Frank (Lenny Abrahamson & Michael Fassbender)

Mickeroo

Trailer out for this, from the director of Garage and What Richard Did:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wk-hWzq67w4

Looks pretty funny, did it play at JDIFF??

e_e

Mickeroo wrote: »

Looks pretty funny, did it play at JDIFF??

It didn't, would have definitely seen it if so.

JP Liz V1

I thought it would be at this year's JDIFF too, looks funny

pixelburp

So it's the story of Frank Sidebottom, only not? How confusing. Though I read one of the scriptwriters is formerly of Sidebottom's band, so I guess it's an 'inspired by' job. Looks funny though and one to keep an eye on.

Fassbender appears to be a dab hand at comedy too, but that doesn't surprise really; it's getting to a point where one wonders what is it he can't do? Accents perhaps, cos it sounds weird in the trailer: is it American or Irish?

Really looking forward to seeing this, really good trailer that doesn't condense the entire film down into 2 minutes. Really wish that more film makers would try something similar.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

pixelburp wrote: »

So it's the story of Frank Sidebottom, only not? How confusing. Though I read one of the scriptwriters is formerly of Sidebottom's band, so I guess it's an 'inspired by' job. Looks funny though and one to keep an eye on.

Fassbender appears to be a dab hand at comedy too, but that doesn't surprise really; it's getting to a point where one wonders what is it he can't do? Accents perhaps, cos it sounds weird in the trailer: is it American or Irish?

They've been pretty clear about the fact it's "inspired by" Sidebottom and not a biopic of Sidebottom.

I assume he's American as the rest of his band are....

It didn't show at JDIFF. Premiered at Sundance and is showing at SXSW this week.


I'm excited to see this. Big fan of Abrahamson's 3 previous films. This one looks a very different subject matter though, interesting to see where it goes. All the reviews have been pretty good for it.

Looper007

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I'm excited to see this. Big fan of Abrahamson's 3 previous films. This one looks a very different subject matter though, interesting to see where it goes. All the reviews have been pretty good for it.

Loved Adam and Paul and What Richard did but thought Garage was a load of old pretentious waffle, but I believe Abrahamson is our brightest talent behind the camera we had in a long time. This has Michael Fassbender and the talented Domhnall Gleeson (still think About Time is one of the most underrated films of last year) so it's bound to be good going by reviews and the footage we've seen, it's a cult film ready to happen.

AnonoBoy

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

They've been pretty clear about the fact it's "inspired by" Sidebottom and not a biopic of Sidebottom.

Wasn't Sidebottom a character anyway?

A biopic would make no sense unless it was of his creator.

Complaints that it's not a biopic sound to me like people complaining that a biopic of Alan Partridge neglected to tell the story of Steve Coogan.

Am I getting this totally wrong?

pixelburp

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Wasn't Sidebottom a character anyway?

A biopic would make no sense unless it was of his creator.

Complaints that it's not a biopic sound to me like people complaining that a biopic of Alan Partridge neglected to tell the story of Steve Coogan.

Am I getting this totally wrong?

Well a bit like Partridge, Sidebottom was one of those alter-egos that seemed to inhabit the actor / musician playing him. Heck, I had to google Sidebottom to remind myself who wore that papermaché head; Chris Sievey, if you're interested

It's a natural enough that people are confused by the trailer, considering how distinctive Sidebottom's 'face' was down the years; it all made sense when I looked up the background of the film, but at face value it's easy to understand how people might get a bit irritated by what seems like a rip-off or Americanisation of Sievey's story. It isn't, but the confusion isn't entirely baseless.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

pixelburp wrote: »

Well a bit like Partridge, Sidebottom was one of those alter-egos that seemed to inhabit the actor / musician playing him. Heck, I had to google Sidebottom to remind myself who wore that papermaché head; Chris Sievey, if you're interested

It's a natural enough that people are confused by the trailer, considering how distinctive Sidebottom's 'face' was down the years; it all made sense when I looked up the background of the film, but at face value it's easy to understand how people might get a bit irritated by what seems like a rip-off or Americanisation of Sievey's story. It isn't, but the confusion isn't entirely baseless.

True, but you'd think when they see practically everyone is American, or that it's set in more recent times that it's maybe not what they thought it was and look into it a bit more before complaining about it. But I suppose that's what the internet is for these days.

