For Your Consideration (2006) User Reviews

a fantastic satire on acting and acting schools - the gurus and the disciples

[sbmill-1 · 7/10 · 16 May 2007]

I'm also surprised by some of the negative commentary around 'For your Consideration'. The satire seemed to me to be to be quite precise - particularly in its analysis of the average actor's life - which is a lot more like "For Your Consideration" or Ricky Gervais's brilliant "The Extras" than anything you're likely to see on Entertainment Tonight that is for sure.

Having studied method acting over several years (a long time ago), and having worked as an extra at different low points in my life (never ever again), I have to say that I laughed till I cried. Without giving the ending away,Marilyn Hacke's closing scene is so on the money - what a cracker!

Acting, actor training and film are all open to exploitation of the gullible because so many people are desperate to be part of it; consequently it's an area ripe for satire. For me, this was more on the money than "Waiting for Guffman" although I enjoyed that too. For your consideration has sharper edges. I think it's great that Ricky Gervais performs in this film. Gervaise is such an 'English' comic whilst Guest's sensibilities are very American - but in the shared fascination with human idiosyncracies, banalities and foibles, they both create a very contemporary form of the comedy of manners.

Another Christopher Guest comedy for your consideration.

[lewiskendell · 6/10 · 28 March 2011]

Another amusing Christopher Guest mockumentary, this time set in Hollywood and targeting the hoopla and absurdity surrounding the Oscar's and promise of a nomination. 

It took me a little while to warm up to this one, but eventually I got into it and it had some pretty funny moments. It is really quite clever in places, and it's probably not that much of a stretch that a small movie and those involved could be swept up in the rumors of possible Academy Awards in such an extreme manner. 

The usual Guest regulars are all here, and so is his particular sense of humor that you either get, or you don't. It's a safe bet that you'll probably like For Your Consideration about as much as you liked other Guest movies like Best in Show. Manage your expectations accordingly.

I Liked It, In Spite of the Negative Reviews It Received

[Danusha_Goska · 7/10 · 24 February 2008]

I don't have much to say about "For Your Consideration," except that I liked it, in spite of the negative reviews it received, and I wanted to say that here in case other viewers, like me, put off viewing it because the reviews put us off.

"For Your Consideration" is a small, brief (86 minutes), sweet, funny movie. It's not as laugh-out-loud funny as "Best in Show" (few movies are) but I liked it better than "Mighty Wind," which I also liked.

Christopher Guest's usual crew is in its usual fine form. Catherine O'Hara is funny in a whole new way, with at least one scene that is quite poignant and unforgettable, at least to struggling artists. John Michael Higgins does a very funny William H. Macy-like character. Jane Lynch is dead-on as an "Entertainment Tonight" style tabloid "journalist."

I even liked the ventriloquist Nina Conti -- and I normally run from the room when a ventriloquist comes on.

For Your Consideration - A Disappointment

[mouschieinstein · 25 November 2006]

The thing most Christopher Guest movies have going for them is their humanity. I always could believe the universe the characters were operating in, and their realism (see the dog owners in Best in Show or the small town citizens of Waiting for Guffman). That humanity transcended the satire and made the movies both hysterical and moving. FYC completely lost the humanity that drives these films. Almost all of the characters were not believable. In this instance Guest's improvisational technique failed him as the actors were all over the top, playing too much to the satire. Only two actors seemed in touch with their characters - Parker Posey (who we really saw too little of to understand her) and the great Catherine O'Hara, who sold both the aging actor she was portraying and the Jewish mother in the film within the film.

Guest & Levy hit a snag: their penchant for delicious comedy seems diminished here. Time for a new comic formula?

[roland-104 · 7/10 · 18 November 2006]

Sooner or later, it was bound to happen. In an impressive string of wonderful mockumentary farces over the past few years, guiding lights Christopher Guest and Eugene Levy, and their brilliant comedic acting ensemble, have joyfully savaged the self-important cultural "worlds" of small town amateur theater ("Waiting for Guffman"), dog shows ("Best in Show") and folk music ("A Mighty Wind").

But a winning formula can't go on forever unchanged, nor should we expect it to. Inevitably, the group have hit a bump in the road with their latest film, "For Your Consideration," a send-up of Hollywood movie making and the assorted vanities of movie makers. Not that it's bad. But compared to those earlier works, it isn't inspired; it doesn't grab you with its efforts to lampoon; and the performances of the actors - always uniformly of a high caliber in most of their movies – is highly variable in this new movie. Perhaps the theme hits too close to home: it's hard to gain the distance necessary to properly ridicule your own ethos, your own cultural world. Or maybe it's just that the recipe Guest and Levy have used to such delightful advantage has just gotten old, for viewers and for Guest's company.

The plot, for what it's worth, concerns a film within a film: the making of a new movie, the ethnically freighted "Home for Purim," which is later rewritten and retitled "Home for Thanksgiving" to broaden its commercial box office appeal. All the stereotypes one expects are on hand: the avaricious executive producers; the harried director; the screenwriters, pained by the incremental decimation of their work; the aging stars in decline; the young up and comings; the vain chase after that holiest of grails: an Oscar, the hangers on – the parasitic, disingenuous talent agent, talk show hosts, film critics and entertainment reporters. They're all here.

