Gigli
| . | . | . | . | . | . | . |
| Directed by | Martin Brest | |
|---|---|---|
| Release date | 1 August 2003 | |
| Runtime | 121 minutes | |
| RYM Rating | ||
| Ranked | #1,359 for 2003 | |
| Language | English | |
| Genres | ||
| Share |
|
|
ADVERTISEMENT
Rate/Catalog
Catalog
Review
To rate, slide your finger across the stars from left to right.
Cast
- Jennifer Lopez
Ricki - Ben Affleck
Larry Gigli - Justin Bartha
Brian - Christopher Walken
Det. Stanley Jacobellis - Al Pacino
Starkman - Melissa Lahlitah Crider
Robin - Lainie Kazan
Mother
9 Reviews
Worst Picture Decathlon: #7
I am in awe of this fucking movie - I actually can't believe this exists. Almost every piece of dialogue is unfathomably bad and cringy, and it may all culminate in the most hilariously awful thing I've ever laid witness to. I couldn't even imagine such a trainwreck exists if I tried; the acting, dialogue, fever dream-like cameos from Christopher Walken and Al Pacino, all adds up to an unbelievably horrible piece of cinema, but the absolute most amusing kind. Gobble gobble.
2/10
I am in awe of this fucking movie - I actually can't believe this exists. Almost every piece of dialogue is unfathomably bad and cringy, and it may all culminate in the most hilariously awful thing I've ever laid witness to. I couldn't even imagine such a trainwreck exists if I tried; the acting, dialogue, fever dream-like cameos from Christopher Walken and Al Pacino, all adds up to an unbelievably horrible piece of cinema, but the absolute most amusing kind. Gobble gobble.
2/10
Published
Yes, it's terrible, but is it the worst film I've ever seen? Not by a long shot. It might be the worst screenplay, though. It's seriously baffling with some of the weirdest stream-of-consciousness dialogue you'll ever hear. Christopher Walken and Al Pacino each show up for their own scene, both of which feel like some kind of staggeringly incomprehensible surrealist Lynchian parody. There's barely a plot. The film just talks at you for two hours and ends. It's crude, dumb, and boring. The most impressive thing is that they managed to spend $75 million on this crap.
Published
Gigli is a fascinating movie. Shot on a $75M budget by a previously successful director, it is an unqualified disaster that fully earns its laughable reputation - despite coming equipped with all the Hollywood gloss you'd expect from a major studio production: contemporary star actors, cameos by Academy Award winners, professional sound, editing and camerawork, plus prime filming locations in downtown Los Angeles. Manos: The Hands of Fate this is not. Where did they go wrong?
If I would teach film class, I would let my pupils scrutinize Gigli to answer that question. Since I don't teach film class, I will attempt a brief analysis myself.
Let's start with the most visible culprit: Bennifer. As in Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez, who both took handsome sums of money to secure Gigli's box office appeal, both coming off 2001 hit movies that reaffirmed them as bonafide A-listers. After Gigli mercilessly bombed, pop culture moved quickly to brand the flaming wreck as Bennifer's Folly: despite not having any chemistry as romantic leads, they fell in actual real-life love during the shooting, and inadvertantly triggered such a destructive, all-consuming media frenzy that nothing was left standing by the time they called off their wedding, 18 months later - including the movie that started it all. In recent interviews, both J-Lo and Ben have blamed the Bennifer hype for Gigli's failure, saying the movie never had a chance in the face of the hysteria surrounding their engagement. But is that really true?
It is true that everybody was fed up with Affleck and Lopez by the time Gigli was released. But it is equally true both Affleck and Lopez are terrible in Gigli. Affleck is extemely unlikable as the movie's namesake, a dumb, macho small-time crook, yelling endless inanities at anybody that crosses his path. He wears out his welcome in 5 minutes; at this point, we still have 115 minutes to go. Part of the problem is that his character is completely out of his range: ugly tattoos or not, Affleck doesn't look like a loser or a gangster, and he fails to infuse his empty bravado with the necessary comedy and tragedy to show there's a human under the posturing.