TheIrishGrover

Really like the look of that. i'd actually like to see Fassbender do a bit of comedy. I think he'd be great. But, yeah, he really needs to work on his accent. I remember watching X-men and people sniggering at his accent lapse. Upon rewatching it last month for the first time since the cinema I realised: It's not that his accent slipped from time to time. It's that he NEVER attempted an english (to match McKellen), American, Polish, or whatever accent. He ALWAYS had his middle of the road Irish accent. The sniggers were at his big bogger accent coming through at times (When the character's angry: "I'm frankenstein's monster" and "I've heard that excuse before")

anyway. Trailer looked great. Looking forward to it.

bnt

pixelburp wrote: »

So it's the story of Frank Sidebottom, only not? How confusing. Though I read one of the scriptwriters is formerly of Sidebottom's band, so I guess it's an 'inspired by' job. Looks funny though and one to keep an eye on.

That would be Jon Ronson, who wrote quite a long piece about his involvement in the band and the film, here:

In 1987 I was 20 and the student union entertainments officer for the Polytechnic of Central London. One day I was sitting in the office when the telephone rang. I picked it up.

"So Frank's playing tonight and our keyboard player can't make it and so we're going to have to cancel unless you know any keyboard players," said a frantic voice.

I cleared my throat. "I play keyboards," I said.

"Well you're in!" the man shouted.

"But I don't know any of your songs," I said.

"Wait a minute," the man said.

I heard muffled voices. He came back to the phone. "Can you play C, F and G?" he said.

...

Frank's character was of a child in a northern town remaining assiduously immature in the face of adulthood. He was a paean to ordinariness. But Chris wasn't ordinary. He was chaotic. Sometimes, on the way back from some gig, I'd become aware that we were taking a detour to some house somewhere with some women we somehow met along the way. There would be partying while I sat outside on the sofa.

In the van I'd listen to Chris's stories, trying to understand him. He reminded me of George Bernard Shaw's unreasonable man: "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." Chris was the unreasonable man, except the world never did adapt to him and he never made any progress. Like when Frank was asked to support the boy band Bros at Wembley. There were 50,000 people in the crowd. This was a huge stage for Frank – his biggest ever, by about 49,500 people. It was his chance to break through to the mainstream. But instead he chose to perform a series of terrible Bros cover versions for five minutes and was bottled off. The show's promoter, Harvey Goldsmith, was glaring at him from the wings. Frank sauntered over to him and said, "I'm thinking of putting on a gig at the Timperley Labour Club. Do you have any tips?"

Manchegan

A lot of the commentariat upset at the dishonour to "their" Frank Sidebottom. The plot sounds like the story of the making of Trout Mask Replica. As a Beefheart fan, should I be upset?

Oafley Jones

bnt wrote: »

That would be Jon Ronson, who wrote quite a long piece about his involvement in the band and the film, here:

Trailer made me think of The Men Who Stare at Goats - poor book and a dreadful movie. Now I know why, has that same awful manufactured feeling of quirkiness for me. It just looks like a thoroughly cynically product that's trying to fly under the indie banner.

Corholio

Looper007 wrote: »

Loved Adam and Paul and What Richard did but thought Garage was a load of old pretentious waffle, but I believe Abrahamson is our brightest talent behind the camera we had in a long time. This has Michael Fassbender and the talented Domhnall Gleeson (still think About Time is one of the most underrated films of last year) so it's bound to be good going by reviews and the footage we've seen, it's a cult film ready to happen.

Thought the opposite myself, Adam and Paul wasn't bad but Garage was excellent. What Richard Did however I thought was a really poor, underwhelming film.

Looper007

Corholio wrote: »

Thought the opposite myself, Adam and Paul wasn't bad but Garage was excellent. What Richard Did however I thought was a really poor, underwhelming film.

Interesting that. But I hated Garage with a passion just so in love with itself and going for Von Trier vibe from the off. I liked What Richard did especially the lead performance from Reynor. Adam and Paul is probably the best Irish film ever imo.

Corholio

Looper007 wrote: »

Interesting that. But I hated Garage with a passion just so in love with itself and going for Von Trier vibe from the off. I liked What Richard did especially the lead performance from Reynor. Adam and Paul is probably the best Irish film ever imo.

I hated Reynor, think that was one of my biggest gripes with the film. Fair play to him for getting the break in Hollywood, but he's matched very well with Bay and Transformers.

thebostoncrab

Well that was just awful.


I knew going into this that the film was inspired by Frank Sidebottom and not a direct bio-pic....but Jesus Christ were do I begin?

What on Earth was the point of having the Frank character in this film? It has next to NOTHING to do with Sidebottom in the slightest. The inspired by tag goes as far as the mask, that's about it really.