Parker Posey (young actress possibly on the way up), Catherine O'Hara ((veteran actress on the way out), Jennifer Coolidge (ditzy producer), and Eugene Levy (actors' agent) provide decent turns but none of these superb talents gives a truly inspired performance here. Harry Shearer is better as a long-suffering actor who is glad enough just to star in a feature film after years of making commercials, Oscar or no Oscar. But the comedic scene stealers in this movie are three pairs of actors who play off each other to wonderful effect: Fred Willard and Jane Lynch as a TV entertainment reporting duo, Bob Balaban and Michael McKean as the beleaguered screenwriters, and Don Lake and Michael Hitchcock as Siskel-Ebert style TV critics. There are several competent cameo contributors as well, the best of whom is Carrie Aizley, a movie journalist.

This is decent fare, but I think Guest and Levy need to re-imagine their formula for successful farce. I never thought the day would come when I would regard a comedy written by David Mamet as superior to work by Guest & Levy, but here's a tip: if you want to see a good send-up of movie making, try Mamet's 2000 film, "State and Main." My grades: 6.5/10 (low B) (Seen on 11/15/06)

For Your Consideration

[cultfilmfan · 6/10 · 25 November 2006]

For Your Consideration is a film within a film. The story focuses on a film crew making a drama called Home For Purim. After three of the main stars of the film find out that they could be nominated for Oscars for their performances in the film their worlds turn completely around and soon they are getting tons of media coverage and are preparing for the big day. The film is a satire of Hollywood and the entertainment industry. For Your Consideration is from director and co-writer Christopher Guest who has given us such great films as Waiting For Guffman, Best In Show, A Mighty Wind and he also co-wrote the cult classic This Is Spinal Tap. After being a fan of his works and all the films I just mentioned, I must admit that I was very disappointed with this movie. For one thing it never really made me laugh. There were one or two jokes that made me laugh a little, but for the most part I found the humour to be too flat and all of the jokes were not that funny or as witty as they should be. The film lacks the brilliant satire and a lot of the great improvising and dialog that usually make the Christopher Guest movies great. The acting was pretty good at times in this movie, but at other times I felt sometimes that the cast kind of overplayed their parts and got to the point where the characters didn't become believable anymore and at times even though they were overplayed they managed to become kind of boring. This film just did not work for me and for the whole I think most Guest fans will be disappointed by this film seeing as it lacks all the humour and wit of his earlier movies. This wasn't a terrible movie by any means, but it did not work for me and after awhile I just stopped caring about this film.

Heart-wrenchingly disappointing

[colberino · 6/10 · 22 November 2006]

I'm a gigantic "Waiting for Guffman" fan. I also really liked "Best In Show." I thought "A Mighty Wind," while not great, was creative and tender. I saw "For Your Consideration" today and while there were funny moments peppered throughout, the film comes off as half-baked. I sat there until the last credit rolled trying to like this film, and couldn't.

I appreciate that so many actors have joined up with Guest to be in his movies, but there are now so many Guest "regulars" that there is barely any character development. "A Mighty Wind" tried to remedy this by giving each character one big quirk. "Consideration" seems to use this tactic sparingly... both a blessing and a curse. What I miss is the intimacy of "Guffman," where we got to know 5-6 characters very well. "Consideration" comes off less as an ensemble cast, and more as a long string of cameos.

Catherine O'Hara gives a brilliant, nuanced performance~ I wish we had gotten to know more about her character.

*Definitely spoilers here!* As other reviewers have pointed out, "Consideration" has a very similar ending to "Guffman." But whereas the ending of "Guffman" is somewhat bemusing (Corky talking about his shop), I thought the ending of "Consideration" was cruel, predictable, and saddening.

Movies with real bad actors aren't fun to watch; strangely, neither are movies with fake bad actors

[matt-newkirk · 6/10 · 20 February 2007]

I'm one of Christopher Guest's biggest fans, having LOVED Spinal Tap, A Mighty Wind, Best in Show, Waiting for Guffman...but the things that made each of those movies so wonderful -- quirky characters sharing their lives with the camera -- seem to be absent here. The cast of Home for Purim, the film within the film, is not very good. They're not supposed to be. The story is melodramatic and the actors find themselves believing themselves to be better than they are. Unfortunately for us, the characters just aren't fun to watch. It's something like Lisa Kudrow's short-lived show, The Comeback. You watch several characters over-hype themselves with over-expectations and it's just an unfortunate train wreck.

That being said, the actors in FYC are terrific. Each one brings their character home. The story told is also possibly a story worth telling, but it has too much of the "Oh." panache from the British version of The Office and not enough of the laugh-out-loud moments.

I can't wait to see Mr. Guest's future films (not to mention look up some of his back catalog!), as well as each of the great cast: Catherine O'Hara, Parker Posey, Eugene Levy, Harry Shearer, and everyone else. I just wish that this film made me laugh more.

A Sublime Comedy - Guest with a Twist

[alliecat_1982 · 10/10 · 27 September 2006]

There is something both enchanting and disorienting about watching a Christopher Guest film that features conventional camera angles and a narrative structure. It is a brave, and ultimately, a rewarding choice for a director who has built his impeccable reputation on the strength of his mockumentaries.

Like its predecessors Waiting for Guffman, Best in Show, and A Mighty Wind, For Your Consideration is largely improvised, and reunites the same winning cast. Gone, however, are several of the conventions of Guest's previous films. For Your Consideration avoids the need to give every last character an extended 'interview' segment and instead weaves minor characters naturally into the fabric of the story. The narrative structure also prevents Guest from relying too heavily on cuts to b-roll sight gags that, while funny, are never more than gags. By challenging himself to tell this story in the absence of these and other mockumentary techniques, Guest is allowed to focus instead on scenes that show how his characters really respond to one another in the moment.

