Leatherheads

Like a lot of people, I never bothered with this film when it came out in the cinemas because of the negative reviews that it got. Likewsie when it came to DVD it sat at the bottom end of my rental list waiting for me to want to watch it. Eventually I did and initially I thought that the reviews had been unfairly harsh because the film seemed like it was going to be a light and sparky sports period piece that captures the screwball comedies of years gone by. This is how it starts but unfortunately it is not how it continues. It is not like, at some point the film suddenly gets "bad" (it doesn't) but more that it doesn't quite have the sparkle or life that the trimmings all suggest that it will. In terms of capturing the period, it does a great job – or at least it does a great job of continuing the nostalgic idea of the period. It does this with a cool jazz soundtrack, good costumes and the suggestion of the snappy dialogue that the screwball movies are known for. I say suggestion because of the places where the film doesn't have the zing that it needed is in the script. It does have its moments though and it is quite fun at times but mostly it feels like it is just falling short of where it should be. It has a couple of things that don't help this either. Firstly it is too long, maybe not for the plot (it doesn't "drag" per se) but certainly for the light tone. Secondly, the romance aspect of the plot doesn't really work, which is partly down to the casting of Zellweger. Where Clooney fits the bill as a "too-cute by half" square-jawed matinée star, Zellweger cannot convincingly deliver her lines in a way that works. I think of Jennifer Jason Leigh in Hudsucker Proxy – she did an impression of an actress in a screwball comedy that was pretty good and looking at that shows up how ill-suited Zellweger is. I know people dislike her on principle but I am not one of them, I just thought she was pretty poor here. Krasinski is good in his role even if, to be frank, he didn't do anything that suggested he has more than the range of characterisation that he has already shown on The Office – and that should be of concern to his "people" since he will soon need to breakout of that show as it cannot run forever. The supporting cast has plenty of interesting and recognisable faces who do solid work. Leatherheads is not a terrible comedy as some have suggested and it should not be criticised for being inconsequential or light. Sadly though it is not frothy, sparky or fun enough to be the film that it was clearly intended to be. OK there are specific issues with aspects of the plot and some (well, one) bit of casting but generally this bigger picture problem is what limits it to be an "OK" film but no better than that.

Clooney's third directorial outing, and his followup to the Oscar nominated Good Night and Good Luck. This movie is quite a bit lighter, a screwball comedy about the early days of professional football. Clooney stars as a pro football player for the Duluth Bulldogs in 1925. The sport is not very popular at this level, but is insanely so at the college level. His plan to increase attendance and save the sport is to recruit football and war hero John Krasinski, who plays for Princeton, onto the team, though college football players rarely go on to the pros. Meanwhile, a reporter from Chicago, played by Renée Zellweger, has discovered that Krasinski's war hero story is bunk, and plans to expose him. While never hilarious, it's quite an enjoyable movie. Clooney, I think, is a more talented director than any of his three films have displayed. I think, if he ever gets his hands on a great script, he'll knock out a truly great film. He captures the period detail well, and the photography is great. I think the film would be a whole lot better without Zellweger. I'm not necessarily a Zellweger hater, but she's staggeringly awful here and drags the whole film down a notch. I like the whole fin de siecle mood. Nothing especially memorable, but a good time.

Leatherheads was a very boring movie from the very beginning. I had a hard time staying in the theatre for the whole movie. This is a movie where you mostly hate it or love it and I strongly didn't like it. I thought the acting was very good and they were fun to watch for older people. I guess I mostly didn't like it because I am younger. It was just way to slow moving and never picked up. The messages were saying its okay to cheat and lie. George Clooney was just a cheater the whole movie when he played football and never changed. The whole movie had like about three laughs. The laughs they did have were small. I mostly didn't like how it took place in the 1920's. It was very real and shows you how football really started. The romance was very confusing and pretty boring. Everyone in this movie was very selfish and wanted everything for themselves. The story was pretty much not even about football. It revolved around war and other stuff. One more thing is that the whole movie was all sarcasm. So if you like sarcasm you will probably like this movie. Overall this movie was very boring and a waste of money.

