User reviews

The 1997 low-key indie dramedy Henry Fool would seemingly have been a secure choice of movies no one would bother to revisit for a sequel. A rumpled, dissipated drifter (Thomas Jay Ryan) strolls into town. His anarchistic rantings and delusions inspire a nerdy garbage collector (James Urbaniak) to write poems, while Henry half-heartedly tries to boink the guy's sister (Parker Posey). As the poet prospers, Henry declines. Nothing special about any of the characters or the story. A pitch for Harold and Maude's Ghost would have been quoted higher odds of ever making it to a screen.

But Parker Posey ain't the semi-official Queen of the Indies for nothing'. So when writer/director Hal Hartley came up with a new incarnation for his cast, a film was born. Though we catch up with the same characters many years, they're in a completely different sort of dark comedy; this one's laced with espionage! Henry may have been an international spy - and possible double, or even triple, agent - for years before meeting the others. He's either dead or in hiding from agents and authorities of many countries. Everyone wants his rambling, incoherent journal which just may contain coded secrets that could destabilize nations and economies. Posey's Fay is either the wife he left to go on the lam, or his widow, depending on who's telling the truth. Fay's efforts to find Henry and/or the hotly-contested journals include a globe-trotting gauntlet of multinational hit-persons and henchmen at every turn. She never knows who to believe or trust. Nor do we.

While herding these unlikely characters into Jason Bourne/Jack Ryan territory, Hartley's script retains the ironic deadpan humor of their first appearance, steering clear of slapstick in exposing them to physical menaces. His sly lampoon of the paranoia, duplicity and musical-chairs alliances of today's geopolitics starts to crumble towards the end. Even so, fans of the first movie will be pleasantly surprised by the novelty of Hartley's recycling methods. (5/18/07)

"Fay Grim" is Hal Hartley's strange, fitfully amusing but ultimately unsuccessful follow-up to his "Henry Fool," an independent feature from 1997 that achieved a certain degree of critical acclaim and financial success upon its release in 1998.

Parker Posey returns as Fay Grim, the wife of the aforementioned Mr. Fool, the literary poseur who disappeared mysteriously at the end of the previous picture taking the multi-volume "confessions" he had written right along with him. Fay is barely keeping the frayed strands of her life together when a couple of CIA agents (the main one played by Jeff Goldblum) arrive on the scene to inform her that not only is her missing husband believed to be dead but that the French government would like nothing better than to get its hands on Fool's inscrutable manuscripts, which, apparently, contain coded information of great value to many of the world's premier powerbrokers. The agents convince Fay to fly to Paris to engage in some serious cloak-and-dagger espionage for the American government. While there, she finds herself quickly embroiled in a complex web of secrecy, lies and international intrigue centered around the man she married but now realizes she never really knew much about.

With its tongue-in-cheek style and preposterously over-complicated storyline, "Fay Grim" is admittedly something of an acquired taste. Some viewers may be intrigued by the hip, postmodernist tone and approach the movie adopts towards its subject matter, while others may find the whole thing insufferably pretentious and annoying. I'm afraid I fit more into the second category, for despite its undeniable cleverness, the movie tends to way overplay its hand, with deliberately arch and self-conscious dialogue - comprised mainly of endless non sequiturs, a rat-a-tat-tat delivery and clipped phrasing - that wears out its welcome very early on. Ditto for the acting, which is intentionally deadpan, one-note and mannered throughout.

At times, the movie's satirical commentary on the insanity of life in the modern world is pointed and acerbic, while, at others, the film is simply too cute by half to really make its case very effectively. "Fay Grim" earns points for at least trying to be different, but you have to be in a very special kind of a mood to truly enjoy it.

Perhaps I would have liked this film more if I wasn't so attached to the characters in Henry Fool. To those who've never seen Henry Fool, I wouldn't worry. As Hartley jokingly said in his introduction to the film at TIFF, the film has lots of exposition and explanations.

This film is very heavy in plot, which keeps the film moving. There are many humorous moments and the film certainly has Hartley's trademark humour and rhythm of dialogue. Over all, a technically well made film and sure to satisfy new fans of Hartley who are just beginning explore his work. As for the older fans who loved his earlier works like Trust and Amateur, this film could go either way. I have mixed feelings about the film and Hartley's later films in general. What Hartley does best is setting his stories in small situations, focusing on the intimate and idiosyncratic ways in which his characters interact with each other. Since his late 90s and onward, his films have widened in scope in terms of subject matter. Mass media in No Such Thing, Religion in the Book of Life and now Terrorism in Fay Grim. I don't know if Hartley's talents are suited to such big subject matter or if he's able to do it justice.

