Home > Comedy >

Kettle of Fish

Watch Now

Kettle of Fish (2006)

October. 15,2006
|
5.2
| Comedy Romance
Watch Now

A lifelong bachelor confronts his intimacy issues when he sublets his apartment to a fetching biologist. His heartsick fish and his wise best buddy are on hand to provide perspective.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

XoWizIama
2006/10/15

Excellent adaptation.

More
CommentsXp
2006/10/16

Best movie ever!

More
Juana
2006/10/17

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

More
Philippa
2006/10/18

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

More
Harriet Deltubbo
2006/10/19

A lifelong bachelor confronts his intimacy issues when he sublets his apartment to a fetching biologist. His heartsick fish and his wise best buddy are on hand to provide perspective. The metaphors in this movie are abundant, and so are the good moments. Are there annoying things in this movie? Yes, like the overdone characters and such. But the movie has enough to keep you entertained. From an artistic standpoint, there were some plot elements and character developments I didn't think were really needed. This is the kind of film that tries to prove that a small story can be much more meaningful than a larger one. Overall rating: 7/10.

More
MBunge
2006/10/20

Kettle of Fish is a romantic-comedy that contains neither romance nor comedy. By no romance, I mean the lead characters and their various paramours have the same sexual chemistry as Spam and grape juice. By no comedy, I mean it's at least 40 minutes into the film before there's even a vague, unsuccessful attempt at humor. This is the sort of movie where you start to wonder when exactly the people involved in making it realized what a leaden fiasco it was. I can't imagine anyone reading this script and thinking it deserved to make it onto the screen, but surely somebody must have figured out what a mistake they were making before they were halfway finished shooting. What must it have been like to spend hours and hours editing this thing only to finally realize no matter how you tried to cut and splice it, Kettle of Fish was never going to be more than a piece of crap?Mel (Matthew Modine) is a professional musician who normally plays the saxophone in a jazz band headed up by his friend Freddie (Isiah Whitlock Jr.). Mel is 40somthing and looks it, particularly around his saggy neck, but still manages to land a bevy of beauties because in this film's reality, there's nothing chicks dig more than middle-aged jazz men who still live like poor college students. As the story begins, Mel is having a mid-life crisis and impetuously decides to move in with Inga (Ewa Da Cruz), his 20something Swedish girlfriend. Mel sublets his apartment to Dr. Ginger Thomas (Gina Gershon), an English scientist who researches the reproductive patterns of frogs. Inga quickly kicks Mel out for being a douchebag, so he weasels his way back into his old apartment and splits the rent with Ginger until she can find her own place.Mel then becomes smitten with Diana (Christy Scott Cashman), a woman he meets on her wedding day, and becomes so fixated on her that he abandons his music career to be the elevator operator in Diana's building so he can see her for a few minutes each day. This movie treats that behavior as wistfully charming. In real life, it would qualify as deranged stalking.As I'm sure you can guess, Mel chases after Diana while he and Ginger fall in love without either of them admitting it to themselves. What passes for clever in this screenplay is that Mel and Ginger bond over Mel's pet fish. It's only when Diana is so neglected by her husband (Fisher Stevens) that she throws herself at Mel that he realizes his feelings for Ginger and blah, blah, blah. There isn't a single original plot development in this entire movie, so if you've seen one romantic-comedy then you know exactly how this one goes.What's most noticeable about Kettle of Fish is how Matthew Modine has absolutely no emotional connection to any of the actresses in the cast. It's almost like they all did their own roles in separate rooms and were then combined on screen via computer. The only believable relationship in the entire film is between Mel and Freddie, but that's of little use since this isn't about Mel coming to grips with his latent homosexuality. I mean, I've always found Modine to be a diffident performer but he might as well be a cigar store Indian for all the attachment he shows to either Ewa Da Cruz, Christy Scott Cashman or Gina Gershon.Not that Da Cruz, Cashman or Gershon are any better. Inga is less like a woman in love and more like a woman with a learning disability. Diana reacts to both Mel and her husband like she were heavily medicated. When the plot needs to kill time by having Ginger trifle with the affection of a fellow research scientist (James O'Connor), Gershon gives it the same level of feeling as if she were testing the pH level in her swimming pool.Gershon's lips are also constantly parted in this film like her teeth were trying to escape from her jaw. Even when her mouth is supposed to be closed, there's a gap in the middle as though she can't unpucker. You don't notice it right away. When you do, though, you can't stop looking at it.When I was finished watching Kettle of Fish, I clicked over to the behind-the-scenes feature on the DVD. I only needed to look at it for 25 seconds before knowing everything there is to know about this film. Writer/director Claudia Myers says this was the first script she wrote in film school and it was inspired by movies where people fall in love at first sight. In other words, she didn't know what the hell she was doing when she wrote it and it's not based on anything real or meaningful from her own life.This is one of those rom-coms where the plot is arduously predictable and the actors look like they'd rather be doing commercials for acne medication. Skip it.

More
jesmale
2006/10/21

Let's face it, romantic comedies are considered lightweight when compared with dramatic movies (just look at the Academy Award nominations each year). But still, the good ones are truly an art form. Look at "When Harry Met Sally", "Sleepless In Seattle", and classics like "Roman Holiday" and "It Happened One Night". I like the good feeling of seeing two people destined to find happiness.This movie attempts to construct something that resembles a romantic comedy. But no one believes the romance between the main characters, and there is nothing funny to make up for that major shortcoming. Modine is way past being a leading man - especially a romantic lead. I'm sure as Executive Producer, he had the means - but not the good sense - to cast himself. And Gershon...I see possibilities of some comedic talent, but she had no script and a poorly developed character. And whose idea was the English accent? Pointless.Others have stated it, but I want to repeat: this story is poorly conceived, poorly executed; the actors are terribly miscast; and the characters, well, we just don't give a hoot about them.An art form this ain't. Go rent "Moonstruck" again.

More
whoffleck
2006/10/22

This movie was supposed to have depicted a 'ladie's man' bachelor who was ready and willing to settle down once and for all. However, I did not care for his mission to settle down, because I didn't care for his character. I don't understand what all of these beautiful women saw in him. He had absolutely no class, or charisma. He should've at least had a way about himself that made ladies weak in the knees other than his saxophone playing, but to no avail. Just because he is a musician does not make him sexy. Not to mention, the things he did to get the attention of a married woman he fell in love in a span of five minutes of knowing her were absolutely outrageous and ridiculous. Does this man have any shame what-so-ever? Had he tidied up, and stopped doing and saying stupid things he would have been more attractive as a character, but alas, his character was bland and boring.Gina Gershon's character was unnecessarily British. She could've just as easily been an uptight out-of-towner with her regular speaking voice than do a poor British accent that sometimes would fade through out the movie.The only two characters I cared for were the fish and frog. Now those two had chemistry! Academy nominations for both… STAT! Plot holes, lack of character development, horrible acting, unnecessary drama, cliché moments... What a mess of a movie.

More