No. No. No.

Rating: 1/10 (22 December 2012)

Elaborate trash. Stylish arrogance. A film for people who have attention deficit disorder, at best. The nonsense of this film begins with a strangely cast Tom hanks mumbling in an incomprehensible accent about who can figure out what? While all of the many pointless events of this film are supposed to be connected, the only connection I can see in this film is how otherwise gifted actors, directors and producers can be tricked into working on this incomprehensible film. There used to be an art in complex films called "continuity"...and that is the first sacrifice of this film. It jumps from past to future to present, between actors and accents, between scenes and dialogue with such confusion that really the effort can only be described as absurd. Are people afraid to tell the truth now? That this film has such a high rating is very suspicious. Are the ratings made by the actors and their friends? Are the ratings here honest? I do not see how they could be, as this is a confusing, disjointed and really pathetic attempt at something that in itself makes no sense. There is not one character accompanied by a history or a sense of why we should care about them, where they come from or what they are doing. I can only imagine that people have allowed themselves to rate this film so highly rather than admit they were tricked out of their money into enduring what can only be described as torture. Hanks in particular is just horrible in this film.