The film just doesn't know what exactly it wants to be. The advertising for the movie makes it seem like a dark comedy with twangs of drama, but the end result is not like this at all. It is just a very dull film that keeps changing its pace. It started off with exactly what I was expecting; splashes of dark humour and an interesting tale of someone finding who they are...but that is quickly thrown out the window 20 minutes in. There is a massive amount of time wasted in the Irish wood scenes that they have to rush everything in the last 20 minutes of the film. That entire second act could have been done in 20 minutes and we would have gotten the same result.

Now, credit were credit is due, Gleeson and Fassbender give it their all and they bring out great performances, and the few scenes they share together, alone, are funny and very strong. It's a shame the rest of the cast couldn't match these.

What made it worse was, every now and then, it would seem to find itself and go back on course...only for it to make a u-turn almost instantly and go back to its lost self.

The absolte worse part of it all though, is people will see this film with little knowledge of the Frank Sidebottom character, and think that Christopher Sievey was a very unstable and mentally ill human being. Such a disappointment.

symbolic

I know nothing of the Frank Sidebottom and knew it wasn't a biopic.

I have to say I really enjoyed the movie. Found it very funny and think it got it's message across very well. I loved the music the band were creating too, great that it was all played by the cast.

Well done to all involved.

Really enjoyed the Q&A afterwards with Abrahamson, he seems to like to talk , which is helpful at such an event!

Hrududu

I saw it last night and loved it. Some great performances from Gleeson and Fassbender. Funny and a little heartbreaking in places. Even though the head never changed you read exactly what Frank was feeling. Some strange but strangely great music in there too.

Looper007

Hrududu wrote: »

I saw it last night and loved it. Some great performances from Gleeson and Fassbender. Funny and a little heartbreaking in places. Even though the head never changed you read exactly what Frank was feeling. Some strange but strangely great music in there too.

I thought it was brilliant but once again the trailer under sold it's darker side, it's quite a sad film

Scoot McNairy death and Frank's issues especially the end are really heart breaking, amazing acting from Fassbender

. Gleeson really is turning into a very good actor interesting to see where his career will go with Star Wars, his character is bit of a ass but he pulls you back onside in the end. But the film belongs too Fassbender as Frank, he's really turning into one of the worlds greatest actors. To totally engross you into a film where you don't see his face for 98% of the film is a amazing credit to him.

The last few scenes

without the head are heart breaking stuff and the last performance with the band is stunning

. Great movie well worth checking out .

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Wasn't Sidebottom a character anyway?

A biopic would make no sense unless it was of his creator.

Complaints that it's not a biopic sound to me like people complaining that a biopic of Alan Partridge neglected to tell the story of Steve Coogan.

Am I getting this totally wrong?

No. You're spot on.

Was at the Q&A screening tonight in the Lighthouse and he pretty much said what you just articulated there, in that it would make no sense to have a biopic of Sievey.

As for the film.. I enjoyed it I guess but felt it was majorly disjointed overall. I felt the editing was far to choppy also. To the point where I it wound me up. There is far too much chopping about and I found it hard to concentrate as a result.

There are a lot of wtf moments, which I was of course expecting but I'm not sure that many of them came about because of who this film was about. I genuinely think that there are just a lot of poorly written scenes.

I really wanted to like this more. I love Lenny's films and TV work also and so it really pains me to be negative about it, but I just don't feel it was as well executed as it could have been. The performances were amazing though.

Interestingly, Lenny spoke about what the original script was like and it sounded like it would have made an excellent film. Would much rather have seen that film made than this one, if the way it was described was anything to by at least.

Azwaldo55

The film drags at times and the ending would have benefited from more enigma. Michael Fassbender's performance is fantastic. His body language and voice make Frank with his laughable big head seem both demonic and sinister and strangely poignant. The film could have benefited from a bigger budget and perhaps a more developed road movie plot.

Azwaldo55

The film drags at times and the ending would have benefited from more enigma. Michael Fassbender's performance is fantastic. His body language and voice make Frank with his laughable big head seem demonic and sinister and strangely poignant. The film could have benefited from a bigger budget and perhaps a more developed road movie plot.

e_e

Good movie, I thought the darker shift in the second half was subtle and effective with it thankfully being nowhere near as self-consciously quirky and knockabout as the trailer made it out to be. Think some are gonna expect a laugh fest and end up hating it which is a shame too, it's more interesting than that.

e_e

The only thing I found jarring was how the opening was obviously shot in Bray yet is England according to the movie. It's hardly a thing the majority of viewers (especially internationally) will notice though.

symbolic

e_e wrote: »

The only thing I found jarring was how the opening was obviously shot in Bray yet is England according to the movie. It's hardly a thing the majority of viewers (especially internationally) will notice though.