Strangely enough, the film can still be reduced to intimate relationships, a simple love story about a woman who goes to seek out the husband she loves. The only problem is, I've seen Henry Fool and everyone seems incredibly out of character in this film. You can tell this film was written long after Henry Fool was finished without any intention of a sequel. Somehow, the terrorist plot feels conveniently tacked on through the use of Henry's books of confessions as a macguffin (in the hitchcockian sense). Fay's motivations for finding Henry seemed motivated purely by the needs of the plot rather than what being faithful to who fay was as person in Henry Fool.

I guess I'm slightly disappointed in the film because it's not true to the characters in the Henry Fool and it doesn't exactly work as a straight ahead thriller. There's too much irony and wryness in Hartley's approach to such as big topic as terrorism. It somehow works and doesn't work at the same time. All I could say, you would either love or hate the film depending on your take on Hartley's work and how well you know Hartley's work. Fans of Henry Fool, be severely warned for a disappointment. For the rest, welcome to the world of Hal Hartley and enjoy the ride.

When I started watching "Fay Grim", I had no idea that it was a sequel to "Henry Fool". Now, the latter was not a movie that I envisioned as having a sequel. But one has arrived, and it's quite good. I assume that you've seen the original, so I won't explain it. This one starts with Fay (Parker Posey) living with her son whom she had with deadbeat Henry (Thomas Jay Ryan). Simon (James Urbaniak) is still in jail. One day, the son gets expelled for bringing a pornographic toy to school. But this is no ordinary toy. It holds a secret that explains much of what happened in the first movie. And this secret delves deeper into geopolitics than "Syriana".

I must say that I'm quite impressed with what Hal Hartley has accomplished here. Maybe this one doesn't quite reach the original's quality, but it certainly takes a good look at what's going on in the world. And the end leaves open the possibility for another sequel.

Also starring Jeff Goldblum.

A wonderfully quirky film with enough twists for a sack of pretzels. Parker Posey plays Fay Grim as a sexy, vulnerable, loving mother who may or may not be what she seems. The story is very tongue in cheek, and the dialog skillfully understated. Hints of humor and intrigue, neither of which overpower the characterization Posey pulls off so well. The supporting cast is stellar. The downside? This film needs your full attention, almost to the point of stopping the film and taking notes. Posey has more sex appeal in her lifting of an eyebrow than most actresses have in their entire body. She's worth your time, even if you don't understand the denouement.

It's hard to believe that this is a sequel to Henry Fool. Hard to believe that the same director and actors were involved in both movies. While Henry Fool is refreshing, witty, comical, Fay Grim is slow, boring, and doesn't go anywhere. Where has the wit gone? I am baffled.

It is 10 years since I saw Henry Fool and many of its dialogs and scenes are still vivid in my memory. Fay Grim is painful to watch. This is no fault of the actors, who are good (Parker Posey) or great (Jeff Goldblum) -- the blame lies entirely with the plot, the dialog, and even some of the filming (low budget is no excuse). A huge disappointment.

Sorry I couldn't pay attention to the plot, I was so bored, so disappointed... if you enjoyed this one you might not enjoy Henry Fool so much... the two movies have absolutely nothing to do with each other... there is no continuity in the characters' personalities... it's all a fraud to entice fans of Henry Fool to watch the sequel.

I'm switching this off now -- Henry in some sort of jail with a Taliban?!?!

Fay Grim is, on its face, a tale of espionage and intrigue told with a nod and a wink. As the sequel to his extraordinary Henry Fool, Hal Hartley creates a surprising blend of film noir and hardboiled spy thriller that starts with a knowing smile and large dose of laughter and turns as poignant and warm as any film I've seen this year.

Parkey Posey is Fay Grim, an unwitting Mata Hari caught between the love of her exiled husband Henry Fool and the questionable intentions of a charming CIA operative. As Agent Fulbright, Jeff Goldblum is a master of wit and sarcasm, in a role that seems tailored to his talents. He has never been better. James Urbaniak is Fay's brother Simon, jailed but renowned for his wildly popular books of poetry. His love of his work and his sister brings a jolt of passion to contrast the dour nature of the spies which eventually populate Fay's world. And Liam Aiken is Fay's oversexed 14 year-old son. Although that may be redundant. Aiken's understated style is remarkably "old soul" for someone his age.