Lopez fares possibly even worse, portraying ice-cold lesbian assassin Ricki who is big on buddhism, yet gets flustered whenever something unexpected happens at Gigli's L.A. apartment we spend half the movie. (Yes - this $75M production is happy to stay put in one place, and with its lengthy dialogues often feels like an adaption of a bizarro Broadway play.) Make no mistake, despite her assassin credentials, Ricki isn't in the story to kill anybody: she is merely around to check on Ben, show her motherly instincts while simultaneously engaging in male fantasy lesbian cliches, only to ultimately fulfil her destiny: to fall in love with the still extremely unlikeable Larry Gigli, and ride off into the sunset with him, looking for "something real". Her character honestly seems comprised of disjointed Post-It notes, a dumping ground for the screenwriter's random, half-baked ideas.
Which bring us to the screenwriter of Gigli. Who also happens to be the producer of Gigli. Who also happens to be the director of Gigli. Martin Brest! Martin Brest?
Martin Brest did Scent of a Woman. Martin Brest did the original Beverly Hills Cop. Martin Brest was a respected man. Marin Brest also has been out of Hollywood since Gigli. Honestly, I can't blame Hollywood.
If somebody has to take the blame for Gigli's failure, it has to be Martin Brest. Brest, being director and screenwriter and reportedly securing final cut, had a lot of freedom here, and was apparently charming enough to get his four name-brand actors, their entourages and the studio execs to buy into his ideas. Which is where it gets baffling, because his ideas were so clearly ill-advised, it's hard to fathom everybody went along.
A movie can fail on many levels, but can be salvaged if it has a pulse. Gigli was dead on arrival because it fails at its very core - its story. Gigli is a film without a soul or an elevator pitch: there literally is nothing there, as the movie's official, increasingly desperate trailer so adequately proves. I am struggling to express how poor the screenplay for Gigli is: it starts nowhere, goes nowhere, and pads its running time with some of the worst, most disingenuous dialogues I've ever heard, a try-hard schoolboy's take on the Tarantino-Elmore Leonard style. Turkey time, anyone? To make it worse, Brest spins a startingly illogical, disjointed, implausible story, a leaky bucket of plot. It doesn't follow romcom logic, it doesn't follow crime logic, it doesn't follow David Lynch logic, Luis Bunuel logic or even Arnold Schwarzenegger logic. It is so, so awful, and the key to understand Gigli's legendary badness. (Although this still doesn't explain how the key players thought it was a good story. Agents, actors and studio execs read screenplays all the time, and usually have good instincts - how was this mess greenlighted?)
Wrapping up, one mystery remains: story disaster or not, how did they spend $75M on this? As noted, there is hardly any action; in fact, there is hardly any movement between locations, no stunts, no intellectual property to buy off, no special effects. $75M bought the studio 2 hours of Bennifer talking, Pacino and Walken dropping by, a bunch of extras on a beach, and that's it. Compare this to the sheer amount of stars, explosions, locations and CGI Con Air got out of its own $75M budget!
That's why I am happy that we have Gigli: a fascinating case study in utter trainwreckness. May it never get old.
If I would teach film class, I would let my pupils scrutinize Gigli to answer that question. Since I don't teach film class, I will attempt a brief analysis myself.
Let's start with the most visible culprit: Bennifer. As in Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez, who both took handsome sums of money to secure Gigli's box office appeal, both coming off 2001 hit movies that reaffirmed them as bonafide A-listers. After Gigli mercilessly bombed, pop culture moved quickly to brand the flaming wreck as Bennifer's Folly: despite not having any chemistry as romantic leads, they fell in actual real-life love during the shooting, and inadvertantly triggered such a destructive, all-consuming media frenzy that nothing was left standing by the time they called off their wedding, 18 months later - including the movie that started it all. In recent interviews, both J-Lo and Ben have blamed the Bennifer hype for Gigli's failure, saying the movie never had a chance in the face of the hysteria surrounding their engagement. But is that really true?
