I have seen this movie on IFC, and although it is admittedly a low-budget film, I found the writing to be pretty darn good. If you are looking for a multi-million dollar production, you definitely won't find it here. In fact, the acting itself could use some help. But from a screen writing perspective, I was pleasantly surprised. At least it is not the same old regurgitated crap constantly bombarding our eyes as of late. For those who may not have fully appreciated "Bobby Loves Mangoes", try "Night of the Dog", one of the award winners of the Palm Beach International Film Festival, and give the screen writing at least another shot.
13 Reviews
PERFECT script, but mediocre acting
triantal11 January 2004
With a few words, this is one of the best storylines there are. It seems to be kinda mysterious and sci-fi in the beginning, but turns all things upside down in the end and shows how stupid people can get and (no offense guys) especially in the US, where there seems to be a paranoia about.... I wont tell anything. Just watch it if you get the chance. It's worth it. 8/10 (because of the average or even BAD acting).
An unusual movie, with a surprising twist.
nickandmargie112427 August 2006
I viewed this movie several years ago, and still remember how much I enjoyed it. I had the opportunity to see it at Boston University as part of a student film festival. While the acting wasn't the caliber of many films I've seen, it was still quite convincing, with a combination of professional and amateur actors. The plot of the film was quite unique, with a true indie feel to it, but it was also quite professional. Ben Cleveland, the producer, did a particularly outstanding job, as you will note if you have an opportunity to see it. Excellent scenery--it was filmed in Boston--with a great surprise ending.
A well made film
per814 May 2001
Make no mistake, this is a well made, competent film with some good twists. It definitely drew me in and I wanted to see how it would end.
It's well done, but if you read other, overly-gushing raves about this film, I'd take them with a grain of salt - remember that this director is quite a self-promoter!
It's well done, but if you read other, overly-gushing raves about this film, I'd take them with a grain of salt - remember that this director is quite a self-promoter!
Could it all be true?
Horst_In_Translation14 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
"Bobby Loves Mangos" (what an innocent title) is an American live action short film from 1998 in the English language of course and this one will have its 20th anniversary next year. Director is Stuart Acher and the screenplay is by Jeremy Catalino. It's a bit of a shame that most of the cast and crew did not manage any big breakthroughs in the 2 decades since this was made as this was a pretty entertaining watch here. I am usually not to big on time travel films and not even a fan of the Back to the Future trilogy. But there was something to these 21 minutes here that I found captivating. It may have been the element of possible catastrophe and what one could reasonably do in order to prevent it. Still the ending made me wonder about how the dad then would have known Bobby is on that trip. Shouldn't he have expected that the principal would cancel the trip? Anyway, probably my bad. Overall, it was a tense and interesting watch, even if I would say that with the ending the crime genre should be added here on IMDb and the Sci-Fi genre should maybe not be included. Still the possibility of time travel could also be enough for the latter, so I'm fine with it and an exclusion would also be a bit of a spoiler, so it's all good. Some smart writing here and the acting was good too, especially by Frank Ridley in the center of it all. All in all, this is certainly a fine little movie, one of 1998's best short films I would say and it also doesn't get much worse on rewatch, especially if you don't remember the ending. But it is at least as much about the ways in which the two protagonists deal with the situation as it is about the final solution. And the video sequence early on is just as captivating edge-of-seat material as it is interesting how people back in the late 90s considered time travel (at least with objects) a valid possibility in the year 2018. Interesting, isn't it? Seeing this one is a great idea to people with a special interest in time travel films, but everybody else can check it out too. An underseen gem we got here.
Best Short Film... Ever.
robcheid16 April 2001
This film, which I had the pleasure of seeing on a segment of short films on TV, was definately the best short film I have seen. Its goal was to get the viewer hooked instantly and tell an intruiging story, all in the 15 or 20 minutes of the film's length, and this was surely accomplished. In the film, the principal of an elementary school receives a warning from the future about a horrible accident, and it is up to him to try and stop it. The film sets its own rules and plays with our imaginations. With the film came an accompanying interview with its director, who seemed obviously proud of this incredible work, his first movie ever. I urge all who read this to find a way to see this great work of cinema, no matter what it takes. The future may depend on it...
Well paint me red and call me Mannie, this film rocks!
DrkUnk19 August 1999
The only thing I want to ask the film makers of this twisting helix of carnal excitement is when on God's green are they going to come out with the feature!? This mind-boggling story has the makings of a "Fargo" but with the twists of "Sixth Sense" or "The Usual Suspects"! It's incredible when a 20-minute short like this one can kick more hiney than 90% of the crapola that comes to the theaters! Kudos towards Stuart Acher, the director, for his great eye, and the writer, Jeremy Catalino, for his ultra-witty script and juicy dialogue! Cast William H. Macy in this thing and make it a feature!
