24 reviews
(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon.)
This sixties time-warped retro kind of "power to the people" nineties flick is mostly a procession of set pieces, some of which are not bad. The bit at the gun store with Billy Bob Thornton was superb. The crack philosophers scene was also very good. And the way "What's So Funny ‛Bout Peace, Love and Understanding?" was sung so badly was just perfectola. (Actually that's "What's So Bad about Peace, Love and Understanding?" but whatever...)
And the way that big silver fish popped those gold fish...gulp!
I think some of the negative comments about this movie ought to be greeted with a "Whoa, dudes--get a sense of humor." Or, "Don't be offended, man, it's only a movie." Or maybe, "Uh, the soundtrack is awesome, dude." (Oh, god, people really did talk like that!) The dream sequences fooled me at least twice. They were funny. Funniest line: when the trash lady pulls her rifle out of her cart and says "Vive la Revolution!" Second funniest line: "What kind of music do you want to hear?" "The farm report."
Okay, this was no masterpiece, and any episodic movie sans plot is not going to rival The Godfather here at IMDb. And James LeGros ain't no Marlon Brando. And if you've ever been to Venice Beach...well, you know it's a freak show. But I think director and screen writer Peter McCarthy did a nice job of bringing that slacker street scene to life. I think the big mistake was to headline actors like Steve Buscemi, John Cusack, Ethan Hawke, and Billy Bob Thornton when they only had cameos. That should have been made clear up front. And there was more than a touch of the kind of sixties moral pretension that we've all grown a little tired of. But bottom line for me, this was a funny movie.
This sixties time-warped retro kind of "power to the people" nineties flick is mostly a procession of set pieces, some of which are not bad. The bit at the gun store with Billy Bob Thornton was superb. The crack philosophers scene was also very good. And the way "What's So Funny ‛Bout Peace, Love and Understanding?" was sung so badly was just perfectola. (Actually that's "What's So Bad about Peace, Love and Understanding?" but whatever...)
And the way that big silver fish popped those gold fish...gulp!
I think some of the negative comments about this movie ought to be greeted with a "Whoa, dudes--get a sense of humor." Or, "Don't be offended, man, it's only a movie." Or maybe, "Uh, the soundtrack is awesome, dude." (Oh, god, people really did talk like that!) The dream sequences fooled me at least twice. They were funny. Funniest line: when the trash lady pulls her rifle out of her cart and says "Vive la Revolution!" Second funniest line: "What kind of music do you want to hear?" "The farm report."
Okay, this was no masterpiece, and any episodic movie sans plot is not going to rival The Godfather here at IMDb. And James LeGros ain't no Marlon Brando. And if you've ever been to Venice Beach...well, you know it's a freak show. But I think director and screen writer Peter McCarthy did a nice job of bringing that slacker street scene to life. I think the big mistake was to headline actors like Steve Buscemi, John Cusack, Ethan Hawke, and Billy Bob Thornton when they only had cameos. That should have been made clear up front. And there was more than a touch of the kind of sixties moral pretension that we've all grown a little tired of. But bottom line for me, this was a funny movie.
- DennisLittrell
- Feb 10, 2002
- Permalink
Floundering is a film I could really relate with when I was fresh out of college, lost and feeling overwhelmed. It is well acted. Direction is passable, though not real important. It's well written if you don't mind breaking the cardinal rule of not having an interior monologue Voiced-over the whole movie by the protagonist. It's THAT kind of movie - where the most interesting action takes place in the characters' head and fantasies. It was also written in Los Angeles immediately following the Riots - which dates the film to anyone who has no memories of the event or climate of the time. (Merryl Fence = Daryl Gates. . . ) This is a character-driven film about a guy in a very confused, bad head-space. And it's good. . .until the end where the Elvis Costello kicks in and the theme of the film is kicked into your teeth with lots of bad singing. For anyone who has been 24 and depressed in the 90's, I'd recommend.
This movie saved me from suicide.
This is not a feel good movie for people who already feel good or people who feel bad and want to stay that way. It is for people who feel that something is wrong, about the world, about themselves, about life as they know it. They want to fix what's wrong but they don't have the energy, the knowledge or the power to do it.