It is true that everybody was fed up with Affleck and Lopez by the time Gigli was released. But it is equally true both Affleck and Lopez are terrible in Gigli. Affleck is extemely unlikable as the movie's namesake, a dumb, macho small-time crook, yelling endless inanities at anybody that crosses his path. He wears out his welcome in 5 minutes; at this point, we still have 115 minutes to go. Part of the problem is that his character is completely out of his range: ugly tattoos or not, Affleck doesn't look like a loser or a gangster, and he fails to infuse his empty bravado with the necessary comedy and tragedy to show there's a human under the posturing.
Lopez fares possibly even worse, portraying ice-cold lesbian assassin Ricki who is big on buddhism, yet gets flustered whenever something unexpected happens at Gigli's L.A. apartment we spend half the movie. (Yes - this $75M production is happy to stay put in one place, and with its lengthy dialogues often feels like an adaption of a bizarro Broadway play.) Make no mistake, despite her assassin credentials, Ricki isn't in the story to kill anybody: she is merely around to check on Ben, show her motherly instincts while simultaneously engaging in male fantasy lesbian cliches, only to ultimately fulfil her destiny: to fall in love with the still extremely unlikeable Larry Gigli, and ride off into the sunset with him, looking for "something real". Her character honestly seems comprised of disjointed Post-It notes, a dumping ground for the screenwriter's random, half-baked ideas.
Which bring us to the screenwriter of Gigli. Who also happens to be the producer of Gigli. Who also happens to be the director of Gigli. Martin Brest! Martin Brest?
Martin Brest did Scent of a Woman. Martin Brest did the original Beverly Hills Cop. Martin Brest was a respected man. Marin Brest also has been out of Hollywood since Gigli. Honestly, I can't blame Hollywood.
If somebody has to take the blame for Gigli's failure, it has to be Martin Brest. Brest, being director and screenwriter and reportedly securing final cut, had a lot of freedom here, and was apparently charming enough to get his four name-brand actors, their entourages and the studio execs to buy into his ideas. Which is where it gets baffling, because his ideas were so clearly ill-advised, it's hard to fathom everybody went along.
A movie can fail on many levels, but can be salvaged if it has a pulse. Gigli was dead on arrival because it fails at its very core - its story. Gigli is a film without a soul or an elevator pitch: there literally is nothing there, as the movie's official, increasingly desperate trailer so adequately proves. I am struggling to express how poor the screenplay for Gigli is: it starts nowhere, goes nowhere, and pads its running time with some of the worst, most disingenuous dialogues I've ever heard, a try-hard schoolboy's take on the Tarantino-Elmore Leonard style. Turkey time, anyone? To make it worse, Brest spins a startingly illogical, disjointed, implausible story, a leaky bucket of plot. It doesn't follow romcom logic, it doesn't follow crime logic, it doesn't follow David Lynch logic, Luis Bunuel logic or even Arnold Schwarzenegger logic. It is so, so awful, and the key to understand Gigli's legendary badness. (Although this still doesn't explain how the key players thought it was a good story. Agents, actors and studio execs read screenplays all the time, and usually have good instincts - how was this mess greenlighted?)
Wrapping up, one mystery remains: story disaster or not, how did they spend $75M on this? As noted, there is hardly any action; in fact, there is hardly any movement between locations, no stunts, no intellectual property to buy off, no special effects. $75M bought the studio 2 hours of Bennifer talking, Pacino and Walken dropping by, a bunch of extras on a beach, and that's it. Compare this to the sheer amount of stars, explosions, locations and CGI Con Air got out of its own $75M budget!
That's why I am happy that we have Gigli: a fascinating case study in utter trainwreckness. May it never get old.
Published
Gigli is a light-hearted crime flick without much crime. It is also a romantic comedy without much romance or comedy. It is a character-driven movie with characters that are unconvincing and unlikable. It doesn't have a real plot, but still manages to have plot holes. It is... an enigma.
Well, not really. It all starts to make sense if you think of the entire movie as a flimsy excuse to put Lopez and Affleck on display. It's a movie created for the most celebrity-hungry, tasteless part of the demographic, and it accomplishes little beyond being a monument to (mostly) unresolved sexual tension and major studio greed.
