TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Ava-Grace Willis Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

K2nsl3r Beat Takeshi's Glory to the Filmmaker, in the first instance, is difficult to rate. Its merits are clear, but its failures are even more striking. It is second in his supposed trilogy of self-critical, self-reflective, self-mocking metamovies. Having given up on his increasingly mainstream audiences (the accolade he received after Zatoichi), Beat Takeshi is trying to bring the "Beat" back into the mix. It remains an open question whether his methods are to be applauded or lamented. Here, in this film, Kitano widens the schism between himself, the auteur, and the movie-going audiences, by techniques of alienation that are borderline sado-masochistic. The salvaging fact is the comedy of the film, which shows Kitano's long-standing background as a comic. He has shown this side of his psyche only very rarely in his films. So, I am torn between appreciating the light-hearted spirit of the film and castigating, as I should, its heavy-handed pacing and direction.But let's look back for a moment... The film that started off this self-reflective trilogy two years ago, Takeshis', I really enjoyed (especially after repeated viewings), because it culminated his career up to that point. This current film does not achieve, or even try to achieve, anything of the sort. It does not reflect back as much as make fun of any sense of history and continuity. It is a meta-movie, a non-movie, a post-movie... and, underneath it all, a series of quirky scenes, gags and fragmentary ideas. The humour of the film is its driving force, making it closer to his comedy Getting Any (1995) than anything he's done before or since. But one has to wade through a pool of dragging nonsense to get to those tasty bits, for which reason I cannot recommend this film as a comedy.At parts, I found the film pretentious, self-righteous and uninvolving. In a word, it's too self-conscious to be a comedy. During some other scenes I was completely at loss of words (whether because of the film's absurdity, incoherence or its complete disregard for the audience), to the degree that I simply decided I would postpone my judgment for some other day... Well, that "other day" is today, but I still can't make up my mind... The movie disarms the viewer, but it does not live up to much, either. It's like an extended foreplay.All in all, one has to appreciate Kitano's vision and uniqueness, but this film works best as a meta-statement of the art of movie making and not so well as a comedy, a drama or anything else. Most viewers will probably find it to be, rightly or wrongly, an irredeemable piece of trash.I kinda liked it. It's not good enough to classify as Dada, but it's just a notch above kitsch.

Chung Mo It's a question how much of an impression that Monty Python made in Japan overall but it certainly seems to be an influence on Kitano's latest work. Certainly Terry Gilliam's signature title graphics for Life of Brian and Meaning of Life are alluded to in this film.The film starts as the narrator gives an account on how Kitano's newest film is coming along. Since Kitano is uncomfortable with the genres of Romance and family drama, these films are abandoned and he is given some action fare to work with. The results are less than satisfactory so it's decided to have Kitano direct an asteroid on collision with earth film. This takes us about 45 minutes into the real film and at this point things get very strange. A mother and daughter (the mother has a giraffe doll on her back and the daughter has a goose puppet on one arm) decide to not pay for a bowl of noodles by dropping a cockroach (that they carry around for just an occasion) into the food and complaining to the chef. But before they can complain, a bunch of professional wrestlers at another table complain about roaches in their food. The two chefs come out and beat up the wrestlers. Kitano plays an assistant to a weird chairman of a society that's devoted to performing odd acts of charity. The chairman's son looks a lot like the Mr. Gumby character from Monty Python.Kitano speaks very little in this film. Mostly he is silent and immobile much like the metal doll that stands in for him during the fight sequences. Once we get into the second half, he loosens up especially during his pantomime comedy bits. The film seems like it's a statement about being an aging film maker in the Japanese entertainment world. Unfortunately, for me the pacing was very slow at times and could have had a good 10 minutes cut out without losing any content. I laughed at some of the film but by the end I was wondering if the film was just Kitano screwing around with ideas.I enjoyed watching this film but I have a had time recommending it to anyone but Kitano fans.

doug-697 This is a satire of the movie industry from the perspective of Japanese actor/director Takeshi Kitano.I am no expert on humour in Japan, but this movie seemed to be a satire written for a society without much of a history of satire. The humour is very, often excruciatingly, broad. As just one example, there's a restaurant scene in which two women are trying to get a free meal by planting a cockroach, however they witness another patron being violently beat up by two huge waiters which changes their minds. The fight goes on far too long and is more violent than funny. The exact same idea was used by Chaplin in his film The Immigrant, however, Chaplin's version was far more sophisticated and subtle. And it was made in 1917!By no means do I feel this is a bad movie, but the humour reminded me of the way Milton Berle would get laughs on his TV show in the 50s by dressing up as a woman. And it had that same nascent feel that Berle had when he was creating the first comedy for TV. As if this movie is an experiment and part of a learning process. I saw the movie at the Toronto Film Festival and I admit there were people in the audience who laughed throughout. To be fair, there are scenes that are very funny by any standards. For example, the karate school scene is quite good. And I think you could enjoy it just to get a perspective on Japanese culture. Kitano is making a serious attempt at creating satire and it could be enjoyed for that attempt. But don't expect Dr. Strangelove.

bruce_files_3 Takeshi's gang hit again. And its a good one. But I am a fan, so don't consider much my opinion. Just keep in mind about this film that if not anything else, it will expand your mind about what is cinema today. That doesn't mean that everything is fresh or striking in those two hours, nor that there is a serious possibility that you will like it, if you ain't a "Kitano-fan"! Then again, Mr. Kitano has stopped making films for the audience or the critics (whatever that means). And the results only his fans can appreciate it. All the rest, better go back and revisit his previous films. Then, you too, will want to shout,"Kantoku...Banzai!!!",indeed!!!!!