I really liked this movie. It shows how things can go south, and you haven't really done anything wrong. The main character is tossed around but tries to maintain equilibrium, having had to deal with very chaotic people and chaotic circumstances beyond his control. How he copes is what makes it interesting. He tries to control the people and circumstances and they just roll over him. In the end, his acceptance and learning to deal with the craziness of life is a lesson for all of us. Sometimes life goes to hell in a handbasket. His acceptance of it is the lesson.

This movie has an all-star cast of comedians, yet the movie isn't as funny as it should be. It does have a few laugh-out loud moments but that is truly it. The plot of the story is simply told when they could have added depth/story to it to really strive home the points they were trying to make.

I think there was supposed to be to be some humor here, but I didn't see it.

Fun movie about family dysfunction. The ending is abrupt and doesn't fit the pace of the rest of the movie. Still an enjoyable movie.

Very relatable for children of divorce.

Boring watch, probably won't watch again, and can't recommend. I like Adam Scott, and even though he carries the movie, he could only do so much to make the movie better. It's just filled with heavy subjects like divorce, broken relationships, sibling competition, and "why doesn't everyone love me like I want them too", but not really in any of the fun ways. Some of the rest of the cast helps with the moment to moment, but no one is really present long enough to really save the day without adding to the unfunny problems. If you like like non-physical misfortune comedy, then you might actually enough this.

Whenever I learn about a movie that has a GREAT cast and also sailed way under the radar (box office/buzz/viewership), I figure what you've got is a project where all the elements ended up being less than the sum of its parts and it just didn't quite work. A.C.O.D. is very much in that category for me. A talented and eclectic cast (Catherine O'Hara, Richard Jenkins, Adam Scott, Jane Lynch, Amy Poehler, etc. etc.) in a film I had never heard of until a year or so ago. What happened? Well, first of all, it's a movie that doesn't quite fit into an easy niche. It's a comedy, but not a raucous one. There are no "memorable" crazy scenes with grand hijinks. It's a small, talky, sweet and bittersweet movie. Almost apologetic in scale..."excuse me, if you've got time, we have a nice story we'd like to tell you, but only if you have nothing better to do." It's told almost entirely from the point of view of Adam Scott, a successful restaurateur in a very nice, comfortable long term relationship with Mary Elizabeth Winstead. One day, his younger brother, Clark Duke, announces his engagement to a young lady he's only been dating for a few months. The impending wedding causes Scott to try to address head on with his parents (long time BITTERLY divorced, and both remarried) their need to attend the wedding and to behave themselves. Seems reasonable enough, but this helpful intent on Scott's part sets of a series of events that brings into question his OWN commitment to HIS relationship and sparks all sorts of trouble with his parents and their new partners. It's all small-scale, though. "Series of events" really means a series of minor hiccups. They are important to these characters, but not really terribly important for the viewer. The film explores some of these messy feelings in a perfectly amusing and amiable way...but nothing is groundbreaking, even though there aren't many films that have addressed this impact of divorce on adult children. In fact, the film is so "on the nose" about this topic, that it introduces us to a writer (Jane Lynch...in an underwritten role even she can't make very funny) who wrote a book about divorced children that featured Adam Scott's character, and who visits him again because she wants to do a follow-up book. This is all just in case we've missed that the movie is about Adult Children of Divorce. Scott, thank goodness, is very good in the role. Even when he's at his most "unlikable" he's always a pleasant tour guide through the events of the film. His parents are played by O'Hara and Jenkins, and while the two aren't really given enough to do, they are fun nonetheless. Poehler's part is small, and she's been asked to play one of her unlikeable characters. I so much prefer her (and believe her acting) when she's nicer and perkier (a la Lesley Knope) rather than her "bitter" characters which are generic and interchangeable. The cover of the Blu Ray also shows Jessica Alba, who a) is terrible & b) is barely in the film. It says a lot when the far more charming, effective and believable Mary Elizabeth Winstead is nowhere on the cover. Her part is five time the size of Alba's, and she brings a warmth to her role that makes us root for her relationship with Scott. (Oh, and Ken Howard is in the film as O'Hara's new husband; he's actually quite nice in his role.) A few surprising developments happen. A few fights and moments of conflict. But in the end, it's mostly just been a brisk, pleasant 90 minute diversion. I can't imagine seeing the film again, but I didn't mind spending time with this mostly engaging cast. I see why the movie wasn't a smash-hit; but it's also a shame almost no one has heard of it.