Half the fun of course is waiting for all the familiar faces to show up, and discovering what crazy character they have inhabited this time around. All the usual suspects are back in For Your Consideration, playing a colourful array of Hollywood types. Insecurities, foibles - and just a few quirks - are in full display.

Jennifer Coolidge is a brilliantly clueless producer, and Eugene Levy has a nice turn as a somewhat smarmy agent who has no faith whatsoever in his client (Harry Shearer's Victor Ann Miller). Guest himself is hilarious playing director Jay Berman, and one only wishes that we got to see more of his rehearsals with the actors, as these are some of the funniest scenes in the film. Mike McKean and Bob Balaban are a fun team as the cowriters of Home for Purim, the movie-within-the-movie. Making his first appearance in a Guest film, Ricky Gervais grabs perhaps the biggest laugh of all with a line that I won't spoil here. And while Fred Willard and Jane Lynch are dealt very broad characters, their send-up of Access Hollywood is laugh-out-loud funny, and provides the perfect vehicle for Willard's boorish shtick.

John Michael Higgins is in amazing form as Corey Taft, sporting surreal philosophies on actors and life that outdo even his colour-worshipping character from A Mighty Wind. And the doe-eyed and endlessly endearing Christopher Moynihan tosses off several absolute gems in response to the inanity going on around him. Much like his character in the film, he's likely to go unnoticed in favour of some flashier performances, but deserves accolades of his own. He and Parker Posey have a sweet, unrehearsed chemistry playing actors in puppy love.

While it is impossible to give due screen time to all of the troupe's mainstays, some deserved better. Jim Piddock is dealt a potentially juicier part than he's had in the past, as the irritable AD who is all too aware that he's surrounded by idiots. But his screen time is far too short to let it amount to much, and fans wanting to see him play against type are better advised to check out his brilliant performance in See This Movie. Meanwhile, Ed Begley Jr. is hideously miscast as the film's token flamboyant gay man. Furthermore, having such recognizable actors as Claire Forlani and particularly Sandra Oh show up for bit parts in For Your Consideration is more distracting than anything, and breaks the illusion of the self-contained world that worked so nicely in Guest's previous efforts.

Despite all of the comedic talent on display however, this is Catherine O'Hara's show, and she more than delivers in her role as fading screen star Marilyn Hack. Her insecurities, dreams, and vulnerabilities are handled with such poignancy and humour that O'Hara fully deserves whatever accolades may come her way in the months to come. She is luminous.

If For Your Consideration comes up a little short, it is in the story department. The outline devised by Guest and Levy suffers somewhat from a lack of focus. If, as Guest insists, this film is not intended as a satire of Hollywood but is rather the tragicomic tale of what happens to someone when they are told that they deserve an award, we should be spending less time on all the Hollywood in-jokes and parodies, and more time with the characters themselves.

We don't learn quite enough about our main characters – those portrayed by Catherine O'Hara, Harry Shearer, and Parker Posey – to really understand how monumental it is for them to be caught up in the Oscar hype. We see that, professionally, they desperately need the break. But we get no perspective on how this effects their personal lives, or changes the way that they relate to the people closest to them. Where are their families? Their friends? They don't seem to have any. And if that was the point in and of itself, it wasn't brought across clearly enough.

Whatever the film's shortcomings, it is the smaller details that are purely Guest which make this film a triumph and future classic: Guest's perfect intonation as he instructs one actor to deliver his line as though "Mommy is going… now?", Jennifer Coolidge jumping in at the absolute perfect moment with "But what about me!?" in the midst of a heated argument that has nothing to do with her, or the sight of Harry Shearer suddenly wearing Rachael Harris' hat to help him get into character. These are the small moments that give Guest's works the rare distinction of being films that get progressively funnier with each viewing.

My hope for the next Guest film is that it continues to stretch the troupe in the way that these last two films have done. Ideally, we'll see an improvised, narrative comedy with some heart, all the expected hilarity… and a little more plot structure. Until then, here it is, for your consideration

For Your Reconsideration

[kmoore91 · 7/10 · 26 November 2006]

A fair amount of people have expressed disappointment with FYC. I think it has to do more with people expecting the usual mockumentary rather than the actual quality of the movie. FYC is more a spoof (conventionally filmed and scripted) than a mockumentary (free-wheeling and improvised) of the Hollywood awards engine. The only problem I had with the film was that it didn't have or say anything that we haven't seen before. There have been lots of movies and TV shows that have tread these same waters. Ironically, Ricky Gervais-who plays one of the "suits" who insists on making "Home for Purim" more appealing to a wider audience, stars in "Extras", a cable show that mocks/spoofs the very same show biz artifice! "30 Rock" and "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" are current examples of the genre that rips on network programs. So, FYC IS a good movie-just don't go in expecting what you are used to from Team Guest.

This just doesn't cut it as a Guest film

[Movie_Muse_Reviews · 4/10 · 19 December 2007]

Christopher Guest has quite the resume and reputation for his quirky, awkward satirical mockumentaries, but "For Your Consideration" simply doesn't measure up with the rest.

It's hard not to judge "Consideration" by its predecessors such as "Best in Show" and "A Mighty Wind." With the same cast, the same satirical (though not full out mockumentary) style, it simply asks for that and it doesn't succeed the way those movies do.