Leatherheads takes place in the 1920's and is about a professional football player named Dodge Connolly who is also the head coach of his team. Dodge's team soon loses sponsorship and they are forced to resign. Being out of work, Dodge soon reads about an up and coming war hero and college football star named Carter Rutherford who he convinces to play on the team and because of Carter's star power, Dodge soon gets the team up and running again. Meanwhile a reporter named Lexie Littleton is going to be writing an article on Carter and soon Dodge meets her and falls in love with her and after first being turned off by him, Lexie soon starts to like him as well, but things get complicated when Lexie uncovers something for her story on Carter, that could hurt him and the team and Dodge, with feelings for Lexie soon has to straighten things out with his love and his team. Even though the film is called Leatherheads, and most of the advertisements show the film as a sports film, really the football aspect is only a backdrop to the romantic comedy part of the film that is really the main focus. The filmmakers of Leatherheads, must have been big fans of the romantic "screwball" comedies of the 1930's and 40's and this is truly a salute and tribute to those movies. That being said, Leatherheads captures everything about those films and the charm, wittiness, comedic performances and style that made those films so distinct. The film's look from the sets right down to the costumes look exactly like the 20's films and in capturing the mood of the 40's comedies the writers have provided a very humorous story filled with snappy and clever dialogue between the characters, numerous situations that resolve themselves with a lot of comedic intelligence and first rate performances from the actors who all do their best job of capturing the comedic performances of that era. Leatherheads works so well because it appeals and does it's job so well for a couple of reasons. First off the story and writing is sharp, funny and tells a very entertaining story with a great backdrop and sets from the crew and also because of the performances, timing and skill of the actors delivering the lines and situations to perfection and doing the best of what they are given and what they are given is very good. Overall a classic tribute to the comedies of yesteryear done with perfection and told with a great knack for such films and delivering a very entertaining, funny and classy film that I think will appeal to many people and will work on the same levels that they worked for me.

This movie had the potential to be so much more. It had a likable and talented cast. It's portrayal of the 20's was impressive and felt authentic. The music and atmosphere were excellent. Ultimately though, this was a comedy and I didn't laugh much. I tried to force a few laughs, hoping that if I just got on a roll I'd enjoy it more, but it never came together for me. It had its moments, but they were brief respites from the melodrama of the rest of the film. I thought John Krasinski was underused. For being the only true comedic actor in the film he was never given many funny things to say. Clooney, while undeniably a superb actor, should realize that his charm alone cannot carry a film. Zelwegger fit her role well, though the strong willed woman who has her heart melted by the sweet talking man is a plot line that should have been left in the previous century. As long as you see this movie without the expectation that you'll be rolling in the aisles you may enjoy it, but if you go in with that misconception you'll be left wanting.

A lot of the negative reviews here concentrate on the historical accuracy of this film. OK, it had about as much to do with the actual NFL as your average war movie has to do with an actual war, or a Western has to do with the true "old west". So, I think we should give them an artistic license pass on that one. The problem here is, the director (Clooney) apparently thinks that making a screwball comedy means a) do stupid things, b) mug for the camera, and c) take stupid scenes full of mugging and stretch them out way too long. Screwball comedies need a fast pace, not necessarily frenetic, but moving briskly along at all times. Here, things drag, and drag, and drag. After you watch this movie, it will make you appreciate how brilliant Mack Sennett was when he pretty much pioneered the genre with his Keystone Cops. After 90 years, you would think that directors would have studied the old masters and learned a thing or two, maybe even improved on things a bit. But no, it's as if someone had watched an automobile pioneer build a Duesenberg, and nearly a century later, paid homage and "improved" on the concept by cobbling together a child's wagon with square wheels. I've enjoyed several of Clooney's movies, I consider him a gifted actor. But very few actors can competently direct themselves; Clint Eastwood notably took a while to get the hang of it. Clooney is clearly at the bottom of a very steep slope. The movie becomes more watchable during the very few times he is out of the frame, but when he's in the picture, he makes himself the centre of attention. In the fight scenes, his mugging is so obnoxious you wish somebody would thump him for real. If you are making a screwball comedy and want some romance thrown in, you need to develop some chemistry between the male and female leads. Clooney and Zellweger have all the chemistry of pair of dumpsters sitting in a parking lot. No spark, no sizzle, not even a post-mortem twitch. Zellweger, who has also turned out some pretty good movies, must have traded her botox injections for oak tannin, giving a stunningly wooden performance. She might just have pulled off the "tough broad in a man's world" act if just once, while trying to out-testosterone the guys, she had looked into the camera with a little half-smile and twinkle in her eye. But no, she kept her jockstrap cinched up tight to the very end. Of course, the biggest sin here is that the movie simply isn't funny. Doing stupid things is not the same as slapstick. Doing stupid things very inventively, like the Stooges, or very athletically, like Buster Keaton, can be hilarious. But otherwise it's boring and, well, stupid. I think I got one good laugh out of the entire movie. Avoid this one. I saw it for free on cable, and still wanted my money back.