I watched a movie because I like Adam Scott but I really thought the movie was funny and had some great points. Families are families and 50% of marriages and in the force so this is kind of on point. It was funny and it made the evening go quickly.

Completely unlikable characters acting unlikable. It is unbearable. A lot of talented people were wasting time by appearing in this.

This is a well done dark comedy; apparently people expected something lighter from him. They missed out.

Adventures and misadventures of a man complexed by the divorce of his parents as a child. This movie is like a filler episode of a 온라인카지노추천 series.

It's not very good. It's okay at times, but it doesn't say anything clever or original.

2.5 Stars At least it wasn't a total disaster

I didn't watch the whole thing; I skimmed it for the Amy Poehler, Catherine O'Hara and Jane Lynch bits. Didn't care about the main character, but the aforementioned ladies pulled off some cool characters. Something about this just missed the mark, and it's hard to discern what. Maybe the stakes weren't really high enough and the family not dysfunctional enough.

An original approach on talking about the effects of divorce on grown up relationships. It was funny and insightful, but not enough meat to make it a great movie.

I think that this film does have something to say about what parents divorcing does to their children, if they ever had any, once they grow up. Perhaps it doesn't go about it in the best way possible, as I found that the movie struggled to maintain a consistent tone. Parts of it felt like it wanted to be a goofy comedy and parts of it felt like it wanted to be something that was a little more insightful and smart. And it's that, to me, what really holds the movie back a lot. I'm not saying that this is a bad movie, because it's not, there were a lot of parts that I liked about it and I'm not afraid to say that. Of course why would I be afraid to say that, but whatever. The point is that, at its worst, the film just misses the mark on what identity it wanted to put forward. At its best, it's a sporadically entertaining film with a damn good cast. Adam Scott, Catherine O'Hara, Jane Lynch, Richard Jenkins, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Amy Poehler, etc. That's a top-notch cast right there and they sure as shit do their best with the material they've received. It's just that they can only do so much and when you have a script that doesn't know what it wants to be, I think that ends up holding the cast back more than it helps them. Because they're juggling all these different ideas and tones the film wants to get across and they don't really know how to unravel all the mess to make something out of it that makes some sort of sense. You know what, as much as the film has something to say as to what divorce does to the kids of that divorce as they grow up, I think the film has far more insight into the real effects of what divorce does during the post-credits stuff. The post-credits stuff is, basically, interviews with the crew of the film and asking them if they were a child of divorce or not and this is, probably, one of the better aspects of the film. And that might sound like an insult to the film I had just watched, but it's really not. But there's something to be said about just hearing the stories from people who actually went through with it as opposed to it being bogged down by certain elements of the script. And you get to see how, really, a incredibly high percentage of people who came from divorced homes, as it were, are far more cynical regarding marriage than, say, people who grew up in homes where the parents were happily married. And I can relate to them, at least the 'children of divorce'. My parents were never together. It was more of a fling, but, as much as my mother did for me and how grateful I am for everything, I think the fact that she was never with my father in an "official" fashion has sort of, also, shaped how I view relationships and marriage. That's inevitable, in my mind, and I think the credits capture the effect that has on the people who grow up with divorced parents and how they view relationships when they become adults more than even the film did. But, since this was a post-credits deal, I ca't really count it as part of the movie nor can I let it affect my score. With that said, this isn't a bad movie, as I mentioned, it's just one that doesn't really know what it wants to be. Everything in the movie is decent, at best, but none of it, outside of the cast, is good. So I can't really recommend it. You can do worse, for sure, but there's nothing special about this, sadly.

Waste of time, nothing is really happening and everybody is overreacting. The plot could have been told to someone in one sentence and it wouldnt be a popular party talk. Also, what was the real purpose of Jessica Alba's character that appeared in the story and made absolutey no difference in the story whatsoever? Love the actors but the story was not very exciting.

A bit of a slog, with nothing much new to say really. The cast is more than established but the script a little undercooked.

Surprisingly not too bad

January 2013 at WME post Sundance