Featured Audience Ratings

• Universal D

  
  First, the truth: this film put me to sleep 4, count 'em, 4 times of trying to watch it (but it was good sleep). Ahh, but the 5th's time the charm wherein I made it through to discover this overlong conversation between two distinctly different types of lives about their… More
  First, the truth: this film put me to sleep 4, count 'em, 4 times of trying to watch it (but it was good sleep). Ahh, but the 5th's time the charm wherein I made it through to discover this overlong conversation between two distinctly different types of lives about their differences wasn't too awful after all. The first part, less conversation than monologue, will have you snoozing comfortably once you get the drift ("... the life of an adventurer/vagabond ... its the only way to live!!"). Only when Shawn stops merely listening and opens up his can of psuedo-intellectual whoop ass (" I don't think you have to go to Mt.Everest to have a meaningful experience, I think you could do it right in the local cigar store if you were meaning to!") does the thing catch fire.

• Jim H

  
  Two men talk about the proper way to live. I am having trouble deciphering whether I didn't like this film because of how much I disagreed with Andre, who has free reign over most the screen time, or because the film, through Wally's eventual conversion, seems to support… More
  Two men talk about the proper way to live. I am having trouble deciphering whether I didn't like this film because of how much I disagreed with Andre, who has free reign over most the screen time, or because the film, through Wally's eventual conversion, seems to support Andre's views, or because it was poorly made. I think a little of all of the above is the best answer. Andre's pseudo-Buddhist sensibility suggests that "just being" leads to not living in cocoons which he contends is what most people do. Of course, there is some merit to this view, but from all we know about Andre's life, it's hard to believe that he practices all he preaches. After all, this is a man who has traveled to India, Poland, and a few other places I can't specifically remember; he speaks longingly of a kind of "christening" in Poland, during which he was blindfolded, stripped naked, and nearly buried alive. And he's arguing for asceticism. It's like a whore arguing for chastity. One of Wally's rare moments of protest features him suggesting that one might do well to achieve things, do shit. And Wally's protest is weak because he fails to suggest that the cocoons they think people are living in couldn't be caused by a lack of ambition rather than a lack of "being." As a film, it would have been better served by balancing the conversation. This is a monologue by Andre, not so much a conversation. Although I disagree with Andre, I can see some valid points to his argument, and those points - indeed the subject as a whole - would have been better served by fully examining the contrary. I think only after we hear the full argument can we make an informed decision. Overall, <i>My Dinner with Andre</i> is an admirable idea - I'd love to see more films so simply built, just two people talking about philosophy - but Andre's dominance of the conversation is just as over-whelming as the content of this speeches.

• Pierluigi P

  
  Brilliant dialectical piece. So simple and yet so transcendental.

• Lanning :

  
  One huge star for Wally Shawn. He earns it--and I mean EARNS it--not for his acting ability--although I love him as an actor--but for sitting there and patiently and politely listening to the interminable droning of Andre. The prototypical "dinner from hell."

• Daniel D

  
  My Dinner with Andre was a film that has previously caught my eye because dialogue in my mind is the most stand out part of a film in personal experiences. But this helped me realize on the contrary of what I thought it can't make a film. Don't get me wrong, I did enjoy this… More
  My Dinner with Andre was a film that has previously caught my eye because dialogue in my mind is the most stand out part of a film in personal experiences. But this helped me realize on the contrary of what I thought it can't make a film. Don't get me wrong, I did enjoy this film well enough, but it didn't meet my expectations. Just like in a real conversation I missed large chunks of the dialogue, and was zoning out. Despite the screenplay covering interesting talking points, with no music or anything it wasn't always enough. The acting was magnificent, using their real names in the film Wallace Shawn and Andre Gregory seemed always genuine and like real people imperfect. Wally felt like someone coming out of a Seinfeld episode, in look and in talk. Andre is a movie character I would like to have a meal with, but it seems I already did. I do like the courage Malle had at attempting such an idea, it's almost ludicrous. It's not pure entertainment, but it's his most enjoyable film I've seen.

• Alec B

  
  For a movie where two men do nothing but sit around and talk, its pretty engaging, mostly because the writing is so strong. Its rare that a director just lets the actors and the words drive a film, so I give Louis Malle an enormous amount of credit for just allowing the characters to… More
  For a movie where two men do nothing but sit around and talk, its pretty engaging, mostly because the writing is so strong. Its rare that a director just lets the actors and the words drive a film, so I give Louis Malle an enormous amount of credit for just allowing the characters to talk and not try to be stylistic.

• Kyle M

  
  Wonderful little film. Utterly unique.

• Alex H

  
  An engaging and intellectually stimulating piece of filmmaking. One of my personal favorite films of all time.

• Bill C

  
  Their conversation centers around how most people wander through life (Shawn) blindly or "dead" as opposed to Andre who has wondered the earth to enrich-en his connection with his life, family and overall existence. "It's inconceivable" that I had not… More
  Their conversation centers around how most people wander through life (Shawn) blindly or "dead" as opposed to Andre who has wondered the earth to enrich-en his connection with his life, family and overall existence. "It's inconceivable" that I had not watched this before 2011. Wallace Shawn (Vizzini from Princess Bride) is the audiences access to the conversation with Andre Gregory. The conversations pacing is excellent. It runs widely off course in the beginning and slows and beautifully in the end. Not really a film for someone who does not lead an examined life. I think most people under 25 will not really enjoy it. It is really more for people who wish the could rekindle their childhood/teen ambition/dreams.

• Anastasia B

  
  A film about truth, art, theatre, reality, human relationships, and a bunch of other subjects, but basically a film about awareness. Awareness of the person as a human being, awareness of the artist, as a cretive force that changes and shapes our perception of reality- all those… More
  A film about truth, art, theatre, reality, human relationships, and a bunch of other subjects, but basically a film about awareness. Awareness of the person as a human being, awareness of the artist, as a cretive force that changes and shapes our perception of reality- all those difficult subjects that are hard to define, here are treated easily, without effort, just as the going to a casual dinner with an old friend. But we all know that dinner with an old friend is never simple. In this case we hear about Andre and his mental problems beforehand, so every crazy story he shares with us in the beginning, almost doesn't make sense, until the film wraps up. It takes a bit of patience, to grasp the meaning, as he shares all the details of a mad "awakening"session with Grotowski's group in a Polish forest, but it's never dull. After all, to find the meaning, one has to look from outside, outside reality, in this case. All those acting exercises, they are surreal. Don't even get me started on direction. Louis Malle uses every detail carefully, uses the body language of the actors and the mirrors in the room, even the coming and going of the waiter, as a valued comment that propels the story. I feel sorry for people who don't get Louis Malle, because they are just missing too much. Anyone who's wondering how could a director make a film about two people talking that lasts two hours (without them ever leaving the table), and not be boring... well you should really see this. It's never boring. You just have to get the point everytime, and everytime they go on telling another story, follow the thread. In the end you might as well discover, what evades anyone, from time to time: meaning.

• Tom S

  
  A great dialogue movie. I love that Wallace Shawn couldn't quite make it through the script without saying "inconcievable."

Read all 11 featured audience ratings