Edge of your seat suspense.
Poethical29 March 1999
This movie is a short that is directed by Stuart Acher, who in my opinion, will be very well known in a few years. In fact, I believe not many people will read this until Stuart breaks through and directs a feature. Or even better, a blockbuster. When this happens, remember: this was predicted by me. Who am I? That will remain anonymous.
Utter Nonsense, the harder you think, the madder you get.
traptc10 July 2003
Warning: Spoilers
The problem with this movie is that it doesn't ring true on either an emotional scale or a rational one.
The key to a good twist ending is that the ending allows everything to make sense. For instance, you can watch the end of "The Sixth Sense," and suddenly you realize why everyone behaves the way they do. Unfortunately, instead of allowing the story to make more sense hindsight, the "twist" ending in BLM refuses to stand up to any sort of scrutiny whatsoever.
But the greatest flaw in "Bobby Loves Mangos" is the fact that all reasonability seems to be sacrificed for the sake of a catchy title.
Spoilers:
The ending revelation that the title refers to is the fact that Bobby isn't allergic to mangos, even though the tape says that he is. Now, this sound like a relatively HUGE flaw in his father's plan, now doesn't this? I mean, assuming that they behave as normal and give Bobby a mango, his whole scam is blown wide open, and they send cops searching for him and the alternate route.
But wait. The plan works, because the idiotic secretary decides to conveniently buy out all the mangos, thus preventing them from ever proving the tape to be the fraud that it is. She does this because she doesn't want Bobby to get sick, like the tape says that he will. Even though, according to that same tape, Bobby getting sick is the only thing that'll save his life. And even though her plan doesn't even make sense, because in all seriousness, there shouldn't be only one fruit vendor in a given city.
Given how the story laid out, there was NO reason for the father to go out of his way to fabricate a story about mango allergies. The ONLY thing that such a fabrication could have done was prove him a fraud. If he needed an excuse of why Bobby was the sole survivor, he could have just insisted he fell off his bicycle or something.
Given how the story is laid out, there was NO reason to reveal that Bobby wasn't actually allergic. What did this actually add? The fact that we now know that the tape is a fake? Nope, Bobby has been kidnapped at that point, so we already know that. The fact that the Principal was a moron for falling for it? No, buying into time travel was what made him a moron, the mango allergy had nothing to do with it.
Seriously, you could take out all the mango references, and the father's plan would have worked just as well. The only thing lost would be the catchy title.
And therein lies the rub. Imagine if "The Shawshank Redemption" decided that "Killer Klowns from The Sahara Desert" would be a more catchy title, and they adjusted the storyline to include a subplot where Andy and Red fight Killer Klowns from the Sahara Desert in order to support the title. It'd suck, right?
Well, so does this "Bobby Loves Mangos."
2 out of 10. It'll keep you guessing til the end, but after that, you got nothing. Worse, you get negative points due to the "twist" ending."
The key to a good twist ending is that the ending allows everything to make sense. For instance, you can watch the end of "The Sixth Sense," and suddenly you realize why everyone behaves the way they do. Unfortunately, instead of allowing the story to make more sense hindsight, the "twist" ending in BLM refuses to stand up to any sort of scrutiny whatsoever.
But the greatest flaw in "Bobby Loves Mangos" is the fact that all reasonability seems to be sacrificed for the sake of a catchy title.
Spoilers:
The ending revelation that the title refers to is the fact that Bobby isn't allergic to mangos, even though the tape says that he is. Now, this sound like a relatively HUGE flaw in his father's plan, now doesn't this? I mean, assuming that they behave as normal and give Bobby a mango, his whole scam is blown wide open, and they send cops searching for him and the alternate route.
But wait. The plan works, because the idiotic secretary decides to conveniently buy out all the mangos, thus preventing them from ever proving the tape to be the fraud that it is. She does this because she doesn't want Bobby to get sick, like the tape says that he will. Even though, according to that same tape, Bobby getting sick is the only thing that'll save his life. And even though her plan doesn't even make sense, because in all seriousness, there shouldn't be only one fruit vendor in a given city.
Given how the story laid out, there was NO reason for the father to go out of his way to fabricate a story about mango allergies. The ONLY thing that such a fabrication could have done was prove him a fraud. If he needed an excuse of why Bobby was the sole survivor, he could have just insisted he fell off his bicycle or something.
Given how the story is laid out, there was NO reason to reveal that Bobby wasn't actually allergic. What did this actually add? The fact that we now know that the tape is a fake? Nope, Bobby has been kidnapped at that point, so we already know that. The fact that the Principal was a moron for falling for it? No, buying into time travel was what made him a moron, the mango allergy had nothing to do with it.