The premise of "Consideration" is on the set of a movie (a ridiculous) movie and the overblown Oscar hype that the film gets. The film contains everyone from the actors to the producer in the cast, as well as a couple Hollywood-focused TV show hosts. The characters are still quirky and amusing in a subtle way, yet something is off. Their depth and the interest in what is happening to them is non-existent and it makes it harder to laugh at the them in the long run and considering characters tend to drive Guest's films, that makes it tough from the get-go.

The plot is simply not as intriguing as well. This perhaps lies in the fact that the focus is not on something obscure like dog shows or traveling folk musicians, but instead on basic Hollywood, which offers less genuine interest in subject alone. Compound that with the weak characters and you have a huge Guest disappointment.

Another Classic By Guest

[4goldners · 9/10 · 24 November 2006]

I'm surprised by the number of negative reviews here for what I thought was in many ways Christopher Guest's most developed movie yet. Granted, you either like his movies or not, but as someone who loved Waiting for Guffman, Best in Show and Mighty Wind equally, I was in no way disappointed by For Your Consideration.

Maybe some of the humor here is easier to appreciate if you're Jewish, but that can't account for more than 5% of the jokes, and all of the actors were great. Particular kudos to O'Hara (as usual), Shearer, Lynch and Posey. The ET/Charlie Rose/Ebert & Roeper spoofs were hilarious and dead-on. The ending of the movie was truer than that of his previous films, and the ever expanding cast of Guest players made the viewing experience more fun than in the past (Sandra Oh, Ricky Gervais etc.).

My theory is that it's hard to approach a new Christopher Guest movie without justifiably expecting a lot, and great expectations often lead to disappointment. I was anxious to see For Your Consideration, but found it to be rewarding, very funny, and a little more poignant than usual (a good thing). Give it a chance and it'll grow on you.

Really isn't funny enough

[JoeytheBrit · 6/10 · 8 April 2008]

After scoring a number of successes with his mockumentary style, Christopher Guest strays slightly from his trusted formula to relate a tale of a bunch of disillusioned mediocrities dreaming of better things as they ply their trade. The problem with this one though is that it's probably a little too close to home for comfort. While the film pokes fun at these people, it also pokes fun at their aspirations, as if it is laughing down at them and wants us to join in which leaves a bitter aftertaste that isn't particularly pleasant.

Guest's big stumbling block is that, for his Oscar buzz strand to work, the actors in the film within a film have to be reasonably good so, in order to provide himself with a comedy backdrop, he has no choice but to make the film itself a joke that would never get green-lighted in the real world. The plight of the screenwriter, forced to compromise his vision in order to see his work reach the screen is touched upon, but the Comic Strip bunch did it better back in the 80s with their Hollywoodisation of the British coal miners' strike. There's also just a little too much familiarity about characters such as the clueless director, the agent who avoids his clients unless they're doing well, and the interfering movie executive.

While the entire cast are terrific it's probably the hard-working Fred Willard who steals the show as a slightly insane presenter of a cheesy TV movie show. The others have to work too hard against this aura of pathetic-ness in which Guest has dipped them to garner many laughs, and as a result it all comes across as a little too subdued.

Disappointing

[billwalko-1 · 3/10 · 5 April 2008]

"Waiting for Guffman" was a little bit of genius. "Best in Show" and "Mighty Wind" expanded on the same concept: focusing on a sub-culture of people who take their little world entirely too seriously. Unfortunately, "For Your Consideration" lacks the subtle satire of Guest's recent efforts.

The beauty of the previous films was the bubble-world of the cast. The assumption of the viewer is, outside this microcosm, exists the "real world." That illusion is broken in "Consideration," with its all-too-broad send up of "Entertainment Tonight," "Wake Up L.A." and similar shows. It would have been funnier if the Oscar buzz was a complete construct WITHIN the set of "Purim", and then later, the realization there was no Oscar buzz at all.

The humor wasn't as sharp as previous efforts. For example, the handful of characters that were unfamiliar with the internet ... that didn't ring true. Worst of all, there's a cruelty toward the characters in "For Your Consideration" that didn't sit well with me. All in all, a disappointment.

Fans missed out on the central, mean-spirited "in joke" here

[lor_ · 17 February 2010]

Having just searched through 137 IMDb comments (whew!) of Guest's film I was quite surprised that nobody noticed the central in-joke at work here, one that spoiled an otherwise mildly amusing effort for me. I guess you have to be a film industry insider, or at least have a working knowledge of film history, to analyze these seemingly transparent recent movies, and everyone struck out.

The central character, played so winningly by Catherine O'Hara, is obviously based on a real-life actress and her Oscar campaign. The real Hollywood actors, namely the typical Academy members who make up the Oscar voting population that selects the nominees annually, will instantly recognize who I'm referring to, even though those intrepid IMDb addicts dropped the ball. The answer is plainly Sally Kirkland, a talented character actress who indeed was nominated for best actress in 1987 for her performance in the indie film ANNA. I knew Sally quite well at the time, and she was completely sincere in the campaign she launched, unsuccessfully, to try and win the coveted Oscar, losing out to Cher for MOONSTRUCK that year. Her campaigning predated what has become merely customary, as the Weinsteins later perfected the art of actively manipulating Academy voters to get annual nominations and wins for their various Miramax (subsequently TWC) films, right up through somehow managing a Penelope Cruz nom for "Nine".

