Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Micitype Pretty Good

Brainsbell The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

Tayyab Torres Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

mr-jon-hope If there is a theme to this movie, it might be the question: What entertains us? The main character stares blankly at telenovelas. He joylessly trudges through tourist attractions. He tells deliberately offensive jokes. He listens to deliberately bad music on endless drives where he occasionally stops to stare at desert vistas. He drinks.He watches others entertain themselves -- watching the absurdist clown who is his opening act; watching people play games at parties; attending a "chromotherapy" seminar; listening to John C. Reilly sing, or letting Reilly mess up one of the comedian's jokes. The comedian laughs only twice during the film.The comedian refuses to tell jokes when he isn't in character. He seems to be repulsed by sex, offended by offers of sympathy (from Reilly and Ty Sheridan), and unable to connect with other people. He ruins his celebrity gig. During another gig, instead of telling jokes, he pretends to shoot the audience while blowing raspberries at them.And we, of course, watch the comedian, waiting to be entertained. Neil Hamburger fans will hear few of his jokes. Michael Cera's cameo is a throwaway. Tim Heidecker fans will be equally disappointed. Speaking of cameos, Annabella Lwin from Bow Wow Wow plays the tour guide in the first scene, and David Yow from the Jesus Lizard also has a brief scene. It isn't worth watching the movie to see them.I gave Entertainment a 5 because it left me feeling ambivalent (which may have been its goal). It is neither great nor incompetent. It certainly isn't entertaining.

picturetaker I usually dig movies like this. Ones with wide open panoramic cinematography and nobody characters but this one really made no sense at all. We basically have this unstable guy who travels around doing a horrible comedy routine. He takes in the sights and wears a yellow hat. I get the premise of this movie. Basically it's a statement about how delusional we can be in our dreams. The main character absolutely fits that part. He doesn't know how to tell jokes, except to convicts and the most hilarity in his act is basically his comb over look. When someone heckles him he can't handle it and tears the person apart. He really doesn't care about anyone or anything.I do not recommend this movie even if you are a fan of independent movies. This one is really forgettable. It's not very good and its ending is abrupt and pointless.

zaikefilms I actually just made an account so that I could give this movie some love. It is awesome. Stressful and uncomfortable as hell, but if you're down for some seriously artsy endurance-cinema, this one's for you.I could hardly tell you what the plot is, but it's never boring. It's slow as hell, but constantly surprising. Alverson "directs" and manipulates the viewer as much as the actors, leading us one way and changing lanes. It requires a willingness to engage with it, because it doesn't answer your questions or even suggest that there is an answer. The cliché "it's the journey, not the destination" definitely applies.It's entertaining as hell. It crawls, sometimes unbearably, but never stops moving. Every detail feels meticulous, but nothing seems to really matter.It's beautifully shot. Nobody seems to be mentioning that. If nothing else, it looks great. It takes place in the desert and manages to be slimy and claustrophobically sterile at the same time. Where most movies make the desert seem vast, this makes it feel like a sandbox. It's as hopeless as The Comedy, but much more empathetic, so you actually care how it ends. And it ends (relatively) big! I couldn't tell you the ending to most of the movies I've seen this year, but this one is going to stick with me.8/10 (probably not going to watch it again, though)

temrok9 There is a thin line, in the world of independent cinema-and European and world cinema as well-between good intentions and an accomplished form that can work as a piece of art. The usual thing, especially in places of art festivals-such as the Thessaloniki film festival where I watched the film- is to meet films that are rather pretentious, wanting to look clever(one perfect example of the kind is the highly regarded by the critics Lobster, which may go as far as bare the title of the best European film of the year), or that through their pronounced emphasis on social situations demand to be taken seriously as movies about people -in contrast with exactly what? Robert Bresson's masterpieces could teach something to all those mediocre directors who claim a place in the history of cinema. So, when I encounter a film maker who has really the capacity to create a cinematic vision with virtuosity and precision I am very glad. This is, I believe, the case of the film Entertainment, which although not easy to enjoy, it is in my opinion a remarkable work of musical quality(it has a pace that is successfully maintained throughout the film) and a personality that is not the sum of its influences(perhaps David Lynch, David Foster Wallace among others?).All actors are perfect but the protagonist, I think, gives probably the best performance of the year.Surely it is a film that very few things happen, but they do happen in a context that is meaningful, in a form that shows that the director is a master of its means, despite the difficulty of the task. A rare experience, copious sometimes, of being in the margin, and what it is all about, strolling in the desert of our lonely damned hard seeking Entertainment souls.