Seriously, you could take out all the mango references, and the father's plan would have worked just as well. The only thing lost would be the catchy title.
And therein lies the rub. Imagine if "The Shawshank Redemption" decided that "Killer Klowns from The Sahara Desert" would be a more catchy title, and they adjusted the storyline to include a subplot where Andy and Red fight Killer Klowns from the Sahara Desert in order to support the title. It'd suck, right?
Well, so does this "Bobby Loves Mangos."
2 out of 10. It'll keep you guessing til the end, but after that, you got nothing. Worse, you get negative points due to the "twist" ending."
Like A Really Lame Twilight Zone Rip-Off
Pixies_Saved_Me21 November 2001
Warning: Spoilers
Rating: 5/10
This is a severely over-rated short film. I suggest you go check it out before reading my review, which is loaded with SPOILERS!
This film starts off okay, with the principle of a school receiving a video cassette in the mail. The gentleman on the tape claims to be from the future, a student from the principle's school named Bobby who has somehow managed to send the videotape back in time. He does this to warn the principle that in the next few days a school bus heading towards Boston is going to careen off a bridge, killing all the students aboard. He himself was supposed to be on the bus but suffered an allergic reaction to mangos the night before. The "future-man" suggests that the bus take a different route and avoid the bridge altogether.
Obviously most anyone who received such a videotape would immediately dismiss it as a tasteless prank, or perhaps a veiled terrorism threat. At the least they'd be very, very skeptical. But the principle and his secretary accept the tape as legitimate with virtually no discussion whatsoever, the principle simply stating that the man in the tape had the same eyes as the student Bobby. Oookaay. The "future-man" shouldn't have been warning the principle of bridges, he should have been selling bridges: would have made a quick fortune off this idiot!
The film does generate a fair amount of interest as to how it will all play out. Is the tape really from the future? Will the bus avoid the bridge? And will Bobby eat them mangos? The problem is, there really isn't much suspense in this scenario. I pretty much just expected the principle to dismissively shrug "Yah it's probably just a hoax, but just to be safe I'll make sure the bus doesn't take the bridge-route". Not much suspense there, and even less so with the principle taking the tape seriously.
And when the big day does come, the principle asks the bus driver to avoid the bridge with all the conviction of someone asking a clerk to double-bag their groceries. Basically no conviction whatsoever. The bus driver all but rolls his eyes and says "Yah, what-the-hell-ever". You'd think since the life of every kid aboard the bus might be at stake that the principle would make this point with real force, but no, of course not. Why? Because obviously if the principle behaved in an even halfway realistic or intelligent manner, there'd be absolutely no suspense. None, zilch, zippo! But since he acts like a lobotomized buffoon, there's the slight suspence of wondering whether the bus driver will indeed avoid the bridge, and if not will the bus careen off of that bridge like the "future-man" said it would.
The ending is the real kicker though. Everything leading up to the ending really doesn't seem half so bad while you're watching it because you really don't know what will happen. That's definitely to the filmmaker's credit. But once the full stupidity of the ending hits you, that's when you realize just how really weak the entire film is.
Forget about the stupidity of the principle and his secretary ... the real mind-boggler is the man in the videotape. He turns out to be Bobby's father and kidnaps him off the school bus. Okay, so now what exactly was the point of the videotape? What exactly did it accomplish? To get the bus to take a different route than usual ... and how was this so instrumental in his kidnapping his son? Why would it have been so difficult to kidnap his son had the bus taken its normal route? Heck, why would it have been so difficult to kidnap his son whenever and wherever he felt like it, never mind specifically during this field trip and on this altered bus-route?
And of course all this depended on the principle acting like an idiot and not informing the police of the videotape. What a criminal genius that Bobby's father was, eh? Sheesh! Double, triple sheesh!!
This film had some decent acting and photography, and did generate interest in its outcome. But in the end the sheer stupidity of the plot brought all it crashing down like the flimsiest of house of cards! It's hard to believe how many glowing, beaming reviews this film has received....
This is a severely over-rated short film. I suggest you go check it out before reading my review, which is loaded with SPOILERS!
This film starts off okay, with the principle of a school receiving a video cassette in the mail. The gentleman on the tape claims to be from the future, a student from the principle's school named Bobby who has somehow managed to send the videotape back in time. He does this to warn the principle that in the next few days a school bus heading towards Boston is going to careen off a bridge, killing all the students aboard. He himself was supposed to be on the bus but suffered an allergic reaction to mangos the night before. The "future-man" suggests that the bus take a different route and avoid the bridge altogether.