The entire film is shot Dutch angle, the off-kilter style made famous by Orson Welles and used primarily in horror films and psychological thrillers to impart a sense of foreboding. In Fay Grim, using that style from opening credits to closing is intriguing at first, deceptively clever the next. For just as the viewer begins to fall for the perfectly timed comedic elements and wit of Hartley's brilliant script, something happens. The film takes a dark yet strangely comforting turn as these characters magically become sympathetic before our eyes. What began as dark comedy morphs into romantic drama, and the transition is masterful. Slow pacing gives way to breathtaking action, and we are sucked right into the vortex.

In the end, Hartley's sharp dialog combined with the amazing performances of a perfectly matched ensemble cast makes for a delicious cinematic cocktail. Told with the luxury of one able to write, produce, direct, edit, and even compose the music, Hal Hartley has crafted a smart, sexy tale of espionage with tongue just barely planted in cheek. Fay Grim is one part Dashiell Hammett, one part Raymond Chandler, and one part Ian Fleming, shaken and maybe stirred as well.

I say 'I'd figure' in that line because, frankly, I've not seen a Hal Hartley movie until now. It's not that I haven't heard of him though, as he was seen as one of those small NY filmmakers (when I say small I mean even smaller than Jim Jarmusch), who made ultra-personal projects on limited budgets. In an ironic way, much as with Pasolini's Salo, though in a slightly different context, Fay Grim interests me to see some of Hartley's more acclaimed features, because there seems to be at least present some semblance of talent behind it, as if Hartley *could* be a very good filmmaker who may be so good he's just taken a big experimental blunder. Or, on the other hand, he could just be someone far too impressed with his own idiosyncrasies and would-be Godard-like cinematic collisions.

I can't quite explain the story, which may or may not be a problem I suppose, however it's not really in due to not having seen the film that preceded Fay Grim, Henry Fool. I think even if I had that experience it wouldn't make too much of a difference based on the final results. There's a lot of international espionage, a double plot wrapped inside of another that's fallen through the fake pockets of the title character, played in an aloof way by Parker Posey (not sure if that's good or bad either, maybe both), and also involving a CIA operative (Jeff Goldblum, as usual a solid presence amid the mania, even conjuring some laughs), not to mention an orgy-laden picture box, and author Henry Fool. It's not that the script is totally impenetrable, however much it goes into over-extended loopholes just for the sake of it, because there are some touches of witty or affectingly strange dialog.

Quite simply, the direction just sucks. Harltey is in love with the Third Man, which is fine, but he imposes a consistently headache inducing style of everything being tilted in angle, with characters having to get into frame equally oddly. Not since Battlefield Earth, in fact, has a director come off so annoyingly in trying to make the unnecessary choice of titled angles for some bizarre dramatic effect, only this time Hartley isn't amid a cluster-f***, he's mostly responsible for it. This, along with the crazy wannabe Godard title-cards that pop in here and there, some a little amusing and some just totally stupid, and the montage segments all in still shots, AND a couple of moments involving action that almost call to mind Ed Wood, undermine any of the potential that is in the script, which is already fairly hard to decipher. In a way, it's fascinating to watch how bad this all goes, but a kind of fascination that comes in seeing the flip-side to total creative control on a sort-of small-scale story.

But let it be known: you'll likely not come across a more wretchedly pretentious example of American independent film-making this year.

"An honest man is always in trouble." This becomes a timberous theme, shadowing Fay throughout the sequel to "Henry Fool." Her character begins as a confused and tentative interviewee, being interrogated by heavy handed, pushy government ghost-types. Men with authority over her, the ability to cause her and her family harm, without disclosing their own motives and limits are leaning hard and fast on Fay. After a couple of conditions are met, she complies meekly. At least, for a while.

"Fay Grim" is as nicely convoluted as a triple loop roller coaster ride - keeps you off-guard and a little dizzy, but in a good way. The patter and phraseology reminded me somewhat of the cadence of a Mamet work. This played very well with Parker Posey's characterization, as well as that of Jeff Goldblum and James Urbaniak. In fact, Urbaniak, as Simon with the owl-glassed eyes, was superbly down-played as Fay's poet genius, stalwart brother. Henry's very brief appearances gave proof of his very big personality and, quite frankly induced me to queue up "Henry Fool" which I have been very reluctant to do.

