Who is cletis tout review

The story is good, very nice twists, the right amount of humor and quotes and What else could you wish for? The story is about Trevor Finch. Together with a diamond thief he escapes from prison, takes over the identity of a journalist who is wanted by the mob for having the evidence of a brutal killing , he meets the daughter of his mate who he has escaped with, they go after the diamonds he buried 20 years ago, they communicate through pigeons, and all this he tells to a hired killer who is obsessed by old movies.

This provides us with some great moments. And by that it's proven again Christian Slater gives a flawless performance. Although it never came close to the wonderful True Romance days, he deserved a lot more credit for this role. And the supporting roles are magnificent as well. Another reason why I can't get this picture wasn't more successful. We've got Richard Dreyfuss, who is excellent as always. Tim Allen as the hired assassin was the biggest surprise.

I liked his sitcom, but his filmroles couldn't satisfy me so far the Santa Claus??? In this film he was great! Obsessed by cinema, that's always and advantage. His role has the best quote-material by the way. Overall, a very decent film.

Made with the largest amount of respect possible. Not a masterpiece but certainly 90 min of pure fun. Got that? If it sounds a bit convoluted, it's because it is. However, there's enough good natured, not-to-be-taken-seriously fun going on in this busy flick to make it marginally enjoyable even if you don't try to follow the story and just no-brain it. A happy mix of murder and diamonds and love and chicanery and groaners, etc. This is a movie that uses one of those "clever" dirty tricks that the writer ought to have avoided: It's analyzing itself so tightly that, according to its own analysis, it is necessarily a masterpiece.

It's blowing its own trumpet. It's too self-aware. And the pity is that it doesn't need it. This, for me, is the main reason why this movie fails to garner more than a 6 out of Another reason is, as I said, it starts out too slow. It takes too long to get into high gear. It has too little to engage the viewer. For half the movie, the only thing that makes you want to spend your time on it is Portia de Rossi's prettiness. To be a really good movie, it needed to have had a number of more attractive elements, be they pretty women or interesting plot turns.

A movie comes, not so often, that can have some really bad elements; it can be a bad movie. But at the same time, it can have some really good elements; adding the bad elements, it is a regular movie. The number 6 means regular movie, but doesn't necessarily means some good and bad elements.

For example, this is a comedy and it doesn't generate much laughs. I mean, it is not that you're crying during the film. You're smiling, but not laughing out-loud. The premise for the film is a totally original, and a very good one. The problem is that it doesn't convince. The story isn't that believable because it is impossible for the filmmakers to make something different.

You can tell they are afraid being different won't work. Maybe they should be, but people will never find out if this movie could have been a lot better; it had the elements to achieve that goal. I was loving it; creating a character in a movie that loves movies and wants to make another movie. Not so confusing as it sounds.

Critical Jim calls himself a critic. The interesting thing is that he is a murderer, but loves old movies; classics. He loves movies that much that he knows the best lines of each classic; and says the line, together with the name of the movie and the studio. He loves movies that much that he creates secret codes with the letters of director's and actor's last names or names. This is an incredibly original character.

I don't remember seeing something similar before. But is just Critical Jim the only original character. The others; we have seen them before. Another disappointment is that the premise is based on Critical Jim's character and his love for movies.

But the movie betrays Critical Jim, betrays its story, and it ultimately betrays itself. Not funny, but with comedic actors in it. Tim Allen plays Critical Jim, in a delightful and surprising performance at the same time. He plays Critical Jim like you've never seen him, totally distanced from his usual roles.

It's the first time I have seen him acting naturally, and not doing the stupid things he usually does. This is his best performance, alongside with the one in "Galaxy Quest". As I said, the rest of the characters are familiar. Christian Slater's Finch is just another character that doesn't need any special gift to be played.

It could be played by anyone, but I was not disappointed by Slater's performance which doesn't mean I was amazed. He is not the greatest actor. He has had a calmed career and I hope he continues that way. I remember loving him in "The name of the rose".

Portia de Rossi is not the right choice for her role, and doesn't seem comfortable playing it, but gives her best anyway and that's not much.

Dreyfuss could be playing a small part, more than a title one. The gimmick here being that Tim Allen is a hired assassin who loves movies.

So his potential victim, Christian Slater, tells him the story of this movie. Get it? Cinematic Time Capsule - Ranked. Entertaining enough, but it feels like that guy at the video store back when those were a thing that talks your ear off about some 3 hour foreign movie no one would actually see when all you want to do is rent something that actually made money.

Reminiscent of all those mid90s Pulp Fiction clones that came out to remind you that Pulp Fiction is still better. How this made it to the s I'll never know. Christian Slater is well suited to the part, but the rest of the cast flounders trying to find a tone that doesn't feel like every other movie like it. This movie reads much better than it plays out onscreen, but if you've got nothing better to do for 90s minutes, you could do a lot worse. Targeting the Tarantino branch of cool, self-aware, banter-swapping hitmen and criminals in an ensemble comedy action merry-go-round, "Who is Cletis Tout?

I wish the writing wasn't so floppy these are the jokes you're using? I wondered later how I even found this movie. And there it is. Reddit Pocket Email Linkedin. E-MAIL: jeff desnews. Now they fix spines instead The bizarre story of a doctor who allegedly lied about hypothermia to get a helicopter rescue How can we help veterans feel remembered? Show gratitude Salt Lake City gave police officers a pay raise 5 months ago.

Is it keeping them on the job? Sign up for the newsletter Morning Edition Start your day with the top stories you missed while you were sleeping. Thanks for signing up! Check your inbox for a welcome email. Email address required. First Name. A caper film of such postmodernist pretense that it's almost a parody of itself. Read full review. Roger Ebert. There was a lot I liked in Cletis Tout, including the performances and the very audacity of details like the magic tricks and the carrier pigeons.

But it seemed a shame that the writer and director, Chris Ver Wiel, took a perfectly sound story idea and complicated it into an exercise in style. Less is more. Bill Stamets. Writer-director Chris Ver Wiel stocks this diverting crime comedy with familar characters and formulas. Michael O'Sullivan. Cletis Tout is both in love with and able to laugh at the conventions it adopts, which is exactly where it goes wrong.

It's just a little too self-satisfied. Scott Tobias.