Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Kaelan Mccaffrey Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

Raymond Sierra The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Isbel A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Cosmoeticadotcom In order to be a good critic one has to rise above one's personal biases. Period. If one cannot get past hating love stories or action films, then one should not practice the craft, because there are good films that are mere love stories or action films. It is the excellence of the film, and how it achieves its excellence, that is more important than what sort of a film it is. This basic lack of understanding how to separate one's likes from the objective ability of art to effectively communicate, is why most critics fail in their task. On a related plane is the inability of many critics to distinguish between when a film is something, and when it is merely about something. A good example of this is the 2001 independent film by actor/director Frank Whaley, called The Jimmy Show (nothing at all like the Jim Carrey vehicle, The Truman Show); his second directorial effort after 1999's lauded Sundance Festival film Joe The King. It is a very good, albeit not great, film about the depressing life of a working class loser. Yet, the film itself is never depressing, despite its being damned to obscurity by critics for that very fact. Again, the point is that film critics claimed something about the film that is about what the film portrays, not how it portrays it…. In many ways, Jimmy O'Brien is like George Bailey, from It's A Wonderful Life, save for two things- the first is that he's a miserable person whose own misery has cost him everything. He has no Mr. Potter as antagonist, and although George Bailey's choices also result in his depression at the end of that film, all of his choices have been selfless, not selfish. Jimmy O'Brien, on the other hand, has been behind all of his failures, because he has tried to please no one but himself. The second is that Jimmy O'Brien is beyond help and hope. Even were a guardian angel, like Bailey's Clarence Oddbody, to intervene, Jimmy would never pay attention long enough to learn. He has no need for others' counsel, and cares not to hear it.In this way, The Jimmy Show is the ultimate realist film, for there are far more Jimmy O'Briens in the world than George Baileys. But, it is the life of the fictive Jimmy O'Brien that depresses one, not the film about him, for this little film can make one feel much better about the lives they've lived, not only because how well the portrait of him is crafted, but if only because a viewer is not as badly off as the lead character. How many DVD viewers lead lives that have far too much truck with aspects of the characters from this film? I would say too many- most of whom would not want to admit it, which is the answer as to why this film was so unfairly panned upon its release. Looking into a mirror, when one does not like what one sees, is always a downer, and The Jimmy Show is a filmic mirror for far too large a portion of an American audience for it to have ever had any great financial nor critical success. But, it is the failure to look at what the mirror reflects, rather than what the mirror is, that was the cause for much of the hostility that this good little film engendered. But, with that knowledge in mind, take a second glance into the looking glass of The Jimmy Show, and Jimmy O'Brien's life. It's worth a bit of redemption, if not for him nor you, then for art.

Snodra In my opinion Frank did a brilliant job of writing, acting and directing this tragic story of Jimmy, who, but for the grace of the universe, could have been any of us. The very ordinariness of much of the details of the story and of the characters juxtaposed against Jimmy's awesome courage in telling it in all its misery from the stage of the comedy club night after night was a stroke of genius.I think it perfectly set up for a sequel which could either give us one of those happy Hollywood endings, or take Jimmy's life to even further tragic ends. I'm hoping to see that sequel, although I feel it could stop where it did and leave the rest to our imaginations as it has done. The death of his grandmother, and the leaving of his wife and daughter make him free at last to go anywhere and do anything. Sometimes I think he'll find himself and build a good life, with at least weekends with Wendy, and other times I see him digging other deep, dark holes for himself. I think that was Mr. Whaley's objective: to make us wonder about this character, and if so, he has succeeded beyond his dreams.

todd_dsm Frank Whaley gave it his directorial all in this one as in "Joe the King". He has a unique voice among the other modern day quills of his medium.This one though, will leave you with a personal malaise. Desolation and reality have now been given gravity with this picture. It's equally depressing that his instincts have drug him in this direction.View at your own risk.

Pepper Anne what a depressing film this was! frank whaley stars as jim, a guy who finds himself narrating his his dwindling life saga to a near-empty room of strangers at each open mic night in a small town new jersey bar. he almost forces the crowd to listen to how each day seems as bad as the one before, with him getting fired from his job, his wife divorcing him, or having to care for his ill mother (although that doesn't seem to both him as much).i have always enjoyed frank whaley in comedy (although he does almost none of that anymore) but this does not really qualify as comedy, no matter how dark or satirical. although, there is one scene in the movie where jim is working at swamie hots, an Indian fast food place, where you get a little comedic shine on an otherwise horribly depressing film.