User reviews

I was really looking forward to "Multiple Sarcasms". With a story about a man, basically at a mid-life crisis, who is looking for happiness in writing and in films, I thought I could really relate. But for a film about playwriting at its heart, it's rather poorly written. Many scenes telling us things that we already know. The first third of the film was introducing us to the main characters, over and over again. But I got everything I needed to know about the characters in the first scene so the rest just became a lesson in boredom.

It was supposed to be about Gabriel discovering that his happiness is rooted in writing, but then out of nowhere the main story became about crossing the line of infidelity. Not writing at all. Boredom, crossing into confusion just becomes frustration. Even with the many underrated actors, "Multiple Sarcasms" is not worth the frustration and boredom.

This film is the story of a man (Timothy Hutton) who seems to have it all, and yet he feels like he's not getting enough out of life. He is an architect. He has a wife (Dana Delaney), a daughter and a lifelong friend (Mira Sorvino), but he just doesn't feel fulfilled. He attempts to write a play, and his work and family start to take a backseat. His wife doesn't appreciate this, and the two decide to split. Timothy Hutton is always brilliant, and this film is no exception, but the script is poorly written. I feel like the dialogue between the adults is juvenile. The story is great and the cast is too, but the dialogue drags it all down. I appreciate the film and I appreciate what the writer/director was trying to do, I just cannot get past the script. I do recommend it as long as you don't mind a few too many lines about the female anatomy that bring nothing to the story.

My wife and I just couldn't muster the energy and will to watch a movie about a man who has everything (wife, daughter and job), and is in a rather enviable position overall. And his problem is... well, we couldn't figure out. He's bored? Doesn't "like his life"? So, let's make a movie about it, shall we?

The premise to this movie is so preposterous, that his audience may be left completely unsympathetic to the main character, or even less sympathetic to the whole enterprise that made the movie possible.

The saving grace of this movie is the good directing - there's a pinch of comedy to give a genre direction to the movie, but apart that, the characters seem rather genuine. Sadly, the whole plot is stillborn and worthless.

Another reviewer here characterized the whole premise of the movie as "preposterous". Obviously, that person has not known many people of wealth and privilege. I have personally known many people of great "success" and wealth who were not very happy. They may have fulfilled the "American Dream" of job, family, etc... but they did NOT feel contentment, fulfillment or joy. One recently committed suicide... a very well-off and talented guy.

So, it's not "preposterous" at all. It's quite common and very understandable since our values here are based almost completely on money -- which is only a tool and you can't purchase happiness, only distraction.

You have to make yourself watch this flick! The promotional description/summary here on IMDb certainly makes this story sound far more interesting than this movie can ever be.

It's the usual NYC setting with beautiful people in successful jobs but - oh my - the waters run deep and dark and the characters are way too introspective. Still wanting to be young and free Gabriel suddenly realizes he's in a stale marriage and has a child and he wants to be a writer. So he looks and acts like an old wino through 93% of the movie.

This type of story has 'been so done'! This flick starts sinking within the first 15 to 20 minutes - whenever you suddenly realize where this story is going. And there's the happy happy ending.

This film examines an interesting aspect of life...friendship between men and women without sex or romance. It's something I personally relate to because my best friends are women (and most of them are also close friends of my wife.) It also is a very well written and well directed film. The lines are good and they are well delivered in a very natural and understated manner, almost as though the scenes were improv. The concept of the play within a play, certainly not an original dramatic device, is, nevertheless, done effectively. This wasn't a big buck film, either in its production costs or its box office. But I suspect the people who made it are motivated more by artistry than by avarice.

Perfect example of a movie that should not be judged by the average rating it receives from viewers. People are apparently terrified of exploring their feelings, their decisions, or their lives if they rated this 4.6 out of 10. With no qualifiers, I give it a 10. Where & when can one explore one's self? Certainly not in schooljails where the teachers themselves are unlikely to have ever gotten to know themselves. Authenticity, the ability to be oneself, is totally lacking in this most vital institution where kids are supposed to get prepared for life. Here is a movie to help focus on the aspect of our lives that is left out of the curriculum--to question one's choices, to find meaning, to discover love, to learn from mistakes. Most people will not bother but will continue making the same mistakes over & over again. Bravo to the producers & everyone connected with this film for giving us something way above the standard fare. EXCEPTIONAL!

I just watched this movie and i must admit it wasn't brilliant but better then a lot of other movies.

The plot starts with a family seemingly happy but as you have already guessed nothing is as it seems. The guy is a thinker while the wife is not so much. Then blah blah blah and the guy writes a sarcastic play, leaves his wife, and finally gets together with his true soul mate.