Yes I had assumed they were in Ireland at the start and then they said they were going to Ireland I was...

AnonoBoy

e_e wrote: »

The only thing I found jarring was how the opening was obviously shot in Bray yet is England according to the movie.

I didn't notice that. Thought it was Brighton or somewhere.

thorbarry

AnonoBoy wrote: »

I didn't notice that. Thought it was Brighton or somewhere.

I thought so as well

heebusjeebus

I came to the movie with no knowledge of Sidebottom and only saw the trailer once.
I was bowled over by it and it's a movie that will stick with me for a while.
It was well paced and the transition from humour to sadness was spot on (Example:

The night the band complete the recording, cut to the following morning and the hanging

).
And the final scene was incredible, Fassbender deserves awards for that scene alone.

https://soundcloud.com/nialler9/frank-i-love-you-all-radio-mix

Looper007

heebusjeebus wrote: »

I came to the movie with no knowledge of Sidebottom and only saw the trailer once.
I was bowled over by it and it's a movie that will stick with me for a while.
It was well paced and the transition from humour to sadness was spot on (Example:

The night the band complete the recording, cut to the following morning and the hanging

).
And the final scene was incredible, Fassbender deserves awards for that scene alone.

https://soundcloud.com/nialler9/frank-i-love-you-all-radio-mix

That final scene shows why Fassbender is the best actor in the world, that you don't see his full face but only half of his face. But you can see the years of mental illness Frank has gone through just in Fassbender's face. Brilliant stuff. How he pulls off Frank's failing state of mind with just his body and voice is simply amazing. If he doesn't get nommed for awards at the end of the year I'd be shocked.

Domhnall Gleeson deserves as much praise too, he play's a right selfish and dislikeable little sod but he makes you like him in the end. Really tough thing to do and he does it marvellously for me. He's really turning into a very good actor.

johnny_ultimate

This is one of those films I would love to be sitting here praising to high heavens. But it's one of those infuriating cases where I think it failed to spark for me, and I actually find it hard to describe why. I guess above all I just found it tonally and narratively flat. Its characters are not interesting enough to allow the drama to really creep under the skin (Gleeson and Gyllenhall particularly struggle to bring Jon and Clara to life convincingly), nor is it funny enough to fully justify its many idiosyncrasies. It aims for a potent mix between comedy and something-close-to-tragedy, but it was a mix it simply did not quite pull off. It doesn't help that Abrahamson's direction is flatter than I'd expect, and the script pretty formulaic despite some surface-level eccentricities. I'd agree there was little flow to proceedings in terms of editing, which adds to an overall sense of unevenness.

Nonetheless, it is enjoyable enough, simply in a peculiarly underwhelming sort of way. And credit where credit is due, the film does offer some potent moments. They've been mentioned already: McNairy's arc is one of the more interesting aspects of the film, while happily everything belatedly comes together - including Fassbender's performance - for a rousing and surprisingly emotional conclusion. The final scene in particular is a killer - a moment that is realised with more artistry and passion than anything that came before it. It's nice to end on a high, but it also amplifies how muted and uneven so much of what came before actually was.

As a Bray native, I would praise the film for featuring cameos from local landmarks the Bray Head Inn and Daata Tandoori, even if it does cheekily suggest those iconic establishments are in a different country altogether.

Penn

Gleeson is very good in the film, and Fassbender gives a great performance. But I thought the film was terrible. I just didn't care about any of the characters. I didn't care about the story. The direction and pacing was poor. The ending was well done but by that point, I just wasn't interested in what happened to any of them. They spent about a year making the album but it seems like they never talked to each other bar the little bits we saw. Removed any likability from the characters.

Yeah, very disappointed in the film. Again, Fassbender is terrific in the film, but everything else was pretty poor.

e_e

I actually like how flawed all of the characters are. You start off thinking that Jon is gonna be just a bland cipher for the audience (the trailer definitely gives that sense too) but his lack of talent and selfishness ends up

dragging down the other members of the band as well as Frank, who you could argue Jon was exploiting in the second half of the film.