Nobody wants to be the main character, Jon, but if you were ever a unemployed college graduate, who smokes. drinks, fornicates, and thinks too much, you know how he feels and have had at least one day like his. The only difference is he snaps. Most of us dont snap because we are afraid of what we might do. What the movie shows is the results would probably be more ridiculous than terrifying.
This is not a feel good movie for people who already feel good or people who feel bad and want to stay that way. It is for people who feel that something is wrong, about the world, about themselves, about life as they know it. They want to fix what's wrong but they don't have the energy, the knowledge or the power to do it.
Nobody wants to be the main character, Jon, but if you were ever a unemployed college graduate, who smokes. drinks, fornicates, and thinks too much, you know how he feels and have had at least one day like his. The only difference is he snaps. Most of us dont snap because we are afraid of what we might do. What the movie shows is the results would probably be more ridiculous than terrifying.
- mikeaycock
- Aug 15, 2000
- Permalink
If you rent this one hoping to see Steve Buscemi, John Cusack or Ethan Hawke, don't bother. None of them has more than 2 minutes on screen. On the other hand, the main character, who is in every scene, is played by a terribly uninteresting, amateurish performer. He comes off as shallow, which means death for this movie, since 1. the movie revolves around this one character, and 2. the character is suppose to be a thoughtful "outsider" type. The movie suffers from many of the usual independant film problems: unconvincing sets, bad acting(takes that shouldn't have gotten near the final cut)without the edge that makes indies worth while(the ending is actually more syrupy than the average Hollywood flic.
- withnail-4
- Apr 28, 2000
- Permalink
Oy.
Ever watched a film that was so gratuitous in its depiction of a certain year/era that it came across as laughable? Welcome to "Floundering"!
I can almost see the wheels turning in the head of the writer of this script as he watched the L.A. riots go down. "Hey! I can capitalize on this by churning out a disaffected script designed to play/capitalize on all of society's current ills while taking a cue from the (MUCH better) 'Slacker'!".
Look, I'm all for films with messages (twisted or otherwise, ala "Repo Man", "The Last Big Thing"), but this film failed miserably, thanks to its continuous depiction of the L.A. Riots as more of a form of voyeuristic entertainment than that of a true tragedy. In fact, the riots obviously BENEFITED the writer and director because it gave them a subject for a film!
Finally, the scene in which our "hero" shoots the outrageously exaggerated police chief allows the makers of this film to reach new lows. Again, the thought process: "Lesse here! Guy is troubled by all of the violence taking place in society and by the widespread insensitivity and hate running rampant. The cure? Kill somebody else, all in the name of 'snapping'!".
Rent something more substantive. May I recommend a VCR tape head cleaner?
Ever watched a film that was so gratuitous in its depiction of a certain year/era that it came across as laughable? Welcome to "Floundering"!
I can almost see the wheels turning in the head of the writer of this script as he watched the L.A. riots go down. "Hey! I can capitalize on this by churning out a disaffected script designed to play/capitalize on all of society's current ills while taking a cue from the (MUCH better) 'Slacker'!".
Look, I'm all for films with messages (twisted or otherwise, ala "Repo Man", "The Last Big Thing"), but this film failed miserably, thanks to its continuous depiction of the L.A. Riots as more of a form of voyeuristic entertainment than that of a true tragedy. In fact, the riots obviously BENEFITED the writer and director because it gave them a subject for a film!
Finally, the scene in which our "hero" shoots the outrageously exaggerated police chief allows the makers of this film to reach new lows. Again, the thought process: "Lesse here! Guy is troubled by all of the violence taking place in society and by the widespread insensitivity and hate running rampant. The cure? Kill somebody else, all in the name of 'snapping'!".
Rent something more substantive. May I recommend a VCR tape head cleaner?
I have watched that movie so many times and it has made me think a lot about my own life. This is the first movie that ever had such an impact on me, I never thaught a movie could be this personal and touching, I guess I thaught only a book could do this. I wanna say thanks to Peter McCarthy for making that film ! and James LeGros for doing such a great job with it.
