Sadly Over-hyped

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

From my favorite movies..

While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Of course it's a parody but it does need to be funnier. And why is the entire cast attractive and white? To begin the movie with direct-to-camera is daring but a mistake. Pity there is no real character development, especially in a movie about writing! It's all very safe. If you like literature and especially parodies you might get a chuckle or two.

Maybe I'm the exception, but having dealt with every one of these personality types in writer groups, I found this movie to be hilarious and therapeutic. This movie is exactly why I don't tell my friends what I write. "If she can do it, I can do it." Then put in the work and prove it, jackass. I have watched this movie twice already, on Netflix, and I will be buying a copy to watch on days when I need to be reminded to ignore the professional jealousy of those around me. Trust me, it's just not worth telling people what you write. Pen names are the way to go. These are the characters, as I saw them, and as I know them to be in person: 1. One woman is a dim-witted, spoiled narcissist who barely makes time to write, yet she tells everyone she's a "writer." She looks at pictures of herself while she does yoga, to get inspired.2. Her husband, who doesn't actually write, but keeps a tape recorder handy so he can record his "brilliant" ideas, which are usually just character names that he finds clever, or half-baked plots. In other words, he's not a writer. The "idea" doesn't write the story, and is absolutely worthless unless you're fleshing it out in the book, and he is not. 3. A sweet guy who loves classic literature, like The Great Gatsby, and takes his own writing very seriously. He submits manuscripts to publishers and agents, and keeps all of his rejection letters on his wall. He admits at the beginning of the movie that he hasn't written in two weeks.4. A narcissistic war veteran who idolizes Tom Clancy and thinks his manuscript is good enough to become a movie. Also, he holds a self-published book signing at a hardware store. (I know someone who threw her own self-published book signing at an IHOP.)5. A guy who's in love with being a writer. It gives him an identity. But he's only written three pages of what he calls a manuscript, and instead of writing the rest of that book, he just revises those three pages again. 6. The girl who makes writing a priority, but hasn't read any of the classics, and hasn't gone to college. But she's the one who lands an agent, a book deal, and a movie deal. I've seen the movie twice and I'm fairly certain that she's the only character who doesn't trash anyone else's writing. I understand why people who haven't belonged to a writers' group may find the movie boring, but it was the only piece of fiction I've ever seen that captured the delusional narcissism of a writers' group. As soon as one person in the group gets successful, the claws come out. "She doesn't deserve it." "It's because she looks good in a miniskirt." ""I'm the better writer, it's not fair." She also put in work, and put her writing first. It doesn't matter who you've read or what you've studied. If you don't finish your manuscript, you will not be successful. I hate to say that writers are this unlikable in person, but we are. I revised my review to say this -- I am both traditionally published, AND self-published. I read other reviews that thought the movie took digs at self-publishing, but I didn't see it that way. There ARE people just like John K. Butzin, who don't know how self-publishing really works, and get scammed as a result. His goal isn't to make a living with his book, but to see it on the big screen someday, and to "get published." His character was the funniest and most realistic, to me. Although, on some level, it's incredibly sad, because guys like him actually exist. I watched this movie with a writer friend and Dennis Farina said many things that made us look at each other and mention names of people we knew. Again, it's actually sad, but it felt so good to laugh. Ten bright, glowing stars from me.

This film does not need to be endured, when the synopsis will do.I cannot understand the positive reviews and will leave their existence to the people who search for Bigfoot, and the Loch Ness Monster. Mysterious, indeed. This film contains some pretty unnerving subtext, and is not at all what I would expect from a romantic comedy. That SHOULD have made it interesting. It's a snore.I assure you that this is not one of those movies that is so bad it's good. It does provide material for a potentially hilarious future film about the man who gave us this turkey. Or perhaps, a good horror film. Robin Williams could play the lead, convincingly. He'd be portraying David Congalton, the man responsible for this incoherent (not in a good way) tangential journey through the world of "real authors" vs "instant celebrities" who have not earned their success...and the men who love them? It is truly confusing, (not in a good way) to see the lead character (based on Congalton) mooning over Cuoco's cheery, inept, undeserving, bubble- headed blonde. Why would such a learned man fall for a girl with a heart of gold and the IQ of an eggplant? Duh. She's young and she is beautiful. And she looks up to him. Double sigh. How romantic...NOT. It was repulsive. So, one of the plot devices designed to hold your interest to the end, simply gives you the vague creeps. You can always watch a truly creepy film, something like "24 Hour Photo", if you want the creeps. Why settle for a whiff of the creeps if you are into creepy movies? And why would you want a whiff of the creeps from the protagonist of a romantic comedy? This movie made me cringe a little. Not enough to make it interesting, just enough to make it icky. One ends the film with the disturbing feeling that one has just wasted their time on an inside joke and vendetta that lives in the head of one other person. Congalton fancies himself a real author, and apparently above his audience, in this film. But if you research what he has written and had published, you can't help but feel like you just saw an autobiographical rant at your expense, by a writer who somehow got his hands on enough money to make his own revenge movie. He makes the audience suffer.Perhaps he was writing a great revenge flick for all of those frustrated authors out there, who can't get read due to the overnight success of hacks who don't have one half their talents or insights. This film made my mind wander to other films, other directors and other ideas for movies. That CANNOT be a sign of a good movie. Based on the reviews, I expected something that would at least hold my attention.This movie starts slow, and goes downhill from there. It is a bitter pill. Whatever you are expecting from these positive reviews, I don't see how you could not be disappointed, and annoyed. I hope I just saved you over an hour of your precious time. Go do a random act of kindness with it, and maybe this movie will not have been made in vain.

I haven't laughed out loud at a movie for a long time. The comedic exaggeration of the characters was delightful and brought back vivid memories of my former southern California writers group – a highly diverse, multi-talented group that, as in this film, included published, unpublished and self-published aspiring writers, all with their own eccentricities and quirky personalities that sometimes clashed and sometimes led to indiscretions.I enjoyed the witty dialogue and the engaging performances from this ensemble cast – especially the talented Dennis Farina. I found the film funny and thought provoking. It stayed with me long after I left the theater. Sometimes caricature is the best way to reveal truth.Now I'm going to track down my old writer friends and recommend this movie!