Sally's large breast implants are an easy target for O'Hara here, with Willard's funny line about her décolletage after interviewing her post-Oscar snub: "Now I've seen the Grand Canyon". For the uninitiated, if you click on Sally's IMDb page you will see how her face in the '80s/'90s closely resembles the look O'Hara captured in her impressive bit of "frozen visage" acting of the final reels of Guest's satire. I shudder to think of how Nicole Kidman, Jessica Lange and Meg Ryan will fare as potential future targets of the merciless Guest/O'Hara team.

We all know from numerous lectures by the latter-day greats like Steve Martin that "comedy isn't pretty". But I was disappointed at Guest and company taking potshots at Ms. Kirkland. She is a sincere artist and while everyone in the entertainment world is out there available for ridicule I was taken aback by the somewhat underhanded, infra dig lampooning here. Knowing Sally I'm sure she took it in her stride when FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION was released, but no one likes to be mocked. Even masochists would prefer some old-fashioned corporal punishment to being humiliated in front of their peers.

As an aside, I admire the talent of these comedy geniuses, including Levy and Guest. But I think a telling anecdote of an incident I witnessed long ago shows that many of them have feet of clay. As a film critic I was attending the press screening for about 50 people at Magno on Times Square in NYC in 1980 for the new film THE FIRST DEADLY SIN, starring Frank Sinatra and Faye Dunaway. The film when released soon after was not successful with critics or audiences and proved to be Frank's final big-screen role, in fact his only movie role after 1970. There is an etiquette at press screenings, but not just critics are invited. Sitting near me was Harry Shearer (a key member of Guest's stock company, and of course immortal from his THIS IS SPINAL TAP participation), whom I recognized immediately from his Saturday NIGHT LIVE appearances plus a friend who I couldn't place. Starting a few minutes into the Sinatra film, which was a gritty, NYC-set thriller, the two of them launched into a series of catcalls and shout-out jokey remarks at the expense of the movie that would have made the yet-to-be-invented stars of MYSTERY SCIENCE THEATRE 3000 proud, or fit well within the current drag queen-led mocking of movies that goes on weekly at my local Chelsea cinema. I even shushed them (!) to no avail. This uncouth behavior stuck with me, and always made me wonder about the sincerity of comics at the level of talent, which I readily concede, of a Shearer, or a Second City denizen. I know contemporary comedians famously study people they see on the street, subway, etc. in ordinary life to build material, but the disrespectful attitude of Shearer & bud toward Sinatra, Dunaway and their earnest (if not at the top of their game) movie collaborators appalled me no end. It's not surprising that poor Faye met a similar fate the following year with the release of MOMMIE DEAREST, which stands as perhaps the most-ridiculed and campy of modern Hollywood releases.

Weak in Comparison to Guest's Other Films

[snazel · 6/10 · 13 December 2007]

"Home for Purim" has some delicious moments, but for the most part, this is one of the weaker efforts by Christopher Guest and Eugene Levy.

The best part of the movie for me is the farcical parody of "Entertainment Tonight", played by Willard and Jane Lynch. All the superficial aspects of that rotten television show are mocked; including the ridiculous editing and camera angles, the mean-spirited banter, the fake tans, plastic faces, cheesy music and empty-headed hosts. The entire package is gloriously torn apart. Indeed, had the movie just been a mockumentary of one of these types of shows, it might have delivered more punch.

The movie falls flat in my opinion as it reaches the third act. The big punch at the end can be seen a mile away, and then movie kind of fizzles and dies. Indeed when the closing credits roll, it doesn't even feel like a legitimate ending. There are numerous loose ends that are never completed or visited and many characters fall out of the movie entirely, without explanation or resolution.

It seems to me the script needed just a little more polish. If it had gone through or two more revisions, it could have produced a very special movie. Instead the movie has some terrific moments, some laugh-out-loud scenes, but as a whole doesn't really deliver.

Still, I enjoy the cast, and I enjoy the humor and I will look forward to Guest's next offering.

A runner up.

[rmax304823 · 6/10 · 23 October 2007]

I haven't seen all of Christopher Guest's parodies, or rather the parodies of Guest and gang, which always include Eugene Levy (he of the Groucho eyebrows), Catherine O'Hara, Parker Posey, Fred Willard, and other familiar faces. "Best in Show" was a real winner.

This one is a runner up, close but no cigar. It's about a cheap film that comes to have critical raves. Three actors are buzzed about as Oscar Nominees, but they don't quite make the cut. An epilogue shows us the heights they went on to conquer despite their disappointment -- one teaches acting to a handful of puzzled and untalented students, another is doing a product commercial voice over, the third is an hysterical performance artist. The writers seem able to dig up some humor out of any situation.

But the film has an improvisatory quality that goes beyond that of "Best in Show." People SOUND as if they're improvising. The editor does what he can to keep the pace snappy but sometimes the scenes are more puzzling than funny.

The winner, again, is Fred Willard, playing the same stoop he played in "Best in Show," but this time with a cartoon hair do. The host of a morning TV show, he ambushes the losers at their various tasks -- trying to have breakfast alone in a diner, auditioning for a role in a commercial, or staggering drunk out of the house to empty the garbage.

It doesn't hit the high spots of the earlier film but it's still pretty amusing. Nothing is sacred to these guys.

missing a reel?!