You walk into the video store, instantly forgetting the movies you wanted to see. You stroll through the aisles aimlessly, until spotting at a dusty jacket that proclaims: Steve Buscemi! John Cusack! Ethan Hawke! Kim Wayans!
Do yourself a favor: Slowly walk away. This is a truly awful movie. It's hard to describe just how awful it is. "One hundred minutes of frustration" comes close. It makes "My Dinner With Andre" look like "Die Hard". James LeGros is at his vacuous worst as the main character, and those stars on the cover have a combined 45 seconds of on-screen time.
Just trying to warn you that this movie should be in the "Rent At Your Own Risk" section
Do yourself a favor: Slowly walk away. This is a truly awful movie. It's hard to describe just how awful it is. "One hundred minutes of frustration" comes close. It makes "My Dinner With Andre" look like "Die Hard". James LeGros is at his vacuous worst as the main character, and those stars on the cover have a combined 45 seconds of on-screen time.
Just trying to warn you that this movie should be in the "Rent At Your Own Risk" section
This is a little movie with big things to say. There are some genuinely funny, thought provoking, and disturbing moments in this film. I was surprised to see it rated so low. Certainly not intended to be an academy award candidate nonetheless this film shines in its own way. Floundering takes you on a strange and comical trip that at times poignantly illuminates the absurd realities of modern life. This film takes on many issues through the "floundering" character of Le Gros; recycling, violence,sexuality, drug abuse, wealth disparity, family loss,mental health, and human fraternity to name a few. Look for some great cameos from the likes of Steve Buscemi, Billy Bob Thornton, and Kim Wayans.
- davidmiannotti
- Sep 26, 2006
- Permalink
For die-hard, slacker, bleeding-heart liberals only. Like what one of the other reviewers said, everyone agrees that racism, greed, etc. are wrong. This film belts the viewer over the head with such heavy-handed, preachy messages for so long, I defy you not to stumble out of your living room without a sizable migraine headache once the film finally ends. Speaking of endings, this one, with the entire cast and crew singing "What's so bad about peace, love and understanding?" was incredibly idiotic. Good L.A. locations (Venice, etc.) are wasted in this incredibly unrealistic look at a bad day in the life of a slacker you never end up caring about it.
Peter McCarthy writer/director of 'Floundering' had a hand in both 'Repo Man' and 'Tapeheads' and that may give you a little bit of an idea where this odd little movie is coming from, but not much. It really is very difficult to categorize. It's an almost stream of consciousness Gen X black comedy that often feels and looks like it's semi improvised. Several sequences completely fall flat, but then it'll bounce back with something genuinely original or inspired. James LeGros ('Drugstore Cowboy', 'Living In Oblivion') stars as a sensitive but confused slacker type who wrestles with his social conscience. The movie shows him going through a crisis period where his whole life falls apart. The movie features an impressive supporting cast of name actors (Buscemi, Cusack, Hawke, Billy Bob Thornton), musicians, weirdos and Alex Cox regulars Sy Richardson and Biff Yeager, even Cox himself appears in a brief cameo. The movies jumps between social realism and surrealism, quirky comedy and darker, more depressing material. It can often be quite frustrating to watch but it's still one of the most interesting and unusual indie movies to come out of the 1990s. Recommended for Alex Cox fans in particular, and fans of the offbeat in general.
In a time when the majority of us forget what happened yesterday, this movie will preserve a cancer on our country, and a moment in time that was indeed depressing and sad. This is one of the most real movies I've ever seen. The soundtrack is incredible, along with everyone who played in it. It isn't just a history lesson, it's a lesson in humanity and the fact is that this occurrence has forever changed the future makes it a truly awesome film. This movie is not for your typical small-minded, Hollywood fluff viewer. I would suggest anyone with a progressive bent for music and movies, and anyone who has stepped off the beaten path- see this movie. One more thing, considering this movie is from 1994, and today it's 2005 and that I own this movie and only got here because I was looking for information on one of the artists because I watched it again yesterday....it's a great film.