Both Jon and Frank are at different ends in terms of their talent and the film thoughtfully shows that neither brilliance or lack of talent are ideal for living healthily and happily within the music industry. I think that the film doesn't just go for "haha aren't these people wacky and loveable!" like the trailer suggests is what gives it a bit of an edge.

johnny_ultimate

I'd agree it's always admirable when a film goes with unlikeable characters - there's no prerequisite for a film to feature likeable individuals, after all, as long as they're interesting. However, it does tend to put extra stress on the writers and actors particularly, and that's where IMO Frank falls down. Gyllenhall's character particularly is neither well written enough or acted enough to come across as a credible or interesting screen presence - it's a one-note role, and that neuters the drama she is required to carry later on. Gleeson fares a bit better, and I'd agree the relationship between him and Frank (and how it ties into the film's themes) is one of the film's most unique and engaging aspects. But ultimately I feel the script overplays his musical ineptness to the point of caricature, the voiceover / tweets come across as cheap, and Gleeson's performance lacking the nuances to really keep us intrigued.

By contrast, both Fassbender and McNairy offer significantly more engaging performances, and the script does a better job at establishing them as deeply troubled people: not 'likeable' in the traditional sense, but certainly fascinating.

There's quite a few things I like about the film in hindsight, particularly the way it takes some unexpected turns in terms of relationships and themes. But sadly I'd be lying if I said the actual watching of the film was a rather underwhelming experience. Maybe it'll play better on a revisit somewhere down the line.

evad_lhorg

I hope they release a soundtrack for it. Really enjoyed some of the music in it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zA1Ld2ZnwE

Roar

I thought it was fascinating. The shot of Frank without his mask standing in the garden and then at the radio hit me like a ton of bricks. With the mask on, him fiddling with the radio is a genius trying to find the perfect sound in his pursuit of perfection. Without the mask, you see him for who he really is - a man with severe mental issues. And it was hearbreaking. You kind of forget throughout the movie that he is just a man with mental issues. Such is the fine line between genius and insanity, I guess.

it's not without its faults, but I really enjoyed it and will definitely be giving this a watch again when it comes out on DVD.

NyOmnishambles

Roar wrote: »

I thought it was fascinating. The shot of Frank without his mask standing in the garden and then at the radio hit me like a ton of bricks. With the mask on, him fiddling with the radio is a genius trying to find the perfect sound in his pursuit of perfection. Without the mask, you see him for who he really is - a man with severe mental issues. And it was hearbreaking. You kind of forget throughout the movie that he is just a man with mental issues. Such is the fine line between genius and insanity, I guess.

it's not without its faults, but I really enjoyed it and will definitely be giving this a watch again when it comes out on DVD.

I watched it last night, have to agree with this, the difference is stark but oh so subtle

An enjoyable uneven movie but it is very effective in parts, will ahve to look up the soundtrack as I loved the music in it

FouxDaFaFa

Yeah, I would agree with "fascinating" being a good word for it.

I loved the script.

The bit at the end with Gleeson talking to Frank's parents trying to persuade them that his illness contributed to his genius and them replying "no, it slowed him down". Totally cut Gleeson down.

The end scene was stunning.

Such a strange fiilm but the most interesting film I've seen all year.

poundapunnet

I'm really not sure what to think about this film. The rest of Abrahamson's body of work feels like such a coherent whole, and this really sticks out. That's not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself, but I don't think it's really sticking out for good reasons.

Things That Bugged Me

I know this is a bit petty and subjective, but Domhnall Gleeson has one of the biggest Irishest heads on him of any man alive and it took me about 20 minutes to get used to the bizarre posh sounds coming out of his mouth, same as Out of Time.

The way the tweeting/technology was integrated felt very clumsy and a bit self-conscious and unconfident. It's going to date the film fierce fast and the way it's used isn't plausible (like the guy in the diner "oh you're the chinchilla guy, here let me tell you some things that are on-the-nose relevant to the themes of this film!").

Clara was very underwritten. I actually liked Gyllenhaal's performance, I thought in a couple of scenes she had excellent moments and I feel like she could have risen to the challenge if she was given more to work with. She nailed it in that last scene.

Speaking of which, I appreciate the director's fondness for having a man walking somewhere on his own as the last scene, but that was really cheesy.


Things I Liked

I don't think I've ever seen Fassbender doing anything less than the best someone could do with the material they're given, when he has something this interesting he's just great. And as well as he acquitted himself with the head on, he was even better when it came off. Again this is personal preference because I just love him but screw it.

That music was much better than I expected, the bit working up to the title sequence had me very excited for the rest of the film.