Undoubtedly, this is a movie I will watch again. It is quirky, somewhat suspenseful, it makes one think. Certainly, as a result of Hartley's stylish acumen and finesse I will benefit from rewatching to catch other of his artistic strokes I will have missed the first time around.

Agents, spies, intrigue and espionage! A woman bumbling through this all to get to her man, who may not even be alive. By the time Fay is done, this butterfly bestirs ripples afar, you know.

Henry Fool is a better film. But this is the perfect way to follow-up a film like 'Henry Fool.' To take Henry very seriously, his 'lies' and his mysterious aura. Even the opening shot of 'Henry Fool' when Simon puts his ear to the ground as Henry comes walking over the hill is more fully manifest through 'Fay Grim.' The over-the-top jokes, that are more or less meta-jokes (about the writing of the film and the jokes themselves), are good but the opening of the film is a little saturated in them. Also Hartley's use of Dutch angles throughout the film is jarring, yes, it's intention, but it feels forced and over-used, it goes beyond jarring to, what I'd like to call, annoying. It's a flawed film, but a must see for any Hartley or 'Henry Fool' fan.

And don't listen to stupid reviews, don't watch this unless you've seen the first film. The intrigue, satire and wit of this movie is totally lost if you haven't seen Henry Fool. It's a sequel. That's just dumb.

This is a wanna-be film. It wants to be like the Coen Brothers, cutting-edge, etc, etc, etc. It just doesnt cut the mustard. It really is Grim. No one over seven will believe the plot or dialogue. It's Kaka disguised as chic. So what we have as an end result is chic kaka. Probably the worst film of that decade. Poor Jeff Goldblum; he used to be cool (Greenwich Village, anyone?); now he is just old.

I heard a review of Fay Grim on my local pbs radio station, which prompted me to go see it a couple of weeks later. I haven't seen other films by the director, and I wasn't expecting much. Overall Fay Grim is basically entertaining and smart, but no masterpiece, no gem. The plot has been covered in other reviews, so I'm just adding my two cents here.

FG has a sort of Harry Lime/The Third Man feeling. The main character, Fay Grim, is drawn into a murky world of intrigue, finds that people and things aren't who and what they seem, and is forced to re-evaluate her beliefs.

Tongue in cheek humor abounds in FG. The guy behind me couldn't stop chuckling. And it's left to the audience to catch on or not – there is little of the 'okay, I'm setting up a joke here.' But the humor can get a bit thick, particularly at the beginning of the movie.

I like long movies, and I'm happy if a movie takes its time to develop. But FG gets a bit boring at times. Either there's choppy scenes of explication or we're getting in or out or going around in various vehicles or . . . I don't know. There was a lot of time spent on structure without much content. The key to the story is a set of notebooks that contain something - rantings or coded secrets - that a lot of people are interested in, so it seems. Had the director done more with this, life would have been splendid. But too soon we're told what's in the notebooks and then we're told why. This choice basically guts the mystery and motivation in the plot.

There is a nice international flavour, though it is hijacked by the post-9/11 myopia. Oddly, I don't think we ever hear anyone speak a language other than English, even though there are characters who are Swedish, French, Israeli, Arab, Afghani, Turk, and maybe German and Russian, and the action takes place in various non-English speaking places. This suggests rather lazy film making.

The movie finishes on a minor chord. This would be a plus if not for the nagging suspicion that this rawness is merely a bridge to a sequel. I mentioned above that Fay Grim has a number of similarities to The Third Man. If you haven't seen Carol Reed's noir thriller, then you may be in for a treat.

Generically speaking, Fay Grim is a highly entertaining thriller featuring two of the most inexorably enjoyable names in American movies, unshakably beautiful and gracefully spunky Parker Posey and endlessly charismatic and unavoidably hilarious Jeff Goldblum. They have many scenes in the first half of the film in which we see these two insatiable presences volleying off of each other, even radiating with charm when Goldblum rolls off Hartley's shamelessly epic info-dumps. Nevertheless, if one were to deconstruct Fay Grim, one would see many instances in which countless scenes could've been squeezed for much more benefit than they have resulted in being.

This sort of filmed in-joke is the sequel to Hal Hartley's Henry Fool, which was made ten years earlier. It has title character Posey forced by CIA agent Goldblum to track down the notebooks that were the precious possessions of her missing fugitive husband, the predecessor's titular anti-hero. Available within them is information that could concede the safety of the United States. Fay first makes for Paris to get a hold of them but becomes engulfed in a bona fide celebration of espionage clichés featuring everything from car bombs to ambiguous helpers to Following the Girl to double-crosses to triple-crosses.

