The plot is one that has occured to all fighting couples - how do you prove who is right after the fact? The problem for the film is this involves going over the same dialogue many times leading to fatigue and a suspension of disbelief that anyones friends would put up with this. A game try and some good scenes - would make a good short film rather than a feature length one.
20 Reviews
let's do it again
ferguson-64 September 2020
Greetings again from the darkness. Couples argue. Some more often and more boisterous than others. Things get ugly when friends and other outsiders are drawn into the arguments, which is exactly what we witness (in exaggerated form) with this film from director Robert Schwartzman and writer Zac Stanford (THE CHUMSCRUBBER, 2005). Schwartzman is also a musician and composer, and is the son of ROCKY actress Talia Shire, and the younger brother of actor Jason Schwartzman (MOONRISE KINGDOM, 2012).
Lisa (Emma Bell, A QUIET PASSION, 2016) has just finished her first acting gig (other than a cameo in her husband's film) in a stage production of Mozart. Her husband Jack (Dan Fogler, FANTASTIC BEASTS AND WHERE TO FIND THEM) is simultaneously happy for her and insecure. His insecurity stems from his lack of success as a writer, and his suspicion, bordering on jealousy, of Lisa and her co-star Paul (Tyler James Williams, "Everybody Hates Chris"). The film picks up at the intimate after-party at Lisa and Jack's home. It's here where we meet Paul and his friend Trina (Cleopatra Coleman, "The Last Man on Earth"), and married couple Brett (Danny Pudi, "Community") and Sarah (Maggie Q, "Nikita"). Brett is Jack's literary agent, and he's about as successful as an agent as Jack is as a writer. Sarah is an Entertainment Lawyer, who is as bored with the party as she was with Lisa's play ... she just wants to go home and sleep.
The party ends abruptly when Jack and Lisa get into a fierce argument. Alone in the house, neither accepts the blame, so of course, it escalates. The unconventional solution reached is to recreate the sequence of events with the same people saying and doing the same things they said and did that first night. Then they do it again. And again. A montage of do-overs causes us to lose track of just how many times these poor people re-live a forgettable and unpleasant evening.
A tonal shift occurs when Jack "casts" the party with actors, while still inviting the same friends to watch. Rather than exaggerated relationship issues, we get an exaggerated look at actors finding their characters ... characters who happen to be sitting in the same room! This jolt of fresh faces transforms the film from quirky to slapstick, and it's quite likely you'll enjoy one segment more than the others. The "new" actors bring their own comedic style to the roles: an amped up Mark Ryder ("Borgia") as Jack, actor-within-an-actor Nathan Stewart-Jarrett ("Misfits") as Paul, a subdued Karan Brar (DIARY OF A WIMPY KID) as Brett, a willing Charlotte McKinney (FANTASY ISLAND) as Lisa, and Marielle Scott (LADY BIRD) as Trina.
The do-overs are a creative approach in attempting to solve the argument, but this movie is at its best, not in deep psychological analysis of relationships, but rather in the simple comedy elements on display. Relax and take it for what it is ... a way to laugh at the problems of others without feeling an ounce of guilt. Just please don't throw the pie.
Lisa (Emma Bell, A QUIET PASSION, 2016) has just finished her first acting gig (other than a cameo in her husband's film) in a stage production of Mozart. Her husband Jack (Dan Fogler, FANTASTIC BEASTS AND WHERE TO FIND THEM) is simultaneously happy for her and insecure. His insecurity stems from his lack of success as a writer, and his suspicion, bordering on jealousy, of Lisa and her co-star Paul (Tyler James Williams, "Everybody Hates Chris"). The film picks up at the intimate after-party at Lisa and Jack's home. It's here where we meet Paul and his friend Trina (Cleopatra Coleman, "The Last Man on Earth"), and married couple Brett (Danny Pudi, "Community") and Sarah (Maggie Q, "Nikita"). Brett is Jack's literary agent, and he's about as successful as an agent as Jack is as a writer. Sarah is an Entertainment Lawyer, who is as bored with the party as she was with Lisa's play ... she just wants to go home and sleep.
The party ends abruptly when Jack and Lisa get into a fierce argument. Alone in the house, neither accepts the blame, so of course, it escalates. The unconventional solution reached is to recreate the sequence of events with the same people saying and doing the same things they said and did that first night. Then they do it again. And again. A montage of do-overs causes us to lose track of just how many times these poor people re-live a forgettable and unpleasant evening.