- tikitina68
- Mar 16, 2005
- Permalink
FLOUNDERING has the kind of insight and genuinely profound and engaged thinking that most "serious" Hollywood films only wish they had. As a whole work, it goes a little astray when it gets caught up in the need to have a traditional "plot" - the last third isn't nearly as good as the first - but its honest humour and sensitivity far outweigh its shortcomings. The cameos work, especially Steve Buscemi's, and add to the movie's appeal. I bought this movie on video so I could watch it again and again, whenever I need to remember that films really CAN be thoughtful, creative and original.
How can good intentions go so awry?
The movie has the right things to say. It attacks greed, racism, corporate indifference, and shallow relationships, and it features cameos by such interesting people as Steve Buscemi. John Cusack, and Billy Bob Thornton.
Unfortunately, it lacks one thing one usually looks for in a comedy, namely humor. It just isn't very funny.
Our hero has a really bad hair day. His girl is with another guy when he shows up early for a date. His brother breaks out of rehab, gets wasted and now thinks our hero is the devil. His bank accounts are possessed by the IRS. His unemployment runs out. His idealistic high school teacher has become a racist greedhead. He is pursued in a drive-by shooting.
He O.D.'s. He is sodomized after he passes out. ....Well, you get the point.
There are two ways to attack a hateful target. One is to use the sharp eye of satire, the other is to say "hey, that stinks". This movie does the latter. It uses the Beavis and Butthead level of analytical depth.
Unfortunately, everyone knows that racism stinks, and they go to movies to be entertained. Viewers may agree with the ideas in this one, and so they may feel good when he strikes back, but not many people will be entertained by it.
Sophomoric.
The movie has the right things to say. It attacks greed, racism, corporate indifference, and shallow relationships, and it features cameos by such interesting people as Steve Buscemi. John Cusack, and Billy Bob Thornton.
Unfortunately, it lacks one thing one usually looks for in a comedy, namely humor. It just isn't very funny.
Our hero has a really bad hair day. His girl is with another guy when he shows up early for a date. His brother breaks out of rehab, gets wasted and now thinks our hero is the devil. His bank accounts are possessed by the IRS. His unemployment runs out. His idealistic high school teacher has become a racist greedhead. He is pursued in a drive-by shooting.
He O.D.'s. He is sodomized after he passes out. ....Well, you get the point.
There are two ways to attack a hateful target. One is to use the sharp eye of satire, the other is to say "hey, that stinks". This movie does the latter. It uses the Beavis and Butthead level of analytical depth.
Unfortunately, everyone knows that racism stinks, and they go to movies to be entertained. Viewers may agree with the ideas in this one, and so they may feel good when he strikes back, but not many people will be entertained by it.
Sophomoric.
"Everyone thinks racism is wrong."
Really?
"Sophomoric."
But aren't we all sophomores when we flounder?
Well then, I suppose this movie needn't have been made.
These judgements come from other comments on this film.
They will not be borne out in mine.
A truly remarkable coming-of-silliness take on coming-of-age films, this movie will p**s off those who dislike surrealism. This film, detailing the miserable turns that James Le Gros's life in LA takes, is NOT needle-tip satire. Like "Kicked in the Head", this film treats its audience as insiders to the joke.
As such, it treats viewers as intelligent, and alert to the weird angles at which the the plot zips off into a new scenario. My particular pleasure in this film comes from Peter McCarthy's ability to run the show without making the film seem choppy.
Far from vacuous, Le Gros is poignant and low key. His 'Cezanne' was one of the high marks in "The Myth of Fingerprints", and this film gives a good introduction to his style.
The objections to this film seem largely based on its perceived political sentiments; a shallow reading leads to a shallow conclusion.
If you liked "Tape Heads", "Kicked in the Head", "The Doom Generation" (or anything by Greg Araki), and "The Myth of Fingerprints", then likely this film is for you.
People who tire easily should seek their pleasures elsewhere.
Really?
"Sophomoric."
But aren't we all sophomores when we flounder?
Well then, I suppose this movie needn't have been made.
These judgements come from other comments on this film.
They will not be borne out in mine.
A truly remarkable coming-of-silliness take on coming-of-age films, this movie will p**s off those who dislike surrealism. This film, detailing the miserable turns that James Le Gros's life in LA takes, is NOT needle-tip satire. Like "Kicked in the Head", this film treats its audience as insiders to the joke.