Obviously most anyone who received such a videotape would immediately dismiss it as a tasteless prank, or perhaps a veiled terrorism threat. At the least they'd be very, very skeptical. But the principle and his secretary accept the tape as legitimate with virtually no discussion whatsoever, the principle simply stating that the man in the tape had the same eyes as the student Bobby. Oookaay. The "future-man" shouldn't have been warning the principle of bridges, he should have been selling bridges: would have made a quick fortune off this idiot!
The film does generate a fair amount of interest as to how it will all play out. Is the tape really from the future? Will the bus avoid the bridge? And will Bobby eat them mangos? The problem is, there really isn't much suspense in this scenario. I pretty much just expected the principle to dismissively shrug "Yah it's probably just a hoax, but just to be safe I'll make sure the bus doesn't take the bridge-route". Not much suspense there, and even less so with the principle taking the tape seriously.
And when the big day does come, the principle asks the bus driver to avoid the bridge with all the conviction of someone asking a clerk to double-bag their groceries. Basically no conviction whatsoever. The bus driver all but rolls his eyes and says "Yah, what-the-hell-ever". You'd think since the life of every kid aboard the bus might be at stake that the principle would make this point with real force, but no, of course not. Why? Because obviously if the principle behaved in an even halfway realistic or intelligent manner, there'd be absolutely no suspense. None, zilch, zippo! But since he acts like a lobotomized buffoon, there's the slight suspence of wondering whether the bus driver will indeed avoid the bridge, and if not will the bus careen off of that bridge like the "future-man" said it would.
The ending is the real kicker though. Everything leading up to the ending really doesn't seem half so bad while you're watching it because you really don't know what will happen. That's definitely to the filmmaker's credit. But once the full stupidity of the ending hits you, that's when you realize just how really weak the entire film is.
Forget about the stupidity of the principle and his secretary ... the real mind-boggler is the man in the videotape. He turns out to be Bobby's father and kidnaps him off the school bus. Okay, so now what exactly was the point of the videotape? What exactly did it accomplish? To get the bus to take a different route than usual ... and how was this so instrumental in his kidnapping his son? Why would it have been so difficult to kidnap his son had the bus taken its normal route? Heck, why would it have been so difficult to kidnap his son whenever and wherever he felt like it, never mind specifically during this field trip and on this altered bus-route?
And of course all this depended on the principle acting like an idiot and not informing the police of the videotape. What a criminal genius that Bobby's father was, eh? Sheesh! Double, triple sheesh!!
This film had some decent acting and photography, and did generate interest in its outcome. But in the end the sheer stupidity of the plot brought all it crashing down like the flimsiest of house of cards! It's hard to believe how many glowing, beaming reviews this film has received....
A great short film!
teulan12 November 2002
Wow, my friend Peter showed me this movie today, and I have to say I loved it. The part that really shines through is the writing, you can tell that it's a great script. The writing and directing are decent enough, but not stellar, for me, the story was really the hook. The ending completely threw me for a loop, too. Great movie and I'd defenitely look out for the writer to have a career in the future!
9.5/10
9.5/10
A cinematic break through!
nealpat1 April 1999
Bobby Loves Mangos is a cinematic materpiece. The screenwriter, Jeremy Catalino is able create all the necessary elements of a feature length movie in an incredible 20 minutes. How he is able to develop the characters in such a short amount of time is absolutely amazing. To even speak of what the movie is about gives away too much, one has to just watch the movie and prepare themselves for the ride of their lifetime. The film is difficult to classify, it has the elements of sci-fi, mystery, as well as a thriller.
Man oh Man, I was at the edge of my seat for 3/4 of this movie. I don't know who this Jeremy Catalino person is, but he is destined for greatness. I'm going to keep my eye on him.
Man oh Man, I was at the edge of my seat for 3/4 of this movie. I don't know who this Jeremy Catalino person is, but he is destined for greatness. I'm going to keep my eye on him.
plenty of realism here
dropo59tx8 October 2004
Bobby Loves Mangos strikes me as perfectly plausible if you consider the three main characters: the "inciting" character is a bit of a sociopath, the principal is a bit of a pompous idiot, and the secretary is a bit of a principal-worshiper (which feeds his pompousness). No, the film does not work at all if we assume that people are perfectly rational logical positivists 100% of the time.
It's a well-done vignette of the *Night Gallery* variety. It doesn't strike me as having feature-film potential because there's about 20 minutes worth of story here. You'd have to package it with other material, embed it somehow in a set of other stories, to make it a decent feature.
It's a well-done vignette of the *Night Gallery* variety. It doesn't strike me as having feature-film potential because there's about 20 minutes worth of story here. You'd have to package it with other material, embed it somehow in a set of other stories, to make it a decent feature.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
