Roger Dodger (2002)

Sorry, this movie sucks

Simply Perfect

This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

Would anyone love a person like Roger Swanson (Scott)? A good-looking New-Yorker, a latter-day Casanova, who can elaborate on the imminent obsolescence of male gender due to the accelerating diminution of its utility, during his working lunch with the presence of his co-workers and their boss Joyce (Rossellini), a woman significantly older than him and whom he has been seeing secretively for quite a long time, he is her "boy".But right in that night, Joyce unilaterally decides to sever their casual affair, Roger doesn't even have his say in it, but at least, the break-up sex is still on the table, so he takes it with a grudge. In a bar, Roger's patronising act to persuade a young girl (Baccani) from putting out to a man whom he claims to a "bad news" to her doesn't pan out like he wants, because ironically, he is also a "bad news" himself and a total stranger, any girl with a good sense of judgement would not let him get what he wants; later he lets loose his frustration by pretentiously derides a much older woman (Emery), who is waiting for her finance alone in the bar, unfortunately sitting next to him.So, the consensus is that we don't like Roger, and no one should, sharp-witted and cerebral, maybe, but he is a callous cad, through and through. However, in the eyes of his nephew, Nick (Eisenberg), who arrives unannounced from Ohio, Roger is a lady's man who proclaims that he can score every night if he wants. Meanwhile, Roger thrills to play his utilitarian role as his wingman once he finds out Nick is a 16-year-old virgin andThe coaching session starts on the sidewalk, by talking, and the gist is that "sex is everywhere", here, the hand-held camera employment from the first-time director Dylan Kidd, a tactic has shown great pragmatism and advantage in its intrusive manner under dialogue-laden, interior- located contexts, causes a somehow fluid and distracting effect al fresco, which trivialises the conversation, however, once the pair plunges into the (retrospectively speaking) three-steps mission to make Nick score that night: hooking-up-ladies-in-the-bar, gatecrashing-a-party and ultimately, the "fail-safe" adventure in a seedy whorehouse, the film becomes unstoppable, accurately captures the nitty-gritty in the metropolitan dating sphere, deceitful, desperate and destructive.A Manichaean strategy to juxtapose an impressionable virgin with a cynical playboy works its way to be beneficial to both parties, Nick, seals his first kiss with an amiable, mature and attractive Sophie (Beals), and sees the vulnerability of a maudlin Donna (Badie), Roger's colleague in the party which Joyce organises and Roger is not invited, and sensibly chooses not to take advantage of her. Roger, however, immersed in his own misery after being cheaply dumped, unexpectedly receives a wake-up call which is just in time for him to rescue Nick from losing his virginity in the most vacuous and crudest way.Scott supremely nails Roger's character as a rapid-fire and eloquent orator edifying his "inconvenient truth" about men and women - some are not truth per se, merely bravado only to sound smart. But Mr. Scott also excavates much deeper under Roger's vain front, he bespeaks a seething soul who has nothing in his grip, who is disheartened by superficiality of the man-woman interrelationship, and the fact that he is constantly under-appreciated for being outspoken about it, yes, that's THE inconvenient truth, if you don't play along with the rule, you are excluded.The film is also Jesse Eisenberg's screen debut, incredibly, his trademark tic of being self- conscious and out-of-the-place has already been honed up to a full blossom. Jennifer Beals and Elizabeth Berkley, make up the pair of the opposite sex as two bar frequenters-cum-friends, Sophie and Andrea, the quartet's breeze-shooting convo is strangely magnetic, both actresses are at the top of their games of being spontaneous and unfeigned, plus Beals beams with warmth in initiating that first kiss!Finishing the movie with a flourish of lacuna, ROGER DODGER resonates pretty well as a snappy and honest take on urban philosophy, a US indie curio with a wider appeal than it seems to have.

Saw this one with a friend, knew close to nothing about it. It starts out pretty bad. The opening scene is not good. The acting was close to embarrassing to watch, did not seem real at all. Almost cringe worthy. It's not that it's horrible, but it misses the mark, and in this type of movie, that's a disaster.It does get a little better, but I did not like some of the performances by the main cast. Rossellini? Not good at all.What saves this movie is Jesse Eisenberg, basically. And some of the "theories" and speeches given by Roger himself. There are some pretty good life lessons here! But the cinematography and general look of the movie I did not like. Looks cheap and sort of amateurish.when you get into it, there are some pretty good parts, and Mr. Eisenberg adds a lot. If the problems with the movie had been fixed, it would be a lot better.

It's not often that I actually bother to write a review of a film but I feel it only fair to post my review in order to prevent the general public wasting their precious time on a film that really is one of the worst piles of garbage I have watched in a very long time. There is one thing I have to hand to the producers of this film which is 10/10 for finding the most highly annoying actor (the main character) and also for providing the most bizarre and quite frankly headache inducing way of filming a movie - if that's what you could call it. Furthermore why this is described as a comedy is beyond me. It is simply not funny and totally depressing and odd! So if you have seen this film listed on Netflix don't bother cause it's awful.

There are plenty of mini-synopses here, so I'll skip that part, and get directly onto the "viewers beware" section of this review.The acting is good, the sets were competent, and the direction was far better than the script deserved.The titular character, Roger, is intelligent, witty, and remarkably reprehensible - but then, guys who haunt the singles scene are. The scene in which he's coaching his nephew in the fine art of sneaking peeks at women is a perfect example of how this character epitomizes the worst view of men and their sexual urges. "Tie your shoe - there's no shame in falling back on an old standby"? Once he's actually talking with women, one begins to wonder how he's ever gotten through a night without wearing someone's drink - this level of casual, cheerful boorishness is remarkably rare and grating.I'd hoped that this would be a reasonably realistic look at the guys who view seduction as a sport - what it turned out to be was a caricature set up for the sole purpose of making the audience want to knock him down.If 'Fear Factor' and 'Jackass' are your favorite television shows, you may enjoy this. Otherwise, look elsewhere.