As such, it treats viewers as intelligent, and alert to the weird angles at which the the plot zips off into a new scenario. My particular pleasure in this film comes from Peter McCarthy's ability to run the show without making the film seem choppy.
Far from vacuous, Le Gros is poignant and low key. His 'Cezanne' was one of the high marks in "The Myth of Fingerprints", and this film gives a good introduction to his style.
The objections to this film seem largely based on its perceived political sentiments; a shallow reading leads to a shallow conclusion.
If you liked "Tape Heads", "Kicked in the Head", "The Doom Generation" (or anything by Greg Araki), and "The Myth of Fingerprints", then likely this film is for you.
People who tire easily should seek their pleasures elsewhere.
- lordwhorfin
- Feb 8, 2000
- Permalink
floundering is a good movie i don't care if it is "indie" or isn't cool enough to be indie. steve buscemi, john cusack or ethan hawke are fine in the movie and serve their purpose well.
~The movie suffers from many of the usual independant film problems: unconvincing sets, bad acting...~ HA do you know why independant movies are like that because they have no big budgets to work with. If you want those problems fixed go rent a james cameron movie and dont waste your time, so people like me who appreciate movies like this can rent it.
As for the character being in every scene, last time i checked the main character is usually in the movie or story quite a bit. how would a main character being in every scene mean death for a movie.
the movie is a few days in the life of a highly stressed neurotic guy who is fed up with the way things are going not a shallow guy. the back of the box usually sums up the movie for you, i suggest you start reading the back of the boxes before you rent anymore.
~The movie suffers from many of the usual independant film problems: unconvincing sets, bad acting...~ HA do you know why independant movies are like that because they have no big budgets to work with. If you want those problems fixed go rent a james cameron movie and dont waste your time, so people like me who appreciate movies like this can rent it.
As for the character being in every scene, last time i checked the main character is usually in the movie or story quite a bit. how would a main character being in every scene mean death for a movie.
the movie is a few days in the life of a highly stressed neurotic guy who is fed up with the way things are going not a shallow guy. the back of the box usually sums up the movie for you, i suggest you start reading the back of the boxes before you rent anymore.
I had heard about this movie only for the star studded cast and a month ago I finally had the chance of watching it. It lived up to my expectations.
John (James LeGros) is an unemployed young man that lives as a flounderer on the beaches of Los Angeles. He lives alone and from time to time he imagines encounters with TV personalities, dead relatives, and the unemployment office. The film is some sort of social commentary when John loses hope and searches for his meaning in life while in a tunnel of self-destruction. In the end he is rescued by an old friend, and then decides to leave Los Angeles and start a new life.
Despite it's an obscure movie it has a nice plot and a star studded cast even tho in brief roles: John Cusack, Steve Buscemi, Billy Bob Thornton, Ethan Hawke and Viggo Mortensen are all good despite I think that if they had more screen time it would have been better. Overall, an obscure movie that turned out to be a nice viewing experience.
John (James LeGros) is an unemployed young man that lives as a flounderer on the beaches of Los Angeles. He lives alone and from time to time he imagines encounters with TV personalities, dead relatives, and the unemployment office. The film is some sort of social commentary when John loses hope and searches for his meaning in life while in a tunnel of self-destruction. In the end he is rescued by an old friend, and then decides to leave Los Angeles and start a new life.
Despite it's an obscure movie it has a nice plot and a star studded cast even tho in brief roles: John Cusack, Steve Buscemi, Billy Bob Thornton, Ethan Hawke and Viggo Mortensen are all good despite I think that if they had more screen time it would have been better. Overall, an obscure movie that turned out to be a nice viewing experience.
- bellino-angelo2014
- Nov 28, 2021
- Permalink
James LeGros stars as John Boyz in this interesting little indie-flick with some interesting themes, perhaps a little more than it can tackle, but with a great cast of (future) stars. No matter how casual LeGros moves about in his slacker L.A. dreamworld, the film is fast-paced and moves quickly from one scene to another, with hardly any scene lasting more than a couple of minutes. The limited number of votes on the IMDb is surprising, considering the number of stars in this film, including John Cusack, Steve Buscemi, Billy Bob Thornton, Ethan Hawke.
