Home
search
more | tips
IMDb > Large (2001) > IMDb user comments

IMDb user comments for
Large (2001) More at IMDb Pro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 11 comments in total 

12 out of 18 people found the following comment useful :-
awe-inspiringly bad, 8 June 2002
1/10
Author: Bel Ludovic from London, England

This film was, quite simply, lowest-common-denominator crap. It was so poorly acted, plotted and constructed that had I been in a cinema I would've walked out - something I have never done. Not much is set in Birmingham, and it's a shame that the little that is, is usually below-par. Here we get to hear a non-stop chorus of fake Brummie accents (which is even more annoying than the real thing, believe me) basically saying not very much. This is a typical Britcom film of the 'Human Traffic' imitation school; aimed at the clubbing generation, it might work after a night drinking, but for anyone else its jokes and gags are woefully unfunny and its plot and characters profoundly uninvolving. Waiting for a bus in the rain is more fun. Avoid, avoid, avoid. Avoid.

Was the above comment useful to you?

Well, the blonde one is FINE!, 19 January 2003
Author: Rob Golding from Crowthore, Berkshire, England

This film came about after the rush of gross out teen comedy's that have been coming around. The film itself is ok, set in Birmingham (mmmm). It follows the son of a rock star, who must not break key conditions set down by his father in order to inherit his millions. Of course he does and must put things right before his 18th birthday. There are some funny moments in here, if u look hard enough. There are also some fine looking ladies and the Birmingham accents are fun to listen too. And copy to impress your mates. This film is best saved for a drunken Saturday night when you want to waste some time with you friends, and look at the 'talent' on display. Not the acting kind. Or, go out with you friends and have a good time. 3/10

Rob

Was the above comment useful to you?

OH MY GOD, 29 July 2002
Author: gerrytaggart67 from London

This has to be the worst film I have ever seen. There is about 5-10 seconds of entertainment in the whole thing. The story is all over the place for a start, characters paper tin, actors mis-cast. Very un-engaging, painful to watch, unoriginal. It's been lit awful, shot awful. It is the worst film I have ever seen. The director has created a film that I will never forget until the day I die.

Was the above comment useful to you?

Now, I didn't pay to see this... thank God., 23 February 2002
Author: Alex Sievewright from Lincoln, England

Oh dear. An hour into this film I walked out (something I have never done before while at the cinema) because I couldn't have cared less about it. The performances were stale, the premise done before and the jokes were unoriginal. I don't think I smiled once let alone laugh. This film is an absolute waste of time. Avoid.

Was the above comment useful to you?

Another nail in the coffin of the British Film Industry, 7 October 2001
1/10
Author: david45 from Birmingham, England

I suppose it was my own fault, expecting something worthwhile, from a film that was funded, in part by FilmFour. I was not expecting, however to be crawling with embarrassment by the end of it. I can only assume that Justin Edgar is a big Tom Sharpe fan, since he used so many of his scenarios - the drugged dog being ever so reminiscent of "The Throwback" etc. etc. The sets were impressive enough and the filming although patchy, evoked enough atmosphere, but "Trainspotting" in Birmingham, this was not. The dragging up of B list celebrities did nothing for the standard of acting either - over the top, or in the case of the lead, Luke De Woolfson virtually non-existent, as he looked constantly surprised to be there at all. There are certainly some very funny moments, but none of them very original - like knowing the punch line to a joke while someone is telling it, the laugh is automatic. I'd like to have something clever to say, to sum it all up, but I'd rather just try and forget that I payed money to see it.

Was the above comment useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
so bad its on the way to being good, 10 April 2006
2/10
Author: (amberpatt) from United Kingdom

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I am three quarters the way through watching this, and I feel compelled to write. Yes it is bad, yes, its the worst film you will see for years, but its been going for 70 something minutes, and I am glued to the couch, mesmerised. This film has passed the that elusive line of so bad its good. Many have strived, few have achieved.

I don't know if it was the nutella and beastiality scene, the terrapin rescue squad, the hot step-mum going away for a weekend of colonic irrigation or the vomiting bride. It was something.

The actors all do a fine job, the script is on dodgy ground, the direction is what finally kills it.

It is a shocking film, but in a few years it could resurface as a bit of a cult.