While the dialog is clever and the acting is up to par, the mix of sports and romance ultimately falls flat. The legitimizing of football in the 1920's is the main plot point, with Clooney's Dodge Connelly attempting to popularize it through recruiting war hero turned college football phenomenon, Carter Rutherford, played by Krasinski. The plot thickens when an officer who fought alongside Rutherford claims that the golden-boy's actions during the war are less than heroic. Zellweger's ambitious Lexie Littleton doggedly pursues the truth behind the tall tales, all the while being pursued by the meant-to-be charming football has-been Connelly and the bright eyed Rutherford, who's reputation she is meant to dismantle. While Zellwegger looks the part of a '20's bombshell, Littleton is little more than an instigating character meant to stir up rivalry and trouble. Though Littleton and Connelly's repartee is meant to mirror that of classic characters, she remains a shadow of prior female protagonists and never comes fully into her own. Her wavering affections for Rutherford and Connelly do not fit into the classic feminine archetype she was meant to embody. While Clooney's smooth-talking Connelly was written with the intent of being charming, his actions oftentimes appear more arrogant than anything else. He is an unabashed trickster both on and off the field, but instead of coming off as an artful beguiler, he instead appears dishonest and at times unworthy. Krasinski's Rutherford is by far the most charming and likable character in the film; his aw-shucks demeanor is disarmingly enchanting. While Rutherford was built up as a rival for the aging Connelly, it is difficult to perceive in what way they are meant to compete with each other. He is stuck in a lie that snowballed into epic proportions, and his naiveté shows when he is genuinely wounded by Littleton's betrayal. The remotely villainous CC Frazier, played by Jonathan Pryce, is an amusing feature of the film. His immoral approach to business and his eager desire to take advantage of the talent of others, namely Rutherford, shows a different and less promising side to the professionalizing of football. While the conflict between Rutherford and Connelly appears somewhat stilted, the banter between the two is unequaled throughout the film. Most of the truly funny moments are between the two, honoring slapstick bits made famous in early cinema. Randy Newman's swinging score is jazzy and jaunty, adding light excitement and highlights the screwiest scenes. The Mention, and the ignoring of, prohibition also added legitimacy to the film, leading to an entertaining old-fashioned police chase involving Littleton and Connelly. The football scenes were initially exciting, with Connelly's dupes and playing dirty rallying the spirit of football and Rutherford's clean and direct approach offering an interesting parallel. However, the final game is rather anticlimactic. What was meant to be the pivotal scene in the football game was dissatisfying and confusing, using old suspense-building clichés to mount a weak scene. The final game was meant to be dull in order to put across Connelly's assertion that the rules of football ruin the game, but nonetheless it results in disappointment. The costume designs, including the old-fashioned football uniforms and Littleton's various old time dresses make one feel as if they are taking a look back into the past, as does the beautiful cinematography. "Leatherheads," is entertaining and fun, but its attempt to emulate the past genre ends up ultimately dissatisfying.

Greetings again from the darkness. The worst thing you can say about a movie ... comedy or drama ... is that it is boring. George Clooney's "Leatherheads" goes beyond boredom straight into snooze-fest. Attempting to follow in the footsteps of the great Preston Sturges and Howard Hawks screwball comedies, just two things are missing: screwball antics and comedy dialogue. One of the best ever writers from Sports Illustrated, Rick Reilly, was a collaborator and writer of the script. I am disappointed and embarrassed for him. Same for George Clooney, who probably could have pulled off the mugging if he hadn't tried to direct as well. Quite a fall off from his "Good Night and Good Luck". Toss in bland John Krazinski ("The Office") as the football hero with a secret and the impossible to like Renee Zellweger as the spunky newspaper writer and it truly is a recipe for disaster. Best part of the movie is a couple of shots of Randy Newman playing piano during a rowdy barroom brawl. The outline of the story showed promise, but the execution proves unfunny, without merit and ultimately a waste of time for all.

I thought this movie was going to be good. It absolutely wasn't, despite the Oscar-winning lead actors. I may have laughed once, and I never heard anybody else in the theater laughing. Renee Zellweger's pancake make-up was very unbecoming. Everybody seems to be trying so hard in this movie, running around in imitation of slapstick but not pulling it off. I think perhaps the movie must've sounded good in development, but something got lost in translation. Were the roaring 20's really like this? I think not. Everything seems a tad artificial. Randy Newman's score was annoying. The film is in sepia tones, just like every other movie that takes place in the 20's or 30's. There's just not that much originality here.

Let me preface this by going on record, I am a huge George Clooney fan, and I love John Krasinski in 'The Office'. Well, I was and I did. This was the world's worst hang nail and it took 113 minutes to rip it off. The stupefying boredom was interrupted only by my frequent efforts to read my watch and estimate when it would be over. Every funny scene was in the previews. All three of them. There was no real story, no character development, and the script was just plain bad. I've had a colonoscopy that was more enjoyable. The title should have been SuperDuper Bad. This movie is a lock for a Razzie. It should get a whole slough of Razzies. I want my money back.