Alright, that's not the whole truth either. I hear Gigli was supposed to be a "real" movie before the studios intervening, and you can tell it probably had promise at one point. Somewhere underneath the flabby, ubiquitous presence of the two pointless main leads there are a few nice things to appreciate. Side characters like Brian and Larry's mom are well acted, the dialogue can be delightfully bizarre and I guess the music isn't bad either. ...yeah.
Now, instead of just complaining about things, here is a part of the review that gives "helpful" advice! Top changes that would make Gigli a better movie, or at least less impactful on environment:
- Travel back in time and prevent Gigli from being re-written as a predictable romcom.
- If Gigli being a predictable romcom can't be helped, change the movie's leads to someone people can bear to watch for 2 hours, at least.
- If the casting of Lopez and Affleck can't be helped either, cut their salary by 68 million total to make the film break even at the box office instead of bombing tremendously.
--> Almost profit!
But in general you shouldn't be watching this, unless you're a bad movie aficionado.
Well, not really. It all starts to make sense if you think of the entire movie as a flimsy excuse to put Lopez and Affleck on display. It's a movie created for the most celebrity-hungry, tasteless part of the demographic, and it accomplishes little beyond being a monument to (mostly) unresolved sexual tension and major studio greed.
Alright, that's not the whole truth either. I hear Gigli was supposed to be a "real" movie before the studios intervening, and you can tell it probably had promise at one point. Somewhere underneath the flabby, ubiquitous presence of the two pointless main leads there are a few nice things to appreciate. Side characters like Brian and Larry's mom are well acted, the dialogue can be delightfully bizarre and I guess the music isn't bad either. ...yeah.
Now, instead of just complaining about things, here is a part of the review that gives "helpful" advice! Top changes that would make Gigli a better movie, or at least less impactful on environment:
- Travel back in time and prevent Gigli from being re-written as a predictable romcom.
- If Gigli being a predictable romcom can't be helped, change the movie's leads to someone people can bear to watch for 2 hours, at least.
- If the casting of Lopez and Affleck can't be helped either, cut their salary by 68 million total to make the film break even at the box office instead of bombing tremendously.
--> Almost profit!
But in general you shouldn't be watching this, unless you're a bad movie aficionado.
Published
What can you say about Gigli? When I think of the phrase 'box office bomb', I think of this. First of all, it cost $75m. How can you justify that amount of money on such an absolute shambles? More than that, where did the money actually go? An absolutely ridiculous amount of money, and it only earnt $7m. Not only has it been one of the most financially unsuccessful films ever made, it's also gone down as one of the worst. Was it really as bad as they say, or was it just a poor film that received a backlash due to the media exposure of the lead actors? I just had to watch it for myself.
I think I've concluded that it's a little bit of both. Looking back on it, it's even more cringeworthy than it was originally. The whole 'Bennifer' thing was laughable and they both seemed like fucking idiots. It amazes how people can have such a wide spread interest in two utterly bland, talentless and uninteresting celebrities but they did and thanks to that, this was born. Originally, the film was supposed to be different from what it ended up being. I think the studio thought it'd be a good idea to try and cash in on the romance of Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck, they must have thought they had a sure thing hit on their hands. It's the only explanation.
So, the plot. If you can call it that. A gangster Larry Gigli (Ben Affleck) is instructed to kidnap the brother of a powerful federal prosecutor to try and keep a mob-boss out of prison. He isn't trusted to carry out his job properly, so Ricki (Lopez) is brought in to oversee things. Now, the brother is mentally retarded, isn't that HILARIOUS?! There's a thousand laughs a minute with the silly man-child! It's the most miscast film I've ever seen. For one thing, the two characters are supposed to be a gangster and an assassin. Ben Affleck the gangster. Jennifer Lopez the assassin. Think about that for a minute. To add to it, Jennifer Lopez doesn't just play an assassin - she plays a lesbian assassin which leads to horrible sexist nonsense and you essentially have Chasing Amy PT 2 where obnoxious idiot Ben Affleck makes another lesbian fall in love with him.