Some really funny bits, Scoot Mc Nairy's song was great.

The way it handled the line between 'ha, look at these wacky characters' and 'oh dear, this is sad' was good. The arrival at SXSw when Frank was talking about 'being in the forest like little squirrels' where it shifted pretty quickly from looking like a believable thing an eccentric artist would do into an uncomfortable encounter is one bit that's really sticking with me.

Jon getting his dickish preconceptions about the links between trauma, mental illness and creativity dismantled was a good arc. It sometimes felt like it was veering between getting lost in the overall madness and then popping up to hammer the message home every once in a while, but overall pretty well handled.

Reading that back it gives the impression that I enjoyed the film far less than I actually did. One of the oddest films I've seen in the cinema in some time-which in my book is a good thing - and plenty to recommend it, it just doesn't feel as tight as the rest of Abrahamson's stuff. I'd certainly watch it again.

candy-gal1

Saw this yesterday, really really enjoyed it!
First time in a long while that an Irish type movie made me laugh out loud a fair few times throughout, very realistic but not in a silly OTT way, all characters were relatable in some way and the soundtrack was excellent!

Would go again!

Warper

Didnt like this at all. Felt like walking out after half an hour but endured the pain until the end. I cant stand Gleeson, he gives off this smarmy sneaky vibe every time i see him. Overall an absolute stonker of a film. The only redeeming scene was the song at the end. Awful stuff

pappyodaniel

at the end we see Frank without his mask. His head has significant scarring and he's missing patches of hair. I haven't come to the conclusion whether the scars/hair are from the accident where he got hit by the car or are they a result of wearing the mask for so long

Just after watching this and kinda loved it. It's one of those off beat, oddball comedic endeavors that manages to be so much more than simply another quirky tale about a bunch of odd balls.

The first hour is very much a satire on how alluring fame is, how it can seduce one so easily. Jon is one of those characters whom it's hard to warm to, at first he comes across as a likeable enough guy but as the film progresses the real Jon comes out and he's not someone you'd like to spend much time with. Concerned more with what Frank can do for him, he manipulates and exploits the obviously ill Frank to his own ends. It's brave to have such a deeply unlikeable character front and center and I do feel that the film could have been far more affecting had they not tacked on the rather uninteresting morality tale ending where Jon learns his lesson.

Without it you wouldn't have those two heartbreaking moments of Frank at his most vulnerable. The image of Frank standing alone in the garden is haunting and heart breaking, here you have this shell of a man whose lost in the world. The subsequent scene of him playing with the radio is a beautiful moment which shows just how subjective we view the world. Alone, tinkering with the radio Frank comes across lost and a more than a little mad yet not an hour earlier the same image was used to showcase the mad genius that is Frank. The final scene with Frank playing once more is striking yet it feels like a cop out. The overtly sentimental moment works only to redeem Jon who really never earns such a mometn.

The films strongest element is the manner in which it transitions from somewhat feel good comedy into a dour and dark parable on how fame corrupts. Abrahamson wonderfully uses the death of Don to accomplish this transition. It's also where the film first falters, Don's death never has the impact it should and there's no sense of loss. It's a monumental moment that should shape the rest of the film but much like Frank's head feels a little hollow.

There's a lot to enjoy about Frank and even a little to love but it loses it's way toward the end. The melodramatic and sentimental finale doesn't jell with what went before, it's too safe and conventional for a film which tried so hard to be a little different, yet it also nearly works. Frank is the kind of film that you'd find hard to recommenced, for everyone who warms to it's off beat nature there's a dozen who will hate it for "it's manufactured quirkiness." Like much of cinemas more off beat fare Frank is a film that will divide audiences down the middle and while it's far from a classic, it remains a damn good film that's hard to dislike.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Just watched it. I think all the good and less good things about it have already been mentioned so I won't go into them all again.

I will say though that I was astounded by how good Fassbender is even with a giant fake head on. He manages to emote so much with just his body and voice that you almost forget that the face isn't actually expressing anything. An incredible performance from him.

I also loved his Most Likable Song ever that he played at the hotel. I want it as my ringtone

Shiraz 4.99

I'm actually annoyed I didn't like it better considering the quality of acting & potential that is there.
It's a pity, 5/10.

WinnyThePoo

Shiraz 4.99 wrote: »

I'm actually annoyed I didn't like it better considering the quality of acting & potential that is there.
It's a pity, 5/10.

Same.

I liked a lot of the parts, but for me it just didn't stick together well to my liking. I came out not really caring at all.