A tonal shift occurs when Jack "casts" the party with actors, while still inviting the same friends to watch. Rather than exaggerated relationship issues, we get an exaggerated look at actors finding their characters ... characters who happen to be sitting in the same room! This jolt of fresh faces transforms the film from quirky to slapstick, and it's quite likely you'll enjoy one segment more than the others. The "new" actors bring their own comedic style to the roles: an amped up Mark Ryder ("Borgia") as Jack, actor-within-an-actor Nathan Stewart-Jarrett ("Misfits") as Paul, a subdued Karan Brar (DIARY OF A WIMPY KID) as Brett, a willing Charlotte McKinney (FANTASY ISLAND) as Lisa, and Marielle Scott (LADY BIRD) as Trina.
The do-overs are a creative approach in attempting to solve the argument, but this movie is at its best, not in deep psychological analysis of relationships, but rather in the simple comedy elements on display. Relax and take it for what it is ... a way to laugh at the problems of others without feeling an ounce of guilt. Just please don't throw the pie.
It's Decent ,entertaining enough ,Repetitive You have to suspend Belief
JonnyEB5 April 2021
A couple have an argument & basically force their friends ( more Like work Acquaintances) to relive the night that lead up to the Argument over & over (Groundhog Day ish) but less unfolding
It's a perfect set up for a play & indie Film because it only requires one or two locations an Interesting wacky premise. Great cast all fun people to watch and very well put together Hollywood quality ,some awkwardly funny bits.
You do have to suspend your belief quite a bit though Because for a group of friends let alone (Acquaintances) to willingly relive a horrible & awkward night even once just feels highly unlikely.
When they reenact the night the 1st time there's only one voice of reason Early on and it takes a bit long for the friends to realise something's up .I think if they had shortened that bit and and made the characters a little more aware/ responsive to the game being played quicker & cut out 10-15 mins overall and Get to the scene when the actors came in quicker. It would have been pretty perfect.
Still an enjoyable and entertaining enough movie if you know what you're going into.
It's a perfect set up for a play & indie Film because it only requires one or two locations an Interesting wacky premise. Great cast all fun people to watch and very well put together Hollywood quality ,some awkwardly funny bits.
You do have to suspend your belief quite a bit though Because for a group of friends let alone (Acquaintances) to willingly relive a horrible & awkward night even once just feels highly unlikely.
When they reenact the night the 1st time there's only one voice of reason Early on and it takes a bit long for the friends to realise something's up .I think if they had shortened that bit and and made the characters a little more aware/ responsive to the game being played quicker & cut out 10-15 mins overall and Get to the scene when the actors came in quicker. It would have been pretty perfect.
Still an enjoyable and entertaining enough movie if you know what you're going into.
Could Have Been Good
chaitanyamaheshwari28 October 2020
This movie has a lot of likeable things, but still collapses on itself. The writing is really inconsistent and has a lot of ups and downs throughout the runtime. The movie starts off good, but then some scenes become too dragged and humour becomes pretty forced at times. Instead of quirky, somehow in the middle, the writing shifts to being absurd and then gradually moves to quirky again. Fogler, Pudi, Coleman have done good, but it's Maggi Q who really stands out. This movie had some potential, but crashed.
The actors are trying their best
bclark-451433 January 2021
When I see a movie like this I need to think, "SOMEbody besides the writer thought this was worth raising money for." Doesn't work as comedy, satire, irony - you name it. Most of the actors are trying SO hard but this should not earn a spot on their demo reel. I seem to have a policy of watching movies all the way through no matter what, but "The Argument" may make me revisit this decision.
Interesting premise, poor execution
TheTruthofItIs29 September 2020
This is a pretty awful attempt, largely because it's written by a full-time colorist new to writing, ugh, and the director is new to directing, coming from soundtracks, so this is why we're all disappointed. Anyone raving with 8/9/10 ratings are studio shills. You'll be leaning on the FF button alot during this self-indulgent time-trap. Avoid if you value your time.
Can't get into the story
Gordon-115 September 2020
I wouldn't if I were you
ritera127 March 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Cocktail party with 3 young couples. Likable enough. Supposed sexual tension between a man and a woman who are not together. Vague "insult" that is never resolved.
Then they want to re-create the night over and over to reveal who is right or wrong, when it was nonsense to begin with.
Massive amount of overacting to a critical level I don't think I've ever seen before. Could have worked but YIKES!
