This movie was a true chore to watch. I don't know why it is seen by some as an artistic film--unless "artistic" means painfully dull and uninteresting.
The entire plot is about two uninteresting people having dinner. The less annoying one (Wallace Shawn) is in awe of how brilliant Andre is, while I felt that Andre was mostly full of crap. Andre was a pseudo-intellectual character that delights in his own importance. If I had wanted to see such an obnoxious and self-important people, I would have watched an episode of Frasier--at least he and Niles are funny as well.
My advice to Andre is STOP talking. Please for the love of God, stop talking!
My Dinner with Andre
1981
Action / Biography / Comedy / Drama
My Dinner with Andre
1981
Action / Biography / Comedy / Drama
Plot summary
Wallace Shawn and Andre Gregory, apparently playing themselves, share their lives over the course of an evening meal at a restaurant. Gregory, a theater director from New York, is the more talkative of the pair. He relates to Shawn his tales of dropping out, traveling around the world, and experiencing the variety of ways people live, such as a monk who could balance his entire weight on his fingertips. Shawn listens avidly, but questions the value of Gregory's seeming abandonment of the pragmatic aspects of life.
Uploaded by: FREEMAN
Director
Top cast
Tech specs
720p.BLU 1080p.BLUMovie Reviews
This must be one of the most boring and self-absorbed films there is
long winding monologues
Wally Shawn (Wallace Shawn) is a 36 year old struggling playwright in NYC. He's also a struggling actor and his girlfriend is a waitress to pay the bills. He reluctantly goes to have dinner with Andre Gregory (Andre Gregory) who is a former friend and colleague. Andre had disappeared over the years traveling the world.
It's a lot of long winding monologues. I struggled to get invested in the conversation. This is a daring theatrical exercise but I don't feel connected to Andre's stories. It does have a hypnotic tone which can be fascinating but I also found it pompous. NYC is not Auschwitz. It's a mostly one-way conversation and Andre won't shut up. The twist isn't that surprising. Andre turns from a pompous blow-hard to a crazy pompous blow-hard. Wally is disappointing in his manic failing defense of science. At least, the ending has some back and forth.
Captivating
I decided to see this film many years ago after it received two thumbs up on the first Ebert- Siskel movie review show. I have always enjoyed conversation and watching the two men here share experiences from different orientations and life experiences kept my attention from beginning to end. The men are polar opposites. One is quite rich and has travelled the world, not just observing but participating. As we pass through his experiences (he does most of the talking) we begin to feel an emptiness, a kind of sadness in him. It's as if he thought there were answers out there that would meet his expectations and they never materialized. Wallace Shawn, a man of great accomplishment in his own right, is the frumpy guy who approaches life in a practical, realistic way. He is the perfect foil and yet his fragility is there on his sleeve. He speaks for us, the viewers, while marveling at the stories his friend tells. He hearkens to his own existence which, while not earth shattering, is one of groundedness. I may need to watch this again soon.