[jonathan-577 · 6/10 · 21 April 2009]

This movie has the usual Guest-company virtues: the deep sense of ensemble, the absurdism embedded in genuine nuanced characterization, the flighty unpredictability. But the usual complaint - that things don't quite feel satisfying or resolved when the lights come up - is almost fatal here. I got the distinct feeling that as Guest strove to shoehorn in all his pals and highlight all the good bits, he lost the main thread. At first there's just a bit of discomfort with the overplayed and hyperextended what's-the-internet oldster naivete, and a vague sense of not-quite-clicking about the film within a film; but then suddenly "Home For Purim" has morphed into "Home For Thanksgiving" and it's like we dropped a reel even though I'm watching on DVD. Half the characters completely disappear (including Guest's overly familiar effete director), we never get so much as a line of dialogue from Home For Thanksgiving, and Catherine O'Hara's actress undergoes a reversal that is allowed no transition whatsoever - in one scene she's Martha Graham, in the next she's Joan Van Ark. This is highly dispiriting; it's like someone gave up. I hope they find a way to keep working together that gives things a boost, because this misses the mark.

Made me laugh

[padawanmovies · 7/10 · 5 October 2022]

I think too many naysayers compared this to Guests' other works but this made me laugh. Everything actors, studios go through to try to secure nominations and how they "change" once they believe there's a chance for nominations. From Miller appearing on a TRL-esqe show sandwiched between two teens, Hack's "new" face on her late night appearance, execs telling a director to cut down the "Jewishness" of their project are all Hilarious examples of when too many people are involved in a project and the pandering that sometimes takes place. I thoroughly enjoyed seeing all the cameos as well from Derek Waters, Casey (from Happy Endings)

Just chill out and go have a good time

[zainashirk · 8/10 · 25 November 2006]

I love this acting troupe. They are a well tuned machine. Though this movie is perhaps a little "inside" of the Hollywood Movie Industry, and the publicity machine on which it is driven, all of the regulars and the new faces invited into the fold give wonderful performances and play their parts with just the right amount of camp with their tongues in their cheeks. I mean after all. don't many of us WANT to know about the inside of the industry? The duo entertainment reporters ( Jane Lynch and Fred Willard) are hilarious and Catherine O'hara's performance is masterful. (do I hear Oscar Buzzzz?) But that is not to say any of the cast's performances were not noteworthy. My whole family had a great time. This is not meant to be a Great panoramic epic, this is good clean hilarity from some of our favorite actors.

If you are a fan of "Best in Show", Waiting for Guffman etc, or you just want to get to know these gifted actors, DO go see this film, nap before you go so you can be happy and rested and hear the inside jokes that spark the guffaws heard throughout the theater. Zaina

"Inside every actor there lives a tiger, a pig, an ass, and a nightingale."

[truemythmedia · 7/10 · 7 February 2020]

"For Your Consideration" is a satire from Christopher Guest, a man whom might be best remembered for his writing and his role as Nigel Tufnel from "This is Spinal Tap", but also his mockumentary films "Waiting for Guffman", "Best in Show", and "A Mighty Wind". While "For Your Consideration" is not a true mockumentary, it does feel remarkably similar in style to those other films Guest made earlier in his career; it's filled with quirky and neurotic characters, stuffed to the gills with clever jokes that lovingly send up it's subject, and though I've seen this film only once (so far), I'm willing to bet it gets better with repeat viewings, just like Guest's other films. That being said, I'd also venture to guess that this film wont appeal to as wide a range of audience as some of Guest's other flicks because I feel like a lot of jokes require a bit of insider knowledge into the film industry or at least a basic understanding of how the industry works, and without that prior knowledge, many of the jokes would fall flat.

Wash, Rinse, Repeat doesn't always work...

[film-critic · 5/10 · 18 February 2008]

Guest seems to be pushing the envelope with Hollywood in this feature, but it isn't funny – it is random, chaotic, and emotional when it should not be. Being a fan of Guest's earlier work, I was initially excited about this outing, but upon viewing it just didn't gel together – emotionally or passionately like Guests other work. This seemed like Guest made a film to spoof the industry, but instead created a dismal look at how comedy can self destruct, even with your regulars trying to make us laugh.

Guest announced in 2005 that he would stop making the "mockumentary" because he thought they were not funny any longer. Hoping to see bigger and braver things from this pioneering director, I hoped "For Your Consideration" would be a fresh chapter in his repertoire of films, but alas, it was nothing of the sort. To begin, the characters seemed stale and uncharismatic. As a "mockumentary", the audience may have had the opportunity to see these actors consume their roles, to build unknown back stories, or to challenge themselves to take their character to the limit, but it never happened as a full-feature film. This was a regular comedy that fruitfully never picked up speed, never pushed the limit, and tried to use similar Guest techniques that would have only worked as a mockumentary. It began to implode with the characters, since we couldn't see them talking directly to us, we had to follow their moves – watch them as they failed, and attempted to make us laugh with their irregularities. Again, what would typically make us laugh in a mockumentary-styled film failed at this level. To demonstrate the error, let's begin with Catherine O'Hara. In Guest's work, she is typically a staple of comedy. Her portrayal of Mickey Crabbe in "A Might Wind" was phenomenal, but in this film it seemed forced, unfunny, and catastrophic. From the opening scene, O'Hara never really defines her character. Is she pushing for freedom, is she ignorant to the truth, or is she trying to fit within the Hollywood scene? Valid questions that never quite get off the ground as we are bombarded with more and more "guest" characters that push this little film into non-existence. Harry Shearer is another example, typically he is genuine in his roles for Guest, but in this feature he just felt stale. He wasn't trying to be funny, nor did he push any level of comedy. The entire hot dog bit was cliché, as was Eugene Levy's performance as his agent. I think that is where problems occurred in this film – there wasn't anything original about Guest's characters in this film, and I think the actors knew it. Fred Willard was the only humorous element to this film – giving us the exact same performance as he did in "Best in Show". This may not have been a mockumentary, but it would have been a mockumentary that would have saved this little feature.