Then they want to re-create the night over and over to reveal who is right or wrong, when it was nonsense to begin with.
Massive amount of overacting to a critical level I don't think I've ever seen before. Could have worked but YIKES!
i think they were attempting a Woody Allen movie.....
burnor-13 October 2020
I had a boring day and i watched this through. It was like a Woody Allen movie in that it had a weird and different premise. But no one in this movie was able pull it off. Cleopatra Coleman was the only actor that was making anything work in it. Also later when the actors came it became slightly entertaining. Really was a waist of time to bother with this. I don't understand where it got the good reviews. Know what go ahead spend some money and watch..go for it.
Stick With It but not sure it completely works.
LLgoatJ9 September 2020
I am not really sure this works as a film. It really is a stage play, an old fashioned farce. The ending reinforces this.
The film is about a couple who have a few friends (possibly nearer to work colleagues) round for a mini party and have a minor argument. To decide who is right and wrong they decide to replay the evening over again. Then again and again and again.... Eventually they hire actors to recreate the evening so they can witness it from a distance.
It sounds like a great set up but I just didn't think it really was successfully carried out. It does genuinely get funny when they get the actors involved and worth watching alone for that section of the film.
Overall though it just felt quite a strange film to watch and that I should be sitting in a theatre watching. I felt it really lost something as a film but can't put my finger on it. It was well acted just not quite right.
From the 1970s there was a stage show called Abigail's Party which is along the same lines and was turned into a one off tv show that it reminded me off for not feeling right.
Overall I would give it a go and stick with it as once the actors get involved it is genuinely funny.
The film is about a couple who have a few friends (possibly nearer to work colleagues) round for a mini party and have a minor argument. To decide who is right and wrong they decide to replay the evening over again. Then again and again and again.... Eventually they hire actors to recreate the evening so they can witness it from a distance.
It sounds like a great set up but I just didn't think it really was successfully carried out. It does genuinely get funny when they get the actors involved and worth watching alone for that section of the film.
Overall though it just felt quite a strange film to watch and that I should be sitting in a theatre watching. I felt it really lost something as a film but can't put my finger on it. It was well acted just not quite right.
From the 1970s there was a stage show called Abigail's Party which is along the same lines and was turned into a one off tv show that it reminded me off for not feeling right.
Overall I would give it a go and stick with it as once the actors get involved it is genuinely funny.
2nd half better than first
iainmcleod_8003 February 2021
When other people started playing the main characters, that was funny. Thats what it should have been - Maggie Q plays the Australian, who plays the actress, who plays Maggie Q etc. Exaggerating each other. Cause the 1st half was boring
Surprising second half
orcanimal4 September 2020
It starts of solid, nothing immanently great but better than the regular drab, although it often does feel a bit obvious and trying to hard.
However, as the second half of the movie arrives, drastic and unexpected changes occur that really elevate the movie by several good notches.
Starts off only ok, but becomes really good by the end. Worth the watch 100%.
"Then can we stop. Because I don't want to argue."
BandSAboutMovies6 September 2020
Warning: Spoilers
"Then can we stop. Because I don't want to argue."
"I don't want to argue either, honey. As long as you can admit I'm right."
I've been digging' Dan Fogler ever since he first came to widespread notice as the plastic surgeon-foil (specializing in breasts, as only Dan Fogler can) to Dan Cook's romance-cursed dentist in Good Luck Chuck. Then there's his memorable work in Balls of Fury with Christopher Walken (!) and the Star Wars-homage Fanboys. And, of course, his most recent work in the Fantastic Beasts franchise.
His latest film . . . well, from my perspective, is a Miramax and Fox Searchlight homage to those 90s-halcyon days of driving to an outside-of-the-big-city six-plex with a screen or two dedicated to those indie comedies starring the likes of Steve Buscemi and Catherine Keener in Walking and Talking, Johnny Suede, and Living in Oblivion, or seeing John Turturro with Griffin Dunne in Search and Destroy-and always walking out of the theatre satisfied. (One of those indie-delights was 2005's The Chumscrubber, written by The Argument's screenwriter, Zach Stanford.)
Of course, with the dual onslaughts of bat-viruses and digital streaming, a great, laugh out loud film such as The Argument, sadly, doesn't have a '90s chance in hell of becoming an indie cult classic in theatres. And the streaming universe of today is a tough marketplace for a movie to shine through for discovery.
