and a cool 60's soul soundtrack.

All the ingredients of a good, even great film, if it just had someone to rein it in at times, the tone is all over the place. Also, it sort of forgets what the story is about 40 minutes in, and never goes back to it. Starts as one film, ends as another, incredibly dark one.

Somewhere between John Waters and John Huston by way of Carl Hiaasen and Karen Russell. Star turns from McConaughey, Cusack and Kidman. Terrific voice over from terrific Macy Gray. 60s soundtrack.

Exhuberant style and form with a messy direction. Still, the performances are so immersive and the topics so exciting that you can't help being entertained by the whole thing.

Could have been something special, but the directing was disastrous. Matthew McConaughey, Nicole Kidman and John Cusack's performances deserve more.

Great casting job... Everyone acts their ass of, but sadly daniels ruins it with an uneven film. Some artsy moves are tried, but the movie doesn't benefit.

The story itself is paperthin, and the director does his part to mess it even more up; a well-performing cast (Z.Efron aside) bring a few moments worthwhile, especially Nicole.K - but it's a bit sad that it nowadays takes less of an effort for her to do trashy convincingly. *Preview*: #13#, exp-2*, story, Nicole.K/10-4, (actors), R2.

Leave it to Lee Daniels to turn a great story and good acting performances into a barely decent movie.

Definitely not an unwatchable movie. On the contrary, I think I'm really amused by all those kinky, cheesy, trashy cheap stuff. Peeing scene is vastly overstated by public and critics right after Cannes screening. I didn't find it disturbing at all. However, I gotta admit I'm blushed while watching Kidman's Catherine Tramell-esque prison scene. Kidman gives hell of a performance! In my opinion, even accepting to shot a sex scene with John Cusack should be awarded with an Oscar.

wonderful casting, very funny script, great story... nicole kidman is a perfect choice to play the ignorant bitchy character