Guest had trouble behind the camera with this film. His camera work seemed staged and oblique. There was no questioning scene that pushed the limit or forced us to see Guest in a new light. He teased the audience, giving us hopes that midway through this film he would transform it into a mockumentary, but alas it never happened. The stages were set, but nothing happened. I couldn't tell if it was the actors that weren't as funny, or Guest's vision was just weak. As a viewer, you find yourself standing outside of this film. You know what Guest's potential can be, yet when you watch this you know that there are just actors playing actors playing preset roles. The addition of Ricky Gervais, Sandra Oh, and Rachael Harris made this Guest film feel like a downtrodden Woody Allen film. Was it a homage to him? The building blocks of this story were weak, thus the entire structure seemed to fall when the pieces fell apart. Comedy was horrible, the story was non-existent, and the actors just seemed used and tired of the time, place, and story.

One other aspect that bewildered me, is anyone else tired of the sad, unsung heroes of Christopher Guest's films seeming like they are being stepped on each minute of the feature. They were fun in "Waiting for Guffman" and "Best in Show", they were endearing in "A Mighty Wind", but in this film they just felt hurt, and at times violent. While I did chuckle at Willard showing up at the non-nominees doors the next day, I thought that crossed a line from funny to violently sad. Again, I did laugh, but not in that boisterous "Christopher Guest" sort of way. I think that best defines this film, it had its moments, but overall it just felt bland. There was no flavor. The actors realized this, but Guest continued with this sad little project. Not a positive mark on his report card.

Overall, I wasn't impressed. This late in the game there is a level of necessity needed, either step up your choice of films (like direct a drama or science fiction) or continue growing the genre you have exploited. "For Your Consideration" will have some chuckling moments, but nothing that screams amazing. Guest could have strengthened his role as a comic genius by creating this same film under the guise of a mockumentary and it would have been phenomenal. There was a lacking air of originality with this film and the actors genuinely didn't fit their parts. This was a sad film that could have been more. I saw the potential, but nothing came out of it. I will continue to give Guest a shot with his amazing back list of films, but a continuation of this type of film will lessen his appeal. Watch it once, but not a film to keep in your collection.

Grade: ** out of *****

Skewering Oscar Buzz with Laughs and Surprising Vitriol on Guest's Non-Mockumentary Satire

[EUyeshima · 8/10 · 2 December 2006]

I look forward to Christopher Guest movies in the same way Ralphie did for his much beloved Red Ryder BB Gun in "A Christmas Story". Drenched with his deadpan wit, Guest's mockumentaries have been such well-targeted show business satires that it's hard to know when the script stops and the improvised reality begins. But that's a lot of the fun with his films, even though his newest is easily the most structured of the bunch. Along with constant co-writer and co-star Eugene Levy, Guest picks a target ripe with possibilities in this 2006 comedy, the Oscar-baiting season prior to the nominations, and surprisingly foregoes the direct interview format in favor of a more traditional narrative. I have to admit I miss some of this dynamic because the on-camera realism resulted in some of the funniest moments in the previous films.

Gratefully, what has been kept from his other films is Guest's stellar ensemble company of comic actors, and this time an even larger cast has been gathered, none of whom disappoint in this outing. The plot focuses on the production of a low-budget studio-bound film, "Home for Purim", a WWII-era family melodrama about a Jewish family in Georgia coping with the mother's terminal illness and the daughter's emergence as a lesbian. Directed by an authoritarian nebbish with an Art Garfunkel hairdo named Jay Berman, the film looks to be an overly sincere piece of tripe, but a blogger on one of the movie sites has predicted leading lady Marilyn Hack, a resigned, over-the-hill B-actress, will be nominated for an Oscar. This starts an Oscar buzz that engulfs the two other nominal principals of the movie, hot-dog pitchman Victor Allen Miller and "serious" actress Callie Webb, and the tidal wave of publicity drastically changes the direction and marketing campaign of the movie even before it's completed.

Guest and Levy fully capture the superficial pandering that occurs when the buzz is in full swing, and they particularly ridicule the ignorance and outdated thinking of those who find themselves in this lightning-in-a-bottle situation. There are acidic jabs at all the infotainment programs - "Entertainment Tonight", "MTV TRL", "The Charlie Rose Show" and "Ebert & Roeper" – but this is character-driven farce, and several stand out. In a brave turn as Marilyn, the wonderful and ever-dependable Catherine O'Hara superbly captures the almost overnight evolution from forgotten, timeworn actress into botox-infused, cleavage-squeezing A-lister wannabe. Harry Shearer gets his best showcase yet as the put-upon Victor whose mouthy agent Morley Orfkin refuses to take his calls until the buzz hits them. As Callie, Parker Posey is more in reactive mode here, though she has a funny Sandra Bernhard-like bit with her character's one-woman show, "No Penis Intended".

