Powerful

Absolutely the worst movie.

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

This decent faux-indie film is ruined by pro-capitalist & anti-poor propaganda. Some of which is implicit (even subliminal) & some of which is overtly explicit.Firstly, one message of this film seems to be that capitalism is good, in fact it gets you laid. Secondly, another message is that homeless & working people are bad, they attack you in the street for no reason! This is evidenced in one scene where the guy says to the other that he got laid with a girl who's father bought a mattress from him & the other guy's reply is "God bless capitalism". To me, a blatant association of our elitist political system with sex.At certain points in the film the lead is attacked by someone whom he describes as a homeless guy, but is at times dressed as a worker. Whether the guy is a figment of the lead's imagination or not, the negative subliminal association of poor/working person & uninitiated violence is made.Later, they crack open a piñata & he says he has them made to look like dictators. Now it's very easy to point at the crimes of others. Why didn't he have some evil American politicians made like Nixon or Kissinger (who helped killed 5 million+ in Vietnam, Cambodia & Laos) or some figures of British Imperialism (who killed just as many as Stalin)? No, only non-capitalist murderers are worthy of our attention & that is the type of blatant propaganda you expect from Hollywood Blockbusters.Where is the anti-consumerist, anti-materialist, anti-elitist & anti-status quo message I expect from productions with a supposedly individualistic non-conformist perspective?

A stunning performance by Paul Dano and a very believable by Zooey Deschannel. Some might say bits of this film are mundane and were not needed, but that's what makes this film a sensation, to be able to relate to these so called scenes can in fact bring you deeper into the film.However, my only criticism would be the ending, I think it leaves us wondering about too many things.Overall, this is a great film which explores the life of a salesman with a very unique life, not seen very much in many films these days, who falls in love with a customer who leads a very strange life too. The violent attacks by an unknown figure played by Zach Galifianakis make the film more mysterious and makes the viewer curious to who this figure is.All in all a fine film.

The fashionable movies these days rely on finding an edge in convention and dangling a foot in the unknown waters on the other side. Wes Anderson and Jason Reitman and Judd Apatow are practitioners of this dynamic. The strategy is plain, with the skill coming from the balancing act.So far, those three have done nothing but take a stable genre and story form and walk it to its edge. There is amusement along the way. I like these. But they don't go deep. They are afraid to hurt. We've had a few years of this now and already the technique has become the default in the least valuable of films: romantic comedies.What we need is someone who knows how to find that edge and go to it. Someone who doesn't just dip a toe, but who jumps back and forth fearlessly carrying back insight. We need more Igby from the other side, but brought back.This young filmmaker is just what I hoped for. The filmmaking is assured. The arcs are broken as intended. It suitably confuses the newspaper critics. It hurts in places.I won't fall into the trap of summarizing what is shown, because what matters is what is not shown. Its the empty spaces in the narrative.Why is someone familiar beating up our hero? Who is this endearing, broken soul that Zooey plays? What role does that gay guy play, the guy we meet at the beginning and never see again? What are those lines that seduce, are never said, but are remarked on as if they need not be?There is a fold here: the sister runs a TeeVee shopping show; Zooey's character helps in an unknown way. In keeping with the gaps, we never know where the fold goes. There is a device from a standard romantic comedy: having a child. It happens but we have no idea how to register it against out romcom templates.Some may think these are signs of a broken movie or an immature writer-director. They seem to me to be effective, deliberately engineered gaps that define an unknown, moving edge we are taken to and baptized in the open ignorance we bring.Zooey really does understand what is going on. She's the perfect actor for this experiment.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

It isn't a good movie. Paul Dano is too boring in Gigantic. Zooey is Zooey. I wonder if she is exactly the same in real life. In all movies of her that I saw she was like all the other. Fortunely I like her a lot but if I didn't I wouldn't have guts to see any other movies with her.I started to see this movie only to see Zoey and, sadly, I finished by the same reason. The movie has no motivation. She said she loves he, but I can not imagine how. His character is boring. Both do nothing to know each other. After, she missed a dinner and everything collapsed.A bunch of things was forgotten too. The research and the hot blonde, for example. An homeless try to kick his ass out. Seemingly with no reason at all.Well, that is how I define this movie. Nothing has a reason. I don't know what was in the director's mind, what the writer was thinking when made this script, but they thought we could find out. Well, I can't. Like me, watch if you don't have any plans at 4a.m. and like Zooey DeschannelFor now, I'm sorry about my bad English.