Chronically Metropolitan (2016)

Why so much hype?

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Well the title fits the film. Chronically self absorbed wealthy New Yorkers. It's hard to really care about a young published author from a wealthy family when NYC is so full of unpublished poor authors. It's also hard to tell the difference between the cute young blondes in the movie. This movie is basically about "white peoples problems." I also suspect the tobacco industry paid a lot for product placements. There is a lot of gratuitous smoking in the film for no other apparent reason.

I can't decide if this is a failed movie about a dysfunctional family or just a failed movie. There is no plot and the characters are weak and uninteresting. Everybody is so undecided about their lives. And please tell the son to get a haircut. Its not interesting, its annoying. My rating of 7 is overly generous. I watched the whole movie but kept checking the time.

This film tells the story of a young writer, who goes back home to New York to find that his dysfunctional family is falling apart. To top that up, his ex-girlfriend that he cannot get over with is getting married to another guy in a few days."Chronically Metropolitan" is basically a showcase of how not to make a film. The plot is boring and tedious. It is just plain and uneventful. Camera work is really plain as there are many long shots showing conversations, and this would have been broken up to close up on the speakers in other films. The point of view for the viewers is almost like an passive bystander, without any engagement with the characters or the situation they are in. The actors are mostly devoid of any emotions, as they sleepwalk through their roles, delivering lines in a passionless and lethargic manner as if they were kids being forced to read texts reluctantly. The only exception is Josh Peck, who at least muster smiles and look energetic in his role. If not for Josh Peck, the film would have been completely bad.

Everything that happens in this film is right off the "indie quirky cute funny sad happily ever after wealthy dysfunctional family drama" checklist.While the story line is unfailingly familiar, the characters are played by mostly engaging actors and the film doesn't bog down in any one place for too long so you are able to watch to the end without getting bored or surprised. This film was described in one blurb as clever and cynical, and maybe it was back in the '70s, but now it's just tame and typical.