The thing is, the lesbian thing isn't entirely true. Firstly, I just think she's a dick tease and secondly, she said that she's been with men before and that she's been with women before. She seems to like both, but prefers women. Her last sexual partner before Larry Gigli was a woman, and then it was of course Larry. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't she bi-sexual? But to be honest, I don't think character development, plot, rationale, subtlety, or anything important really matters with the filmmakers. The cliché one dimensional characters weren't even the worst thing about it, the worst thing has got to be the dialogue. As I was watching, I couldn't believe what I was hearing. I actually had to rewind a couple of times just to see if they actually said what I thought they said. I was cringing, I had my head in my hands. You know when you watch a horror film and you put your hand over your face, but still look through the gap in-between your fingers because even though you're scared, you want to know what happens? That was honestly what this was like. The dialogue was just amazing and having Ben Affleck act like a tough guy in that horrible accent while swearing obnoxiously was nauseating.
You know the scene where they're at that fast food place and the two main characters are sat, talking and there's a bunch of youths sat over from them who won't turn their music down? Instead of Larry going over, Ricki goes over to handle it. She tells them that there's a martial arts move that can gouge out the eyes and simultaneously destroy the visual cortex which would result in not only the victim losing their eye, but their memory as well. I kind of wish somebody would do that to me, then I wouldn't have to remember this awful, awful movie.
It's sexist, dull, dumb, cringeworthy, embarrassing, the acting was terrible, the dialogue was even worse. One of the most baffling and ill-judged films ever.
I think I've concluded that it's a little bit of both. Looking back on it, it's even more cringeworthy than it was originally. The whole 'Bennifer' thing was laughable and they both seemed like fucking idiots. It amazes how people can have such a wide spread interest in two utterly bland, talentless and uninteresting celebrities but they did and thanks to that, this was born. Originally, the film was supposed to be different from what it ended up being. I think the studio thought it'd be a good idea to try and cash in on the romance of Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck, they must have thought they had a sure thing hit on their hands. It's the only explanation.
So, the plot. If you can call it that. A gangster Larry Gigli (Ben Affleck) is instructed to kidnap the brother of a powerful federal prosecutor to try and keep a mob-boss out of prison. He isn't trusted to carry out his job properly, so Ricki (Lopez) is brought in to oversee things. Now, the brother is mentally retarded, isn't that HILARIOUS?! There's a thousand laughs a minute with the silly man-child! It's the most miscast film I've ever seen. For one thing, the two characters are supposed to be a gangster and an assassin. Ben Affleck the gangster. Jennifer Lopez the assassin. Think about that for a minute. To add to it, Jennifer Lopez doesn't just play an assassin - she plays a lesbian assassin which leads to horrible sexist nonsense and you essentially have Chasing Amy PT 2 where obnoxious idiot Ben Affleck makes another lesbian fall in love with him.
The thing is, the lesbian thing isn't entirely true. Firstly, I just think she's a dick tease and secondly, she said that she's been with men before and that she's been with women before. She seems to like both, but prefers women. Her last sexual partner before Larry Gigli was a woman, and then it was of course Larry. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't she bi-sexual? But to be honest, I don't think character development, plot, rationale, subtlety, or anything important really matters with the filmmakers. The cliché one dimensional characters weren't even the worst thing about it, the worst thing has got to be the dialogue. As I was watching, I couldn't believe what I was hearing. I actually had to rewind a couple of times just to see if they actually said what I thought they said. I was cringing, I had my head in my hands. You know when you watch a horror film and you put your hand over your face, but still look through the gap in-between your fingers because even though you're scared, you want to know what happens? That was honestly what this was like. The dialogue was just amazing and having Ben Affleck act like a tough guy in that horrible accent while swearing obnoxiously was nauseating.
You know the scene where they're at that fast food place and the two main characters are sat, talking and there's a bunch of youths sat over from them who won't turn their music down? Instead of Larry going over, Ricki goes over to handle it. She tells them that there's a martial arts move that can gouge out the eyes and simultaneously destroy the visual cortex which would result in not only the victim losing their eye, but their memory as well. I kind of wish somebody would do that to me, then I wouldn't have to remember this awful, awful movie.
It's sexist, dull, dumb, cringeworthy, embarrassing, the acting was terrible, the dialogue was even worse. One of the most baffling and ill-judged films ever.
