![Picture](/uploads/2/1/9/0/21903072/1168509.jpg?189)
Playing for Keeps
Rating: 1.5/4
Unfortunately for people that are going to watch "Playing for Keeps" thinking that's it's going to be a good film because it comes from the same guy who directed 2006's "The Pursuit of Happyness" and has stars such as Gerard Butler, Catherine Zeta-Jones (who's an Academy Award winner), Uma Thurman (an Academy Award nominee), and Dennis Quaid in it, are going to be pretty disappointed in this turkey of a film.
One of the main problems with this film is that Gerard Butler, the star of this film, gives maybe one of the worst performances of his career because when you watch Butler in this, when you see him act in all of the scenes that he's in, he just looks so tired, so miserable (maybe he even knew that this wasn't going to be a good film), and so terrible in this that you just feel so bad for the poor guy. Not only was Butler awful in this, but a lot of this film is just so, so cheesy and predictable in the worst ways possible. The film gets way to sentimental and so cutie-pie-like that when you watch this, you just roll your eyes and become ecstatic when it happens. Amazingly though, this film actually didn't feel like one giant sitcom-like film as a thought it would be because while this film was predictable and cheesy as hell, it still felt like a regular (bad) film. I don't know why, but "Playing for Keeps" didn't feel like a sitcom to me at all. I just don't know why.
So while Butler was awful in this, everyone else (Zeta-Jones, Thurman, Quaid) at least looked like they all had SOME sort of dignity and weren't as terrible as Butler was because despite them being written terribly, they all at least looked like they just wanted to get this film over and done with all together. They all must have gotten some paycheck to because for people to be written this awful and cheesy, while having some sort of dignity in, they deserve at least a check of five million, or over.
Another problem with this film was that it was just boring. I mean, I would say for about 55% of this Film I almost fell asleep or turned it off because although this film ran at only 105 minutes long, it felt like 165 minutes long (about two hours and forty-five minutes). This was maybe one of the slowest-short films I have ever seen. Perhaps the reason for this films excruciatingly slow speed was because of how cheesy everything was in this film. Was that the reason? maybe. I do know was that this film not only had one of the worst performances by star Gerard Butler, along with actors who don't even want to be in this film (heck, watch Zeta-Jones in this entire film), but It was also a pretty dumb film with cheesy and predictable story elements, terrible writing (yet not feeling like a TV sitcom for some strange reason), and just an overall boring film.
Rating: 1.5/4
Unfortunately for people that are going to watch "Playing for Keeps" thinking that's it's going to be a good film because it comes from the same guy who directed 2006's "The Pursuit of Happyness" and has stars such as Gerard Butler, Catherine Zeta-Jones (who's an Academy Award winner), Uma Thurman (an Academy Award nominee), and Dennis Quaid in it, are going to be pretty disappointed in this turkey of a film.
One of the main problems with this film is that Gerard Butler, the star of this film, gives maybe one of the worst performances of his career because when you watch Butler in this, when you see him act in all of the scenes that he's in, he just looks so tired, so miserable (maybe he even knew that this wasn't going to be a good film), and so terrible in this that you just feel so bad for the poor guy. Not only was Butler awful in this, but a lot of this film is just so, so cheesy and predictable in the worst ways possible. The film gets way to sentimental and so cutie-pie-like that when you watch this, you just roll your eyes and become ecstatic when it happens. Amazingly though, this film actually didn't feel like one giant sitcom-like film as a thought it would be because while this film was predictable and cheesy as hell, it still felt like a regular (bad) film. I don't know why, but "Playing for Keeps" didn't feel like a sitcom to me at all. I just don't know why.
So while Butler was awful in this, everyone else (Zeta-Jones, Thurman, Quaid) at least looked like they all had SOME sort of dignity and weren't as terrible as Butler was because despite them being written terribly, they all at least looked like they just wanted to get this film over and done with all together. They all must have gotten some paycheck to because for people to be written this awful and cheesy, while having some sort of dignity in, they deserve at least a check of five million, or over.
Another problem with this film was that it was just boring. I mean, I would say for about 55% of this Film I almost fell asleep or turned it off because although this film ran at only 105 minutes long, it felt like 165 minutes long (about two hours and forty-five minutes). This was maybe one of the slowest-short films I have ever seen. Perhaps the reason for this films excruciatingly slow speed was because of how cheesy everything was in this film. Was that the reason? maybe. I do know was that this film not only had one of the worst performances by star Gerard Butler, along with actors who don't even want to be in this film (heck, watch Zeta-Jones in this entire film), but It was also a pretty dumb film with cheesy and predictable story elements, terrible writing (yet not feeling like a TV sitcom for some strange reason), and just an overall boring film.