GamerTab That was an excellent one.

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Bumpy Chip It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Jakoba True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Matthew Stechel Good but not great movie bears a lot of the hallmarks of a Coen Bros movie, particularly in the movie's tone which is semi comedic, semi serious. I can't really explain it, but the film really moves and feels like a Coen Bros film...but without the luster or shiny glossy veneer that the Coen Bros usually put on their films--No Country For Old Men aside. Michael Rappaport's character even seems to be right on the same wavelength as other leading characters in several of the brothers other films such as Tim Robbins in The Hudsucker Proxy or Brad Pitt's in Burn After Reading. All three kind of share this kind of dimly, upbeat world view that can't be shaken despite all the crap that keeps getting thrown at them by everyone around them....that is until they're completely shaken and their spirits completely crushed only to be reborn anew, which also happened to be the character arcs of the main characters in both The Hudsucker Proxy and Burn After Reading so this all tracks. In re-watching this movie tonight for the first time in a good decade plus, the real chief flaw in it is how underwritten, or i guess underwhelming Michael Jeter's villain is here. My memory of the movie had a more flamboyant villain and Jeter's character doesn't seem to be quite present enough to make as big an impression as he should in order to be the big bad guy that Rappaport must defeat. John Caroll Lynch fares a bit better as the Elvis like henchman, but his character also doesn't get much definition--but at least he gets some sequences in which he gets to properly snarl and be villainous, but without much by way of character definition, its hard to really care about either of the two bad guys here which kind of takes some of the sting out of the movie. I did really enjoy Rappaport's performance tho. He's not always so well regarded as an actor by people I know despite having been quite good in a fair number of films over the years, and between this and his excellent lead role in the film "Special" he's someone who honestly may be overlooked as an actor. The movie would not work at all if you didn't buy his shifts from happy go lucky to despondent to vindictive but he nails the role...and frankly his speech in the ring on "the evils of a crooked spine" should be better known in general. All that said, there are some serious flaws in here, but its worth a look especially if you're a fan of either wrestling gimmicks or Rappaport or just want a look at what a Coen Brothers movie would look and sound like without either brother at the helm.

Andy Muench When I saw this movie, I was on the one hand overwhelmed and on the other hand very disappointed. It is a tragic and in some parts surrealistic comedy that is standing close to Bertolt Brecht's theater dramas and his V-effect and the German Dadaism-Artists. It may be considered as a sequel or even as a conclusion of other Coen - movies OR as just a big piece of humbug. I myself was thinking between these two aspects for a long time. And I came to the conclusion that everybody has to decide for himself. The thing that was really fascinating were the characters: real types - to speak in the traditional language of drama - not complex protagonists made me think about the sense of this movie. And to come back to the title of this comment: It is really a thin line between a very complex piece of film-artwork and rubbish. Decide for yourselves!

party pat When I saw the trailer for this movie, I thought this was going to be a comedy about underground wreseling. Man was I wrong. I found this movie in the comedy section, but I did not witness any comedy, just a lot of unneccessary and drawn out seens. There also was not much wreseling going on. I don't know how you make a seen where a man wearing a suit with his organs drawn on beats up a biker boring. This movie beat all the odds though. By shear numbers alone that seen should have been at least mildly entertaining, somehow though it was not. The only saving grace is Racheal Leigh Cook's character. Not really the character but how she was dressed. Its a sad production when a movie must credit a characters lack of clothing as its only high point. This had pretty respectable actors in it to. Do actors read the scripts before they take parts? I really can not write any thing else about this movie for I do not wish to recall my viewing of it.

Benjy I rented this movie for two reasons, first and foremost because the box contained the 'C' word. No not that 'C' word, the other one.... Coen, Ethan Coen. One half of the duo which brought us the Big Lebowsi, Fargo and the Hudsucker Proxy and even though he only has a co-writing credit (along with director J. Todd Anderson)it's easy to see his influence. The second reason was the excellent Michael Rapaport, who you may or more likely not, recognise from True Romance and Beautiful Girls. He's in fine form here as a Chiropractor who sidelines as rather odd looking Wrestler who wears a suit that looks like he's had his skin removed. SPOILERS***** When his family of chemists are massacred by the local pharmaceutical mafia head, Sticks Verona he loses the plot (although Coen and Anderson don't) and becomes a wrestling super hero using his Chiropractic skills to disable his enemies. One ridiculous plot twist after another follows as the Naked Man seeks his horrible revenge on the quadraplegic Sticks Verona. He's not an evil man, he just has back problems. This is not a great movie, it's a good movie. It is though, always entertaining and thoroughly bizarre!