Protraph
Lack of good storyline.
Ogosmith
Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.
Roxie
The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;
SnoopyStyle
Dick Dandelion (Jamie Bell) lives in an American mining town. He's a new miner and works in the general store. He buys a toy gun from introverted Susan (Alison Pill). It turns out to be a real gun. He recruits the town's outcasts to form a gun club calling themselves The Dandies. He has his version of pacifism with particular rules. Krugsby (Bill Pullman) is the sheriff.Directed by Thomas Vinterberg and written by Lars von Trier, this has a surreal unreality. I didn't make the connection to Lars von Trier's Dogville when I first saw this. I almost prefer Dogville's outlandish surrealism. This felt annoyingly fake. The voice-overs leave me cold. There is a wrongness that I couldn't comprehend. Even with new eyes, the fakeness strikes me wrong. Of course, there is a point but it could have been more compelling to give it better truths.
Martin Bradley
Working in English writer Lars von Trier and director Thomas Vinterberg tackle American gun culture in a highly original and deeply disturbing fashion; it's the kind of satire I can't imagine an American film-maker making. It's about a group of young misfits in an American mining town who form a 'pacifist' gun club. The purpose? To love their guns, (Wendy is a pistol), but hate killing. When they allow a young gun-loving criminal into the group you might think things are going to go badly and they do, but not quite in the way you might expect.Young British actor Jamie Bell is excellent as the boy who founds the club and Danso Gordon is outstanding as the young criminal who, at first, challenges his authority but who turns out to be perhaps the most sensible member of this strange gang. Indeed, all the performances are excellent as is Anthony Dod Mantle's cinematography. The film itself came and went with almost no-one seeing it. Do yourself a favor and look this one up.
d-trick-b
There is something very fundamental that shouldn't go wrong in a film, and that is the so-called "suspension of disbelief". When you sit watching a film and can't keep yourself from thinking that it's all just a film with actors saying their lines on a film set, then it's obviously gone wrong. And that's the very thing that happens to "Dear Wendy". It's a cleverly thought-out, well conceived plan, but it doesn't come to life. The characters feel two-dimensional all the way through, I didn't care for any of them, so I just kept watching from the outside, which felt a bit like looking at fish in an aquarium. Furthermore, the story is painfully predictable - once people take a gun in their hands, it's always an easy guess to tell what will happen in the end, and so it does. Cinematography and everything is good as usual, but cinematography and everything never made a boring film good. "Festen" was such a great, deep, human film - where did the guy go who made it?
imwithspaz
While the cinematography was very pleasing to the eyes and the young actors did a commendable job, the story itself leaves something to be desired. Though it starts out with an interesting concept, Dear Wendy winds its way into a ridiculous hole. The "twists" are random and unfounded, probably there for the sole reason of providing conflict. Also, the movie tends to be sluggish: watching for an hour feels like two or three. On the positive side, the young actors did a very good job (for the most part). At times dramatic pauses cause more laughter than thought, but that's difficult to avoid with the script. Eye-catching camera angles were used, along with some interesting techniques. To sum up, the director, cinematographer, and actors are probably usually amazing at their jobs; however, if they enjoy their careers they should stay away from writing like this.