Now a response to the previous review: A guy criticized that the plot makes us completely unsympathetic to the main character due to his ungratefulness to what he has(the happy family stuff). I agree that you shouldn't not leave a marriage in ruin like that but in order to achieve that you need to be on the same level of understanding with your partner. That doesn't mean that you always agree but it means he at least gets your "multiple sarcasm". Im not talking about intelligence here well maybe I am so what some people get it some don't that is just how it is.

Anyway not a bad movie but i think it dint reach the right audience.

This might be Timothy Hutton's best performance, and all the acting was great; but the development of why Timothy Hutton and Mira Sorvino truly loved each other was missing.

Yes they knew each other and were friends / comfortable, but love requires the desire. The discussion of fear causing that not to shine might be true, but not in a long standing relationship/ friendship.

So with as deep as the portrayal was and discussions were, the one that was never deep (albeit comfortable) was Timothy Hutton and Mira Sorvino's characters. I don't blame the acting as much as the writing.

..............

I guess it all depends on what one brings to a movie. If I were only going to watch this film once, I would miss most of it. On a film binge, long vacation, I watched 2 other films of other genres before I got to _Multiple Sarcasms_. I wouldn't classify it as a comedy and I got unsorted mush. I even stopped in the middle and went to bed. The next morning I decided to see it through. I will watch it again. Scenes of exceptional beauty, characters that are real, believable (uh, is this a movie or did I get into somebody else's head). Terms one learned at school, well, for example about theater -- for example, "vraisemblance" -- help to "defamiliarize the text". We may have seen movies with bits, tropes, business, cutting and editing like this before, but this one is still original, subtle, and inviting with sufficient refractions with stage and staging to place us both inside it and outside it. Very near the end of the film, the writer places himself as an actor on the stage, then also to one side as editor/actor critiquing the writer/actor. This was not over done. Life into stage or film is very strange and wonderful. There are characters playing the role of audience members whom we have gotten to know during the course of the film. The music was excellent, the scenes, the character development of supporting characters was fine (getting good and drunk with "Eric"). We could probe the messiness of the protagonist's life "as life" with the "vraisemblance" probe (Living out of a suitcase? His dwelling was no suitcase.) By the end of the film we have seen a man's life shuddering into chaos as he takes up writing, and the miracle of the process is that a beautiful coherence emerges. He has become more grounded, centered and real. The process works! I should write a play. This is pretty good film alchemy. India Ennenga's "Liz" was radiant.

What this film was really missing was a real turnout to explain a playwright's boredom with all the good things he couldn't enjoy. Or a real, Allen-like neurosis (but that is overdone), perhaps of the psycho kind.

Unfortunately, the intelligent dialog and the good cast can't really make it memorable. From the way the story is told, the viewer becomes unsympathetic towards the main character (and it's nothing wrong with that), but the latter's motivation is thin at best, and that's wrong and makes him a spoiled whining nerd. Which most real writers and real men aren't - hopefully.

Well, it's disappointing, but it still might win an award, the Have a Great Cast and Dialog and Still Ruin the Film award.

I thought this was a good movie all in all. The acting was good and so was the story line. It was a tale of a man who was trying to find himself and find happiness in his life, isn't this what we all are searching for in the end? The main character Gabe wanted to be a writer so he gave up everything to do this. I think sometimes people are over critical of movies and over analyze things...just sit back and enjoy the ride and try to find a moral to the story instead of finding all the flaws. because this is what is wrong with our society as a whole, we always look for the flaws. So i would definitely recommend this movie it was different from the mainstream blockbusters and had some deep meaning to it.

MULTIPLE SARCASMS was a movie that made me feel reticent because it has a low score of 4,6 and only 15 reviews mostly with negative scores. But since I am like the judge and jury for these sort of movies last June I finally bit the bullet on this one. And to my surprise it was very good.

Gabriel (Timothy Hutton) looks like is living a perfect life: a successful career as an architect, a wife and a daughter that love him. But one day he realizes he is not happy and decides to write a play about the sorry state of his life. After one day he is unexpectedly fired he becomes pushy towards his literary agent friend (Mario van Peebles) for representing him and when Gabriel starts writing and his stage play has success, his life finally changes.

So why this movie is hated by most viewers? Well, probably because most viewers don't want to see stories about men at crossroads in their lives but for me instead they are nice subjects to deal with. And Hutton's performance looked a little bit to that of BEAUTIFUL GIRLS - again, playing a man at crossroads in his life. There is a scene where he has some sort of fever dream where he has the Elvis Presley hairdo and various women lift him up that actually was funny. And the ending, it's really satisfying considering what the lead has gone through.

If you stumble upon this movie give it a try. Perhaps from time to time you feel the need to connect with characters like the lead of this.