The primary appeal of it all for me is that it's such a novel approach to the sequel of a movie about a garbageman and a struggling novelist in a small town. In the original Henry Fool, Posey played a simple woman leading a very simple life. Hartley's talents do not reach the heights of many of the other independent newbies from the 1990s, but I do admire his wild creativity in making an inadvertent Nearne sister out of her, giving her a terrific predicament, as he did to her character's brother, played by James Urbaniak, in Henry Fool, as she is trapped between whether or not she may still love her overwhelming refugee husband and the problematic but forceful plans of Goldblum.

Hartley, however, is simply riding on that fragmentary idea. His plot, though complex and labyrinthine, true to the form of the spy film, it seems as if to be entirely capricious. The reason I was not bored was mostly due to the pace at which the story unfolds, not to mention the presence of Posey and Goldblum. The problem with the remainder of Hartley's cast is that I cannot seem to become fond of the rest of them. It has nothing to do with how obscure they are compared to the relative star power of the two said charm masters, but with how they don't seem to hold their own alongside them, though Saffron Burrows certainly comes close. Most of the scenes not involving Posey or Goldblum are far too light on their feet, stringing us along with info-dumps we have no choice but to listen to or else be totally lost in the ensuing sequence of scenes. They are shot almost entirely in tiled angles, as if Hartley is compensating for that implacable feeling of a lack of material.

Liam Aiken, however, playing the now teenage son of Fay and Henry, has a certain allure about him, seeming wise beyond his years, certainly much wiser than any of the adult characters. Perhaps Hartley intended that, or maybe it's simply Aiken's presence. The problem with a Hartley film is that you never quite know what was intended and what just happens to be there. As Scorsese said, "Cinema is a matter of what's in the frame and what's out." One has to be able to trust that what we see is a conscious decision by the filmmaker to remain in the finished film.

At first, Fay Grim seems like it's going to be a return to form for Hartley. This sequel to what, as of this writing, is his last good movie, Henry Fool, starts in an interesting fashion, showing the fallout from the previous film's end. The movie has the spare dialog, quirky performances and low key wit that distinguishes Hartley's best films.

I kind of like the idea of the sequel, which turns our perception of Henry upside down. The fact that Hartley has decided to create his sequel as an entirely different genre from the original is really pretty clever.

Unfortunately, Hartley is an uncomfortable genre director, as he proved in his odd "monster movie" No Such Thing. His take on the spy film is, like that movie, not much fun. The strange, disconnected dialog that works well when portraying people trying to cover up their emotional scars seems out of place in a movie in which people have to convey important information. There is more than one way to make a spy movie - look at Ian Fleming versus John Le Carre - but you can't do things in such a way that the audience is not only perplexed about what's going on, but even perplexed as to how the film's characters know what's going on. The story is so convoluted it could be considered a spy film parody if it were actually clever or wacky, but instead it just feels like Hartley doesn't understand the mechanics of a genre movie well enough to either make or satirize one.

Also, while I generally really like Parker Posey, I did not care for her performance in this; she seemed far too dumb in affect to play the role of the heroine. Thomas Jay Ryan, on the other hand, comes off the best in the film, and feels like a breath of fresh air when he appears. But he cannot save this film, and at this point I've begun to believe that no one can save Hartley from making bad, self indulgent, poorly conceived movies.

When I first heard that Hal Hartley was doing a sequel to Henry Fool, I was excited (it's been a personal favorite for years now), and then wary when I heard it had something to do with terrorism. Having just seen it though, I was surprised to find that it worked, while still being an entirely different sort of movie than Henry Fool. The writing and direction were both dead on and the acting was superb...especial kudos go to Hartley for reassembling virtually the whole cast, right down to Henry's son, who was only four in the original. Like I said though, this movie is quite different from the first, but it works: I reconciled myself with the change in tone and subject matter to the fact that 10 years have passed and the characters would have found themselves in very different situations since the first film ended. In this case, an unexpected adventure ensues...and that's about all I'll give away...not to mention the fact that I'll need to see it again to really understand what's going on and who's double crossing who. While it was certainly one of the better movies I've seen in some time, it suffers like many sequels with its ending, as it appears that Hartley is planning a third now and the film leaves you hanging. I'll be sure to buy my tickets for part 3 ('Henry Grim'?) in 2017.

