A guy's weepie -- if you're into "this kind" of movie. Unfortunately I'm not. (And how did this ever get 38,000 votes??!!)

Rating: Null/10 (30 July 2004)

First off let me say that I am not particularly fond of this sort of film. I feel that it has been done over and over and over again, since the major success of the formula with this film. We've seen THE EMPEROR'S CLUB, MONA LISA SMILE, SCHOOL OF ROCK, SISTER ACT, and many other rip-offs (some good, most poor) that fail to establish the warmth of this one.
That's the problem -- DEAD POETS SOCIETY is all gooey; all warmth. It's well-made, and I can certainly understand why some might love it. But for me it's a bit too controlling and sentimental. Most of the characters are cliches. I had a hard time "getting into" the movie, and once I did, I'll admit that it became interesting -- but it's not gripping at all. It takes focus.
Which is a good thing I suppose. I'm a fan of gentle, soft epics -- but this one is sugar-coated a bit too thick. It comes across as utterly unconvincing and, at times, yes, even annoying.
For some reason most comedians feel they need to prove to the world that they can act. With Robin Williams, the problem is that he's not a particularly great actor, mainly because every time we hear him speak we're reminded of his early days as a comedian. There's something generally funny about the guy.
I love GOOD WILL HUNTING but have a hard time taking him seriously most of the time. Every time he opens his mouth I feel like I'm supposed to laugh or something. Him playing a serial killer in INSOMNIA is admirable, but at the same time, rather laughable. He's just not the sort of guy who would have ever gotten a career through acting -- even his voice sounds comedic, and when he tries to play serious characters, he has a hard time controlling himself (see this for proof -- he's constantly acting like a hyper-active man-child).
So...the acting is great and Williams DOES give a good performance, but I have a hard time taking him seriously. Peter Weir is a great director but essentially I just feel he layered this one a bit too thick with controlling, contrived sentimentality.
It's a shame.
NOTE: I am in no way suggesting that you will not like this movie, and am not bashing it. Don't feel the need to send me hate letters -- I recommend this film to anyone who thinks they might enjoy it. However, if you "know" it's not your sort of movie, chances are you WON'T like it. I liked it, but didn't love it, and had a hard time focusing most of the time, mainly because I felt distanced from what was happening.
I was watching it with a girl who said, "This is such a guy's movie," and left the room in disgust. Ironically I was just thinking the opposite -- "this is such a 'chick flick'."
So I got to thinking...if this is a film targeted towards guys -- which it obviously is (it covers all ground of male trials and tribulations)...then why is it so damned "gooey"?
And as a final reflection...how on earth did this get 38,000 votes from IMDb users? I understand that it's a famous film, regarded as a well-made "classic" of its genre...but honestly I thought I'd see about 17,000 - 21,000 votes. 38,000 votes is close to the amount THE LORD OF THE RINGS: RETURN OF THE KING had last time I checked. THE TERMINATOR is only 12,000 ahead, and between the two, which do YOU see referenced more in pop culture?
Anyway...this is a poor review, so don't send me any hate mail -- I already know...
Great acting only makes this worth recommending.