Admirable film.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

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

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

On the down side is the fact that the 2003 film Melvin Goes To Dinner, directed by first timer Bob Odenkirk, is a watered down yuppy version of the great 1981 Louis Malle film My Dinner With Andre. On the up side is that if you are going to imitate something, at least choose something great, for the imitation, while not great, is likely to be good, which My Dinner With Melvin is. It was written by actor/playwright Michael Blieden, adapted from his play Phyro-Giants, and had a no name cast, as opposed to 2001's similarly themed HBO film Dinner With Friends, which starred Dennis Quaid, Toni Collette, Andie McDowell, and Greg Kinnear…. the film really does chicken out of putting its characters in emotional deep water. Yes, admissions of fetishes and infidelities can titillate, but given that this was filmed only a year and a half after 9/11 you'd think there might be a touch of political dischord thrown in. They argue a bit over religion, but no character seems willing to really stand up for anything. They are all, in that sense, preening wimps.Still, I only wish there were deeper characters. Whereas Shawn and Gregory discourse on life and determinism, the four yuppies talk of things like ghosts with all the depth that a post-Angels In America America can muster, and then are amazed at each others' supposed depth, and how stimulating their conversation is. And when I reference Angels In America it's not a mere throwaway diss. There's a reason for the connection. Call it Post-Intellectualism. Call it, 'Show, don't tell.' Call it a nice try that settles for copouts. There are too many synchronicities and pallid contrivances that line up to get these four people together in the first place, and then reveal so much about themselves. Yet, it succeeds just enough that I can recommend this noble attempt, especially since the film's start and end are strong- and I mean literally the first and last few seconds of each. You may not wish you were able to join in the conversation, as you did with My Dinner With Andre, but it's still a few notches above anything you'll overhear in a real restaurant. For that, I recommend this DVD.

I had mixed feelings about this one. I went into it knowing that it was largely based on conversation with very little vestiges of plot, so I was pleasantly surprised to find that it all sort of falls into place to mean something at the end. All in all, the conversational elements are richly written and very appealing. However, that's the end... it takes a while for it to be truly enriching.Sometimes the conversation is such that you feel like you're in it, and that's probably as close to good as the cinematography and editing gets, considering in general it really isn't that well done. I can forgive the hand-held look and a lot of how the image turned out from its independent production value, but try as I might I couldn't help but feel a lot of the work was just shoddy camera operation.Sometimes the conversation isn't very appealing and I can't help but think, "I'm obviously not in this conversation because I wouldn't go there." So there's that element too, a sort of discursive alienation one feels when the conversation feels less than involving.Mostly, however, the dialog is great and the characters are amazing. There are some really great performances all around and it's definitely worth a viewing or two, or more, but even as I say that I can't help but think that the play version of this story must be absolutely amazing because of mostly the format of the two media.--PolarisDiB

Witless, trendy twaddle and psycho-babble of the most annoying variety. This may well be the worst film ever made. It is difficult to believe that anyone has ever made it through this movie in one sitting. It is hard to decide which element of this film is the worst: the acting, which is stiff, yet glistening with the desperation of young, hungry actors trying to find meaning in this piece of dreck; the writing, in which the aching banality is broken up only by the sense of irritation that is the inevitable outcome of listening to the ill-considered opinions of dullards; or the cinematography, which is flat, insipid and unattractive.There are a few people involved with this film, such as David Cross and Maura Tierney, who have shown real talent in the past. One imagines they intensely regret their association with this piece of tripe.

Nearly all of Melvin Goes to Dinner's brief running time is spent observing a rambling but always interesting dinner conversation among four variously connected people in their late twenties. I was very impressed by both the writing and the acting. It's rare enough that we get even brief conversations that sound right, like real people really speak to each other; Here we have over an hour's worth.All of the performances are very good. I especially liked Stephanie Courtney's ability to make Alex simultaneously annoying and charming. Others have noted the wonderful cameo by Jack Black as a mental patient with an impressively detailed conception of reality.If you find yourself looking for a break from CGI and other special effects, give Melvin Goes to Dinner a try. The best thing I can say about it is that as soon as it ended, I wanted to watch it again from the beginning.