The angle of the shots and the sound quality rendering parts of the dialog undecipherable becomes a steadily increasing distraction. Also, the unavailabilityof captions on the DVD format is a definite fault in what might beotherwise a rather enjoyable film. Also, the jacket of the DVD version considers this humorous; hardly an accurate description! one would be puzzled, too, about the interjection oftitles/descriptions of things about to happen. It is reminiscent of the 60's "Tom Jones." Perhaps this was an attempt to be funny, but with overall humor lacking, it morphs only into a cheap gimmick. There were some real possibilities for this film, but it seems the directing and editing missed them at nearly every possibility.

Convoluted, infuriating and implausible, Fay Grim is hard to sit through but Parker Posey is really the only actress who could take this story and run with it. She's at once touching,funny, cunning. The supporting actors commit to it as well.

I wont even try to tell you the plot.. It involves characters from Hartley's Henry Fool and attempts a tale of international espionage.

The film works well if you continue along with it-understanding it is. in a sense, completely ridiculous. It becomes more and more ridiculous as you plod along. (I resisted the temptation to turn off the DVD twice).

Fay Grim requires an adventurous film-goer willing to tackle something that isn't cookie-cutter. In the end, it offers something that defies description.

A tongue-firmly-in-cheek spy thriller which is about the games along the way, not the actual plot. If you can accept that - and tolerate relentless use of the Dutch Angle - then you'll have a lot of fun. If that isn't your cup of tea, then this is very hard going.

I haven't seen the original Henry Fool and cannot compare this to it. The movie is reviewed as a standalone.

It's clear that the budget was extremely tight. This movie takes that limitation and turns it into an asset - creativity takes the place of special effects and the now ubiquitous chase scenes and choreographed shootouts. Props are kept to a minimum, so are locations, costumes, vehicles and the like. Swooping, highly technical camera shots are noticeable by their absence. This would have crippled a lesser director, but Hal Hartley takes these things and makes the limitations stylish.

This is a very stylish movie.

The way people talk and interact, the way the scenes flow or cut or jump, how characters evolve - it's all done in a way I've never seen before. It should be clunky. Somehow it flows. An awful lot of ground gets covered, with the absolute minimum of fuss. There are a lot of lessons here for jaded audiences and amateur film makers alike.

The acting isn't going to win any awards, but it doesn't have to. The style of the movie doesn't call for large dramatic turns. Parker Posey does very well as a woman taking control, Jeff Goldblum's role might have been a suit tailored for him, and the young Liam Aiken (as Ned Grim) has quite a turn as a precocious teenager. The rest of the cast are alright, and that's all that's needed. The whole movie is about people keeping a straight face while playing apparently serious games, and large displays of emotion would simply get in the way of the fun.

Unfortunately the film makes a strategic mis-step about two-thirds through. The first half of the movie sets up a delightful farce, with the initially beleaguered Fay Grim becoming someone rather smarter than those around her. It could have kept going this way, and to my mind it should have. Instead the movie steers into darker, more serious territory. When it does, the film's two biggest assets – the games between characters, and the feeling of a fairytale – are lost. Instead, Hartley chooses to concentrate on the plot line.

It's not a good call. The plot line is perfect for a farce; it's not suitable for where Hartley tries to go. He nearly manages to make it work, but the ground prepared in the first half simply isn't right for what he tries to move toward in the second. If the audience got this far, it's still worth seeing affairs through to the end, though.

Smart, stylish, and it makes audiences engage with what's going on.

I love Parker Posey. And I even admit Jeff Goldblum is becoming handsomer.

I just don't understand what this film was trying to do and most of all I wonder if it's amateur look and feel was deliberate. Every scene between characters has a look like maybe another take was in order. You simply will be astonished at how the action is handled.The plot is way too convoluted. I simply gave up at about the 3/4 point.

Most exasperating is the film seems to be going for funny. And it gets there occasionally but without conviction. This could have been a great spy thriller or a zany comedy. Not both. Damn.

I'll start by saying I didn't realise this was a sequel to Henry Fool, a movie I haven't seen. Hard to describe the style of the movie, a satire possibly. The dialogue is deliberately stilted, which I found amusing, though others might find maddening. The ensemble cast is superbly led by Parker Posey and Jeff Goldblum, the plot is quite bizarre but enjoyable and the overall feel of the movie is of a stage play. Quirky, but I really liked it.