Published
The final act stood out as bad but it's nothing I haven't seen before in poor movies. The movie seemed pointless though, was there even a storyline?
That said, I couldn't help but be a little disappointed - this was merely mediocre when I expected it to be much worse.
That said, I couldn't help but be a little disappointed - this was merely mediocre when I expected it to be much worse.
Published
Most bad movies are just exactly that, bad. Gigli comes dangerously close to being an entertaining bad movie. You could make an argument for this being enjoyable if you were having a few drinks with the right people. Pay particular attention to the dialogue, it is the kind that makes your jaw drop and your hand reaching for the remote so you can rewind and see if they really said what you thought they said.
Here's some useless bit of trivia for you: At the time of its release Gigli broke the record for the largest second weekend drop in box-office with an 81.9% drop.
I'm still not sure whether this might be one bad movie I'll recommend to people or not.
Here's some useless bit of trivia for you: At the time of its release Gigli broke the record for the largest second weekend drop in box-office with an 81.9% drop.
I'm still not sure whether this might be one bad movie I'll recommend to people or not.
Published
This movie is pretty bad. I don't think it deserved the kind of backlash that it received when it was released in '03, but since the world had gotten tired of hearing about 'Bennifer' in the tabloids, it was really inevitable. The casting was ridiculous (Ben Affleck as a gangster hitman? Jennifer Lopez as a lesbian assassin? Really?), the story was horrible (are we really supposed to believe that Ben Affleck made a lesbian fall in love with him? Again?), and this is easily the worst performance given by both actors, though it's hard to give a great performance when you're clearly not right for the role. Not even close to being a great movie, but I think it's also a far cry from being one of the worst. I at least got a little enjoyment out of Justin Bartha's performance, even if it seemed like a bad Rain Man impersonation.
Published
Votes are used to help determine the most interesting content on RYM.
Vote up content that is on-topic, within the rules/guidelines, and will likely stay relevant long-term.
Vote down content which breaks the rules.
Vote up content that is on-topic, within the rules/guidelines, and will likely stay relevant long-term.
Vote down content which breaks the rules.
Catalog
29 Mar 2024
25 Mar 2024
19 Mar 2024
17 Mar 2024
17 Mar 2024
13 Mar 2024
5 Mar 2024
27 Feb 2024
5 Feb 2024
4 Feb 2024
15 Jan 2024
14 Jan 2024
30 Dec 2023
19 Dec 2023
2 Nov 2023
| . | . | . | . | . | . | . |
Comments
29 Lists
Discussion
- What is your least favorite movie? Film Polls/Games
- Directors that quit the movies Film
- Defending a mediocre movie that everyone hates Film
- What's your favourite film in RYM's bottom 100? Film
- RYM's Least Favorite Film Project: 2003 Film Polls/Games
- Give me your ten favorite (#1 - 1000 bottom all-time) Film
- Career-ending films Film
- Anti-Canon: Bottom Films Rated by RYMers 2014 Film
- ick out the best and worst 0.5 star rated movies of the user above you Film
- Bottom Films as Voted by RYMers (There's a list now) Film
- RYM's lowest rated films Film
- Baker's Dozen - Film Edition Film Polls/Games
- The reason for inferiority of horror in comparison to drama Film
- Do I have to enter all the bad movies into the database? Film
Suggestions
- Loading...
Contributions
Log in to submit a correction or upload art for this film.
- Be respectful! All the community rules apply here.
- Keep your comments focused on the film. Don't post randomness/off-topic comments. Jokes are fine, but don't post tactless/inappropriate ones.
- Don't get in arguments with people here, or start long discussions. Use the boards for extended discussion.
- Don't use this space to complain about the average rating, chart position, genre voting, others' reviews or ratings, or errors on the page.
- Don't comment just to troll/provoke. Likewise, don't respond to trollish comments; just report them and ignore them.
- Any spoilers should be placed in spoiler tags as such: [spoiler](spoiler goes here)[/spoiler]
Note: Unlike reviews, comments are considered temporary and may be deleted/purged without notice.yeah, this is a film and a crime - giglin'