KnotMissPriceless Why so much hype?

Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Odelecol Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

linear80 The worst Comedy and Romance movie that I have ever watched :( Since this movie got 5.7 rating from 3000+ users, so I expected that I would get some good laugh and heart-touched romance scenes but NO, I didn't. Except good laugh and romance scenes, I got no idea that who is the main protagonist, female or male cast. I have no idea about what movie wants to show me "The good guy" and I just saw a d*ck who got a lot of chicks' numbers in his phone and F*cked a lot of girls who thought they were his only one love and spent the rest of their life together......... The ending also ridiculous......that such D*ck still got a girl with him, like he lives happily ever after which drove me crazy while watching it.

rinoa-3 "The Good Guy" was one of the "comedy/romance" films I got myself when, for the first time in my life, I found myself craving a chick flick (which I usually despise) to relieve myself of the stress I've been immersed in lately. To tell the truth, I only chose it for Alexis Bledel (not because I find her a particularly good actress, but because she gives me that cozy familiar feeling that I was looking for) and because the movie poster looked good (now that's a futile reason). Since I looked it up beforehand, I knew it was rated 6.2/10 on IMDb, so my expectations were pretty low -- I tend to be a hard critic. However, I was up for a surprise: to begin with, I got something that could and SHOULD have been labeled as "drama" as well. In fact, "The Good Guy" has very little "comedy" to it, except for the intelligent, well-measured and well-placed jokes that make the film even more enjoyable without detracting from the story's seriousness or credibility.This film focuses on a very interesting concept that Beth (Alexis Bledel) directly alludes to in a scene where she mentions "The Good Soldier", a book sharing the same basic idea: that we automatically trust a story's narrator out of habit, without taking the time to realize there might be other versions to the events, and that they may not be as innocent as they make themselves look. "The Good Guy" takes on this challenge amazingly well by presenting us with a likable protagonist/narrator (Scott Porter's character, Tommy) that, as the story unfolds, turns out to be (pardon the language) a total jerk, and definitely not trustworthy at all. His betrayal is not only harshly felt by Beth, his girlfriend, but also -- and this is the highly praise-worthy part -- by the viewer, who does not see it coming, partially because the well-constructed events make the "twist" very subtle at first, and partially because, well, he is the narrator, after all! -- this unexpectedness is a lot like what being betrayed in real life actually feels like, and that's why the film becomes so personal, making it even easier to hate Tommy and relate to what Beth is going through. In fact, the story is so well-built that, in the beginning, Beth seems to be the more loose, less trustworthy one, and you expect her to mess up somehow -- until the tables turn and the truth about Tommy is exposed, leaving us, the viewers, with a feeling of having been cheated on by the narrator, who has made fools of us all along, as he has Beth.In addition to a very original and successfully achieved core concept, "The Good Guy" is composed of decent enough acting and directing (with a few minor mistakes -- but it must be noted that Julio DePietro is a newcomer), is never boring, is funny only when it has to be (and serious most of the time) and does NOT overdo the cheesiness that necessarily derives from its "romance" label: on the contrary, the story and characters feel realistic enough; everything seems "possible", and everyone's actions are justifiable.All in all, where I expected a light chick flick, I ended up with something much better: a light relationship drama, with some comedy and romance mixed into it. While it is certainly not a great film, The Good Guy is a very enjoyable one with many strong points, and definitely deserves more than the 6.2 IMDb is currently giving it.

Willie-12 There are certain gimmicks used in movies that really should only be reserved for those who are seasoned and confident movie makers. One of those is the "let's reveal the ending at the beginning" gimmick. Basically the filmmaker is betting that everything that will come after the reveal (which basically is a flashback) will be so compelling, it won't matter if the audience already knows what's going to happen. It's risky. And when used by a lesser filmmaker, it's poison. It will kill a film before it even has a chance to breathe. That's exactly what happened with The Good Guy. Here's a film that definitely has it's problems. It's not very well written. It has decent acting performances, but nothing worth writing home about. It has a pretty generic and formulaic plot. But it still had the chance to be somewhat interesting. Had I not known the conclusion, I actually would have been mildly interested in how it was all going to turn out. However, because of the poisonous reveal at the start of the film, there was no real drama involved in any of the major plot points. I never felt sorry for Daniel, because I assumed he was the one wrapping his arms around Beth in the very first scene. I never really hated Tommy because I assumed, from Beth's statement, "I feel sorry for you Tommy...I really do," that he'd done some pretty stupid and crappy things. So by the time the ending of the film got back to the beginning, I actually had a little compassion for Tommy, when what I really should have been thinking was, "Hey pal, you got what you deserved." Was this ever going to be a great film? No. Could it have been a decent one? Maybe. But even if it was going to sink anyway, regardless of the poor film making decision, I'd rather it had sunk on it's own.

mayylalaa93 Basically, it's about a Wall Street guy named Tom Fielding (Scott Porter) who's dating Alexis Bledel's character, Beth. She's too stupid to realize that he is cheating on her, despite her bitter girlfriends warning her over and over again. Tom has a new employee, Daniel Seaver (Bryan Greenberg) who does not have a personality, so he teaches him how to be a successful trader on Wall Street. Beth and Daniel have a spark. They get together in the end when she realizes that the successful Wall Street guy is a dirty cheater and has been since forever.OH! But there's a twist! The beginning is actually the end. How clever.Oh and Tom turns out to be the bad guy. Throw in an Asian and a black guy to spice things up, so they wouldn't be criticized for no diversity. Well, got that covered, now how about the script...I could not stop banging my head with my palm because every line made me shiver. Every line was just another cliché line. It's a horrible "romantic" flick filled with the lines of every other romantic Hollywood movie. Characters weren't developed well enough. Hell, they weren't developed at all, so there was really nothing to this film. I did not feel any connection between the characters. They tried to show the comfortable relationships that surround the group of friends with constant cursing. It shouldn't be rated R because there wasn't any sexual content that was unbearable; there were no naked bodies and aside from the cursing, there was nothing insane. Glad it was a short hour and 37 minutes. AND DON'T EVEN TRY TO UNDERSTAND THEIR CONVERSATIONS. THEY'RE NOT UNDERSTANDABLE.And Bryan Greenberg is too good to be on this piece of sh-t. He was on One Tree Hill, damn it. As for the others, I do not give a ...Gilmore Girls suxxxx.