Fairaher
The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.
Matylda Swan
It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.
Walter Sloane
Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.
wthimes
I dated one of the producers years ago and was aware of the title, but had never actually bothered to rent it. It was on as the Sunday late movie recently so I taped it to finally satisfy my curiosity.I had forgotten that so many recognizable actors had signed on for the film and I think the cast acquitted themselves well with what they were given.I think the biggest problem was that it wasn't so much a dark comedy as it was a dark farce. I'm not sure you can do farce with much of an edge, but I'm sure there are other films out there that have successfully done so. On the other hand, without the light touch it would have been a very different, dark and heavy film and most likely would have been suffered for it. I suppose the writer could have attempted a more staged and wordy, less 'madcap' version, but maybe then the ending wouldn't have been as interesting as it was here.Maybe it sounds like I didn't enjoy it, but I did. I just enjoyed it for what it is, a late night popcorn movie. Good job ML, I'm proud of you.
danielmarshall
I loved this film. The dog got to control the action and made sure every other character got what he or she deserved. He got to play the role of God, the wise and fair judge. I saw the whole thing as one great spoof on every imaginable cultural and plot stereotype. I found myself suspending disbelief, hardly able to wait to discover how the author would resolve the conflict without anyone telling the police, yet never took any of it seriously. It even poked fun at the typical happy ending and the Motion Picture Code rules. That's the way it struck me. I have to confess that I was watching at midnight, ready for anything light, and that I like dogs.
bbbl67
This movie started out so good too. Then all of a sudden everyone bares fangs and starts double-crossing and killing each other at the end! Yes, to be a good, clever ironic movie, you need to have some double-crossing. But the writer must've gotten lazy, and switched off the "good" and "clever" part, and just had everyone become a monster.Couldn't they have shown all of those apartment complex neighbors outwitting the bad guys and getting to keep the money in the end? Possibly even doing something to get revenge for the accidental murders of their two apartment mates at the beginning? Why does the dog-catcher get all of the money? She only showed up in the middle very briefly. Yes, sorry, I gave away the ending ... don't worry about it, you're not likely going to watch it all of the way till the end of this movie anyway.
George Parker
"More Dogs Than Bones" is a comedy about some crooked cash which gets so doggone lost that no one can find it. Supposed to be a comedy, this dog stumbles clumsily along with a monotonous storyline punctuated with some comic relief which is so bad the only relief is when the film ends. How so many good actors could end up in such an awful film is beyond all reason. Pass on this puppy. (D+)