Truly one of the highlights is when Billy Bob Thornton sells James LeGros a gun, son of a gun Thornton! He steals it, definitely.
The philosophy is not very lasting. The conservation with his father talking about sending the army into America's inner cities after the L.A. riots, since they control the country already. 'I think that's called fascism, dad.' And then the topic it's dropped and the film contains some more of these quasi-philosophical intakes, not very strong. And you don't wanna see James Le Gros dancing when he's drunk.
The whole thing is primitively filmed, it almost feels like a home movie, with the low key and somewhat amateurish score, but as a whole a slight but still quite an engrossing film.
Camera Obscura --- 7/10
Truly one of the highlights is when Billy Bob Thornton sells James LeGros a gun, son of a gun Thornton! He steals it, definitely.
The philosophy is not very lasting. The conservation with his father talking about sending the army into America's inner cities after the L.A. riots, since they control the country already. 'I think that's called fascism, dad.' And then the topic it's dropped and the film contains some more of these quasi-philosophical intakes, not very strong. And you don't wanna see James Le Gros dancing when he's drunk.
The whole thing is primitively filmed, it almost feels like a home movie, with the low key and somewhat amateurish score, but as a whole a slight but still quite an engrossing film.
Camera Obscura --- 7/10
- Camera-Obscura
- Nov 19, 2006
- Permalink
A Darkly Comic Snapshot of 1990s Disillusionment
Floundering (1994) is an unconventional and biting exploration of post-Reagan America, blending dark comedy, social critique, and existential angst into a unique indie film. Directed by Peter McCarthy, the movie captures the aimless drift of its protagonist and, by extension, the disillusionment of a generation grappling with societal collapse, economic uncertainty, and political cynicism.
James LeGros shines in the lead role as John Boyz, a disaffected writer and slacker navigating a surreal Los Angeles filled with eccentric characters and absurd situations. His performance is understated yet impactful, capturing the malaise and frustration of someone trapped in a world he neither understands nor fully accepts. LeGros imbues John with a quiet desperation that makes his journey poignant and relatable.
The film's supporting cast is a treasure trove of talent, including appearances by Ethan Hawke, John Cusack, and Steve Buscemi, who each bring a quirky charm to their brief but memorable roles. Buscemi, in particular, stands out as a neurotic bureaucrat whose interactions with John highlight the absurdity of the system.
McCarthy's direction creates a dreamlike quality, blending grim realism with satirical absurdity. The film's episodic structure mirrors John's fragmented life, jumping from one bizarre encounter to another while maintaining a sharp, satirical edge. The backdrop of a decaying Los Angeles amplifies the film's themes, serving as both a literal and metaphorical wasteland for its disillusioned characters.
The soundtrack, featuring a mix of indie and alternative tracks, perfectly complements the film's tone and era, adding an additional layer of authenticity to its 1990s aesthetic.
While Floundering occasionally veers into self-indulgence and its narrative can feel disjointed, it succeeds as a raw, unfiltered depiction of societal and personal alienation. It doesn't offer easy answers or resolutions, but its refusal to conform is part of its charm.
Final Thoughts: Floundering is a bold and offbeat indie gem that captures the zeitgeist of the 1990s with wit, honesty, and a touch of surrealism. Its stellar cast and biting commentary make it a film that lingers long after the credits roll.
Rating: 8/10 A darkly funny, poignant, and thought-provoking look at the struggles of a lost generation, Floundering deserves a place in the pantheon of 1990s indie cinema.
Floundering (1994) is an unconventional and biting exploration of post-Reagan America, blending dark comedy, social critique, and existential angst into a unique indie film. Directed by Peter McCarthy, the movie captures the aimless drift of its protagonist and, by extension, the disillusionment of a generation grappling with societal collapse, economic uncertainty, and political cynicism.