Everyone else gets less screen time, but they all provide memorably riotous contributions – Guest as Berman, Levy as Morley, Jennifer Coolidge as clueless producer Whitney Taylor Brown, John Michael Higgins as bromide-spouting publicist Corey Taft, Don Lake and Michael Hitchcock as the Love It/Hate It movie critics, Michael McKean and Bob Balaban as the academic screenwriters, Ed Begley Jr. as Marilyn's fey hairdresser (and biggest fan), Ricky Gervais as the oily studio honcho, and best of all, as the entertainment TV co-hosts, Fred Willard as mohawk-moussed Chuck Porter and Jane Lynch as gam-showcasing Mary Hart-knockoff Cindy Martin. I imagine Guest's reputation is the reason you see such high-profile actors like Sandra Oh and Craig Bierko in nothing more than bit parts here. The film takes a sharp turn toward the end that adds surprising vitriol to the laughs, and the vituperative tone makes the proceedings all the more devastating and resonant. More like "A Mighty Wind" with its dramatic undercurrents, this one is not as laugh-out-loud as "Waiting for Guffman" and "Best in Show", but it shows a continuing maturation in Guest's film-making technique that is most welcome.

If you love the other Christopher Guest 'parodies' then you'll love this one too

[danieljfarthing · 7/10 · 17 April 2022]

Director Christopher Guest's run of distinctive parodies (inc "Best In Show" & "Mascots") uses a core of actors (inc himself, John Michael Higgins, Fred Willard, Jennifer Coolidge, Jane Lynch, Catherine O'Hara, Harry Shearer, Carrie Aizley & others) to produce unrelated but hilarious comedies. 2006's "For Your Consideration" (again co-written with Guest by regular co-star Eugene Levy) is another example, focused on a small in-production film garnering unexpected 'potential Oscar' buzz. The likes of Ricky Gervais, Parker Posey, John Krasinski, Richard Kind & Sandra Oh add colourful flavour to another terrific episode of the 'series'. If you love 'em, you'll love this one.

Consider This

[moutonbear25 · 5/10 · 26 November 2006]

FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION Written by Eugene Levy and Christopher Guest Directed by Christopher Guest

It starts around September and goes right through until January when the nominations are announced. Hollywood slowly unveils the most thought-provoking, most dramatic, most controversial films. Some launch in hundreds of theatres throughout North America; others launch in just dozens. Every facet of the way the film is marketed needs to be just right. The stars need to make the talk-show rounds while the critical circles lay claim to their yearly favorites. You don't want to be oversold and disappoint nor do you want to go unnoticed. What you want is your name called at that ungodly hour. When it is, you will no longer be introduced by your name alone. From now on, your name will always be preceded by Academy Award Nominee. The moniker will open doors for you, get you better scripts with better directors and better paychecks. If you're none too careful though, it could also get you an overinflated ego that could cause major rifts on set. The doors that open lead to bigger rooms which means bigger possibility for public humiliation when you start to think you're so much better than you actually are. All of this also means huge potential for laughs and jabs should the entire process of an actor's performance on it's way to an Oscar nomination be parodied, especially if it is to be parodied by writers, Christopher Guest and Eugene Levy, of BEST IN SHOW and WAITING FOR GUFFMAN fame. Huge potential can go either way though and sadly for Guest, Levy and the rest of the gang, their latest, FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, a movie about a movie that starts to generate Oscar buzz, does not live up to its own awards season buzz.

As the cast of characters is introduced and the scene is set, promise is shown. Guest himself plays Jay Berman, the director of the small Hollywood production, "Home for Purim." The film stars veteran film actress, Marilyn Hack (Catherine O'Hara), as a mother nearing her death whose family has come home for the Jewish holiday. Joining Hack in front of the camera are Dad (Harry Shearer), son (Christoper Moynihan), daughter (Parker Posey) and her (scandal!) girlfriend (Mary Pat Hooligan). Other Guest regulars like John Michael Higgins as a neurotic PR guy and Jennifer Coolidge as a vapid producer fill out the space behind the camera. Bob Balaban and Michael McKean play the possessive writing team while Fred Willard and Jane Lynch play entertainment show hosts with permanent smiles hiding their empty souls. The size of the cast stretches so far that when Marilyn learns that an internet site believes her performance to be Oscar worthy, the reaction ripples further than it should. There is no time to develop anyone past the quirkiness that exemplifies most Guest character creations. With a running time of under and hour and half, clearly the time could have been taken. O'Hara's Hack does receive more focus than any other but even her storyline seems to be missing an enormous chunk as her progression goes from intriguing to perplexing. The Oscar buzz leads to more attention and more focus on the cast and then suddenly, the film ends. I felt as though nothing had happened when so much should have.

While the film does not satisfy on the surface, it does make a strong statement on the ridiculousness of the awards season. Now I'm an Oscar enthusiast but even I can acknowledge how silly the whole thing is. The title, FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, comes from a common practice for production companies to take out full page ads in Variety asking Academy voters to consider a particular performance when they are making their picks. In the context of Guest's film, it seems to be asking voters to consider something else entirely, like how out of control this process has become. Recognizing certain performances over others negates the craft itself and creates a hierarchy of status amidst the acting community. As if actors didn't doubt their abilities enough to begin with, the need for an Oscar to validate your career choice forces talent to become second to recognition. Guest's inclusion of the entertainment show or film critics and fair-weather executive producers only further criticizes all the hands that manipulate the machine. No role in Hollywood goes untouched by Guest; they all get swept up in the false reality of the pinnacle of success known as the Academy Awards.

Ironically, Catherine O'Hara's performance in FOR YOUR COSIDERATION has begun to generate some Oscar buzz of its own (which I just contributed to). But anyone who knows a thing or two about what gets a name onto an Oscar ballot knows that no matter how good a performance is (and this one is pretty darn good but not that good), if said performance is better than the film it comes from, the walk to the podium gets that much longer. Christopher Guest better make sure he books ad space in Variety early.