Hopefully, this review on this little puff of the cloud will alter the clogged, digital tributaries of fate for this, the third directing effort from musician Robert Schwartzman (you've heard his songs on TV's The O.C., One Tree Hill, and Pretty Little Liars), whose initial forays into directing produced the under-the-streaming radar indie-award winners Dreamland (2016) and The Unicorn (2018).
The cast of The Argument: Dan Fogler, Danny Pudi and Maggie Q; courtesy of Gravitas Ventures. It's almost a disservice to Schwartzman's skills as a director to mention his Hollywood pedigree, for a filmmaker's work should always stand tall on its own merits-of which The Argument has many. But with so many streaming choices vying for our coin-and taking into an account the purpose of a film review is to inspire you to see the film-we'll have to cheat a little bit and tell you that Schwartzman's name is familiar because his brother Jason is an actor you know well. And his mother is Talia Shire. And his Uncle is Francis Ford Coppola. His cousin in Nicolas Cage (Arsenal)* and his ex-cousin-in-law is Spike Jonze (Adaptation).
The Argument-the one where Jack is always right, is a pseudo-meta narrative commenting on the romantic repetition of relationships that turns the concept of there's always three sides to a story: "your side, their side . . . and the truth" on its head.
Jack is a "genius" playwright and screenwriter with a middling successful, "repetitive" zombie tale on his resume (it did okay overseas), scratching n' begging for his next gig. Lisa (Emma Bell of AMC-TV's The Walking Dead), his three-years live-in, actress-girlfriend, has finally broken out of the endless cycle of background work, student films, and infomericals with a well-reviewed role in a local stage production of Amadeus. And, to the immature chagrin of Jack: she's a little bit too chummy with her "Mozart." Why? Because, well, he's a genius writer, after all: he's her "Mozart" (but, in reality, he's a "Salieri").
Jack's insecurities and Lisa's ego (after one successful community theatre role, she pirouetting-grand entrancing across rooms) bursts across the living room of their L.A. bungalow as they hold a cocktail party with their friends (Maggie Q of the Divergent franchise, Live Free Die Hard, ABC-TV Designated Survivor, along with Danny Pudi of Star Trek Beyond, and a mature Tyler James Williams from Everybody Hates Chris) to celebrate the play's success. And the party ends. And their friends leave. But the argument doesn't end.
So, in a non-mystical "Groundhog Day" of their own making-a day where Jack is never wrong-they invite their friends over for another dinner party, under the guise of Jack apologizing for his behavior. But in reality: Jack and Lisa want to recreate the night to see where it went wrong-and who was wrong: Jack or Lisa. And Jack's obsession for resolution bleeds over into his writing (the best part of the movie; the supporting cast of "actors" own their duality) where he holds a mock-casting (via Craigslist) and auditions actors in a cold read of a never-to-be-produced play based on "The Argument"-the one where Jack was "right."
- Lisa and Jack discovering common ground
I've been digging' Dan Fogler ever since he first came to widespread notice as the plastic surgeon-foil (specializing in breasts, as only Dan Fogler can) to Dan Cook's romance-cursed dentist in Good Luck Chuck. Then there's his memorable work in Balls of Fury with Christopher Walken (!) and the Star Wars-homage Fanboys. And, of course, his most recent work in the Fantastic Beasts franchise.
His latest film . . . well, from my perspective, is a Miramax and Fox Searchlight homage to those 90s-halcyon days of driving to an outside-of-the-big-city six-plex with a screen or two dedicated to those indie comedies starring the likes of Steve Buscemi and Catherine Keener in Walking and Talking, Johnny Suede, and Living in Oblivion, or seeing John Turturro with Griffin Dunne in Search and Destroy-and always walking out of the theatre satisfied. (One of those indie-delights was 2005's The Chumscrubber, written by The Argument's screenwriter, Zach Stanford.)
Of course, with the dual onslaughts of bat-viruses and digital streaming, a great, laugh out loud film such as The Argument, sadly, doesn't have a '90s chance in hell of becoming an indie cult classic in theatres. And the streaming universe of today is a tough marketplace for a movie to shine through for discovery.
Hopefully, this review on this little puff of the cloud will alter the clogged, digital tributaries of fate for this, the third directing effort from musician Robert Schwartzman (you've heard his songs on TV's The O.C., One Tree Hill, and Pretty Little Liars), whose initial forays into directing produced the under-the-streaming radar indie-award winners Dreamland (2016) and The Unicorn (2018).