James LeGros shines in the lead role as John Boyz, a disaffected writer and slacker navigating a surreal Los Angeles filled with eccentric characters and absurd situations. His performance is understated yet impactful, capturing the malaise and frustration of someone trapped in a world he neither understands nor fully accepts. LeGros imbues John with a quiet desperation that makes his journey poignant and relatable.
The film's supporting cast is a treasure trove of talent, including appearances by Ethan Hawke, John Cusack, and Steve Buscemi, who each bring a quirky charm to their brief but memorable roles. Buscemi, in particular, stands out as a neurotic bureaucrat whose interactions with John highlight the absurdity of the system.
McCarthy's direction creates a dreamlike quality, blending grim realism with satirical absurdity. The film's episodic structure mirrors John's fragmented life, jumping from one bizarre encounter to another while maintaining a sharp, satirical edge. The backdrop of a decaying Los Angeles amplifies the film's themes, serving as both a literal and metaphorical wasteland for its disillusioned characters.
The soundtrack, featuring a mix of indie and alternative tracks, perfectly complements the film's tone and era, adding an additional layer of authenticity to its 1990s aesthetic.
While Floundering occasionally veers into self-indulgence and its narrative can feel disjointed, it succeeds as a raw, unfiltered depiction of societal and personal alienation. It doesn't offer easy answers or resolutions, but its refusal to conform is part of its charm.
Final Thoughts: Floundering is a bold and offbeat indie gem that captures the zeitgeist of the 1990s with wit, honesty, and a touch of surrealism. Its stellar cast and biting commentary make it a film that lingers long after the credits roll.
Rating: 8/10 A darkly funny, poignant, and thought-provoking look at the struggles of a lost generation, Floundering deserves a place in the pantheon of 1990s indie cinema.
- Split_Image
- Dec 28, 2024
- Permalink
Floundering offers a fresh insight into the problems plagueing youth in the 90's. It revolves around a youth named John who is having extreme difficulty in finding his center. His situation is not improved by his philosophic friends who tell him it will take time, or by his drug-addicted paranoid (he calls John the devil) brother. The cast is sterling and the script is stong. This movie is one to see if things haven't been going your way.
Unfortunate misfire about a typical generation Xer and his difficulties in dealing with the complexities of modern life.
Made in 1994, but already badly dated with a great deal of emphasis on the Rodney King riots. Also has a corrupt police chief named Merrill Fence which is really just a very thinly disguised substitute for the then real life LA police Chief Darryl Gates. Unfortunately anyone viewing it today (or living outside the LA area) may not know this, thus making a lot of the directors satirical jabs mute and pointless.
Although the inner angst of the main character is certainly identifiable, he is played (and written) too broadly to really be interesting. The film, like it's main character, cannot find it's center moving almost jarringly from the surreal, to the gritty, to outright romanticism.
There are some interesting philosophical insights and a couple of funny moments (including a amusing conversation between the main character and his now dead parents) to keep it passable. Yet it's just not fully realized enough to give it that unique cult status that it was intended for.
Nelson Lyon, who plays the police chief, steals the film with his unique acting style.
Made in 1994, but already badly dated with a great deal of emphasis on the Rodney King riots. Also has a corrupt police chief named Merrill Fence which is really just a very thinly disguised substitute for the then real life LA police Chief Darryl Gates. Unfortunately anyone viewing it today (or living outside the LA area) may not know this, thus making a lot of the directors satirical jabs mute and pointless.
Although the inner angst of the main character is certainly identifiable, he is played (and written) too broadly to really be interesting. The film, like it's main character, cannot find it's center moving almost jarringly from the surreal, to the gritty, to outright romanticism.
There are some interesting philosophical insights and a couple of funny moments (including a amusing conversation between the main character and his now dead parents) to keep it passable. Yet it's just not fully realized enough to give it that unique cult status that it was intended for.
Nelson Lyon, who plays the police chief, steals the film with his unique acting style.
Since it's unclear to me how to vote for this movie--help me out here, imdb--I'll vote for it here. I give it nine stars. For anyone who can get it, it's worth seeing. James LeGros gets to the heart of any character he plays. He seems to bypass technique. In addition to this movie, he's more than worth watching in "Gun Crazy", "Living in Oblivion," and "Drugstore Cowboy."