Was the above comment useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Worth watching but nothing seminal., 5 February 2005
5/10
Author: redlopa from Cambridge, UK

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

So, I watched this film tonight actually on the strength of Morwenna Banks' presence. I had no presuppositions or expectations of the movie and was reasonably fulfilled by it. Most of the other reviewers are right - it is a gross out movie but seems to hover in a weird "cannot decide" world between a full on pop film and a stylised highly crafted piece. I liked: The performances - lots of people I never heard of giving a good show for the camera. The casting was great, apart from Les Dennis, who is just irritating in general. I liked the production values which were very high. I liked Melinda Gutteridge. I didn't like the pacing - the story just didn't really get going and though I was happy when everything inevitably resolved itself for good (not logging this as a spoiler, it's so obvious and in fact is implicit as part of the genre!) I still didn't feel there was enough flavour in what is a pretty run of the mill storyline. I actually found myself thinking nostalgically about the (superior) film Weird Science, whose plot is similar. God, and the actual cinematography was irritating. Scenes went from blue to yellow to orange... really VERY unsubtle to the point of interrupting the flow of the film. Casting: 8/10 Acting: 8/10 Pictures: 4/10 Story: 2/10 Execution: 6/10 Let's stick with an overall 5/10. Worth seeing but don't miss a good film in the cinema for it. PS partly in response to another reviewer, I don't think this film is remembered NOW, never mind in ten or twenty years time.

Was the above comment useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Pretty awful - yet funny, 29 October 2002
7/10
Author: ncsn

Think "Dude, Mary ate my Pie" as directed by Tom Green - only without the good taste (and with bad teeth all round). And yet - the humor harks back more to Basil Fawlty than to Jack Tripper, the amazonian babes would do Benny Hill proud, and the dog leaves "There's something about Mary"'s pooch wallowing in the dust. As late-night video rental/cable fare - 8 out of 10.

Was the above comment useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
You'll either love it or hate it, 20 October 2002
10/10
Author: davidphillips515 from London, England

Large is one of the funniest films I have ever seen. It is destined to become a cult classic. You either get the humour or you don't and I know some people who really hated it. Whatever your opinion, this is an extremely well-crafted film. I was a big fan of Justin Edgar's short film Dirty Phonecalls. While a lot of his off the wall energy has been diluted here, Large does not disappoint and I urge anyone with a sense of humour to see it.

It belongs to the teen movie sub-genre of the House Party Movie. The only other UK antecedent is the cult House Party Movie 'Party Party', but it's a better film that that. It cleverly melds the great UK traditions of social realism and smutty comedy, almost like a Carry On for kids.

The cast of 'Party Party' reads like a who's who of successful actors, and I believe the same thing will happen with Large. The actors might have familiar faces, but not familiar names -yet. Hats off to Edgar as well for casting most of the film with genuine Brummies. Admittedly, it's not all great performance-wise -Emma Catherwood as the evil girlfriend Rachel is truly appalling. I can only assume that the casting director was having a bad day.

Edgar and co-writer Mike Dent have created their own kitschy fantasy world, where Birmingham has it's own Home Shopping Channel and dogs have pyschiatrists. It's a little like John Waters mythologisation of Baltimore in his films. Despite this, the world has its roots in reality: Anyone who knows Solihull or Sutton Coldfield will have met someone like Lorraine Benita Mousely.

I've never seen a film that looks quite like Large, every scene has colours so vibrant that they almost make your eyes bleed. Despite this reaction against the usual grey look of UK movies, Edgar has gone for an edgy, documentary-style handheld camera throughout, which serves to keep the pace cracking along. The Dolby 5.1 mix should also be singled out for praise, and the gutsy score from David A Hughes. Large does not look like the low-budget film it is.

There seems to be a bad smell about Large just because it got a one-star review in The Guardian (from Peter Bradshaw, the man who wrote the worlds worst sitcom -Baddiel's Syndrome with public school chum David Baddiel), but I read great reviews in Sight and Sound and Variety. I can only guess that the reason it wasn't a massive hit in the UK was because it was released the same week as 'American Pie 2' on 400 screens less. Unfortunately, UK teenagers would rather see a bad Hollywood Teen movie than a good British one.

The true worth of Large cannot be determined now, but in ten, twenty or even thirty years time, when critics will look back on it as a fascinating curiosity amidst the UK cinema of this period. I have no idea what Edgar will come up with next, but I can't wait to see it.

Was the above comment useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Fantastic, a must see, 4 July 2001
10/10
Author: lukeallder from Birmingham, England

This film includes all properties needed for a successful film. Its humour and filthy-ness make the movie a must see. Justin Edgar is a director and writer who will soon be known world wide for his fantastic wit and origiality. If you like waynes world and american pie this movies for you and if you did not like them see it anyway.

Was the above comment useful to you?
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another comment

Related Links

Ratings External reviews Plot keywords
Main details Your user comments Your vote history