The cast of The Argument: Dan Fogler, Danny Pudi and Maggie Q; courtesy of Gravitas Ventures. It's almost a disservice to Schwartzman's skills as a director to mention his Hollywood pedigree, for a filmmaker's work should always stand tall on its own merits-of which The Argument has many. But with so many streaming choices vying for our coin-and taking into an account the purpose of a film review is to inspire you to see the film-we'll have to cheat a little bit and tell you that Schwartzman's name is familiar because his brother Jason is an actor you know well. And his mother is Talia Shire. And his Uncle is Francis Ford Coppola. His cousin in Nicolas Cage (Arsenal)* and his ex-cousin-in-law is Spike Jonze (Adaptation).
The Argument-the one where Jack is always right, is a pseudo-meta narrative commenting on the romantic repetition of relationships that turns the concept of there's always three sides to a story: "your side, their side . . . and the truth" on its head.
Jack is a "genius" playwright and screenwriter with a middling successful, "repetitive" zombie tale on his resume (it did okay overseas), scratching n' begging for his next gig. Lisa (Emma Bell of AMC-TV's The Walking Dead), his three-years live-in, actress-girlfriend, has finally broken out of the endless cycle of background work, student films, and infomericals with a well-reviewed role in a local stage production of Amadeus. And, to the immature chagrin of Jack: she's a little bit too chummy with her "Mozart." Why? Because, well, he's a genius writer, after all: he's her "Mozart" (but, in reality, he's a "Salieri").
Jack's insecurities and Lisa's ego (after one successful community theatre role, she pirouetting-grand entrancing across rooms) bursts across the living room of their L.A. bungalow as they hold a cocktail party with their friends (Maggie Q of the Divergent franchise, Live Free Die Hard, ABC-TV Designated Survivor, along with Danny Pudi of Star Trek Beyond, and a mature Tyler James Williams from Everybody Hates Chris) to celebrate the play's success. And the party ends. And their friends leave. But the argument doesn't end.
So, in a non-mystical "Groundhog Day" of their own making-a day where Jack is never wrong-they invite their friends over for another dinner party, under the guise of Jack apologizing for his behavior. But in reality: Jack and Lisa want to recreate the night to see where it went wrong-and who was wrong: Jack or Lisa. And Jack's obsession for resolution bleeds over into his writing (the best part of the movie; the supporting cast of "actors" own their duality) where he holds a mock-casting (via Craigslist) and auditions actors in a cold read of a never-to-be-produced play based on "The Argument"-the one where Jack was "right."
Worst movie ever!
kppzhxkg3 July 2022
Being smart doesn't means being good- Avoidable
XzingLawliet13 June 2021
Sometimes someone gets a smart idea and decides to make a movie out of it, but then lacks the substance to fill out the whole picture.
Pseudo-smarts would say, "No, it is a smart take." "Not everyone's cup of tea."
I'll tell you what it is- BORING. Patting urself on the back about how smart the movie is, yes we can see through the flexing.
Update: They've deleted several Google reviews including mine who didn't like the movie.
Pseudo-smarts would say, "No, it is a smart take." "Not everyone's cup of tea."
I'll tell you what it is- BORING. Patting urself on the back about how smart the movie is, yes we can see through the flexing.
Update: They've deleted several Google reviews including mine who didn't like the movie.
l-o-l
majorbonobo5 September 2020
It starts a bit slow setting the premise of the argument, one a bit nasty, but around the 30 minute mark, the laughs get going with the psychodramatic re-enactments. Later, before the 1 hour mark, it gets demented crazy hilarious. Wait for it. Sarah the Sock deserves an award. The dead doth trot on our common humanity!
Smart and witty and laugh out loud funny as it progresses
mixta-435329 September 2020
Smart & funny, great ensemble cast. Disagree with those who say it starts too slow. It paces as it should, starting reasonably normal and accelerating into zaniness, with a nice minor twist near the end. Enjoyed it enough to watch it again, a rarity!
Loved it, had me laughing the whole time
rcsasst18 January 2021
Well crafted film, original & and absurd, fun & creative, challenging to pull off a feature in one location like this but I forgot I hadn't left the house!!
Well acted, all around great work. A must see if you like comedy's that are straight down the middle. Act 3 is on another level. Looks really nice too!!
RH88
Well acted, all around great work. A must see if you like comedy's that are straight down the middle. Act 3 is on another level. Looks really nice too!!
RH88
Great Movie!
vendor-0206914 January 2021
Witty one liners
jvinyard-0420812 December 2020
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
