★ 5 / 10
A Clumsy, Chaotic Caper
reelreviewsandrecommendations
It's often said that a film is made in the edit. Sometimes, though, that's where it dies. A misstep in pacing, a scene trimmed too far, a story-thread…
It's often said that a film is made in the edit. Sometimes, though, that's where it dies. A misstep in pacing, a scene trimmed too far, a story-thread reshuffled to please the wrong audience- these are the silent assassins of good cinema. However, a film's release isn't always its final form. Some escape the cutting room only to stumble into cinemas half-formed, victims of studio interference, rushed deadlines, or just bad timing.Yet, every now and then, they get a second chance. A director's cut can resurrect what was lost, revealing the version that was always meant to be. 'Blade Runner', 'Brazil' and countless others have been retroactively rescued, proving that editing isn't just a technical process- it's where a film finds its rhythm, its shape, its soul.Richard Shepard's feature film debut 'The Linguini Incident' was a critical and commercial failure upon release in 1991. Best described as quirky, it follows Lucy, an aspiring escape artist stuck working as a waitress in a chic New York restaurant. Alongside fellow misfits Viv, a lingerie designer, and Monte, a charismatic English bartender with a suspiciously flexible approach to the truth, Lucy decides to rob the restaurant. What follows is a clumsy, chaotic caper- a good way of summing up the film itself.In a 2024 Filmmaker magazine article, before the 4k re-edit and release of the film, Shepard blamed the failure of 'The Linguini Incident' on it being taken away from him "recut, barely released and opened on the weekend of the 1992 LA riots." It's a compelling set of excuses, and to be fair, they probably hold some water. Unfortunately, even with Shepard's fresh cut, the film just isn't great.Although the new version is sharper and more coherent, with improved pacing, it's not a transformation. This isn't 'Blade Runner' reclaimed from the ashes. It's a strange, meandering flick with moments of charm but just as many moments where Shepard and co-screenwriter Tamar Brott's narrative drifts aimlessly, unsure of what it wants to be.Is the film a romantic-comedy? It's neither very romantic, nor that funny, so perhaps not. Is it a crime caper? A parody? At times, it flirts with being a satire, poking at the same chic environments and yuppie vanity that 'American Psycho' skewered so well- though with significantly less bite. Further, the characters are insufferably trendy- stylishly disaffected, meticulously dressed and prone to dialogue so overly hip it would be too much even in a John Waters film.There's a calculated coolness to everything that tips over into affectation, as though the film is so busy admiring its own reflection it forgets to tell a story worth caring about. It's not that it is aggressively bad- rather it's stubbornly unsure of itself. Scenes wander off on tangents, jokes hang in the air without landing and the plot, such as it is, appears less driven by character than a vague desire to keep things moving.Visually, the film has a certain undeniable charm. Robert D. Yeoman's cinematography captures a stylish early-90s New York with a glossy sheen complementing the film's aspirational, if scattered, energy. There's a crispness to the framing and lighting, adding atmosphere and life, even if the story can't always keep pace.The production design leans into the aggressively curated aesthetic of the era: sleek restaurant interiors, breadsticks shaped like driftwood, cocktails served in crystal glasses. The sets and costumes are impeccably styled, helping to sell the world these characters inhabit, even when the script falters. However, these flashy stylizations are both a strength and a weakness-the film is so busy looking good it sometimes forgets to breathe.Further, the score echoes this polished, slightly off-kilter vibe. It's jaunty and playful, underscoring the caper elements with light jazz and quirky melodies, yet occasionally veering into the overly whimsical. The music does a decent job of keeping things moving, but rarely adds any emotional depth or tension. In a film struggling to find its narrative footing, the score feels like a pleasant accessory rather than a driving force.The film's main strength is its cast. Rosanna Arquette makes for a delightfully offbeat lead, blending neurotic charm with a hint of world-weariness that keeps Lucy from becoming just another quirky archetype. Her performance anchors the film's scattered energy, providing a relatable core amid the chaos.David Bowie, meanwhile, brings his usual enigmatic magnetism to Monte, the charming bartender with a penchant for bending the truth. His presence elevates the material, adding a layer of genuinely cool sophistication and just the right dash of mystery. Even when the script falters, Bowie's effortless charisma never does.Further, Eszter Balint is a delight as Viv, damn near stealing the show at times, while Marlee Matlin makes the most of an all too small role as the restaurant receptionist. Conversely, as the restaurant owners, Buck Henry and Andre Gregory are ridiculously over the top, playing the material as broad farce. Gregory especially hams it up to an irritating degree, actively damaging the film around him.In conclusion, Richard Shepard's 'The Linguini Incident' is less a lost classic waiting to be rediscovered than a curious artifact of early '90s indie whimsy- equal parts charm and confusion, style over substance and ambition tangled in uncertainty. While the director's cut polishes a rough gem, it still never quite shines. For Bowie fans, it's worth a look- though it's a bit half-baked.
★ 7 / 10
A Very Colorful, Cheery, And Bubbly Romantic Comedy
IrisNo11
I knew that I wasn't going to be disappointed in this movie! I liked it, but it's not the best. The characters have great humour and a bit of strange taste to…
I knew that I wasn't going to be disappointed in this movie! I liked it, but it's not the best. The characters have great humour and a bit of strange taste to them. One is obsessed by Houdini, the other designs self-defense bras, and then there is the mystery man from England, Monte. I loved the strange characteristics to Lucy, Vivian, and Monte, and if Dali's were a real restaurant, I would LOVE to go there for dinner! I loved the setting of Dali's and the wardrobe the waiters, waitresses, and bartenders are required to wear. There is a lot of strange high fashion in this film! Rosanna Arquette's look is totally early 90's with the bright Irish red hair and the fire engine red lipstick shade!This movie's very colorful and very cheery! I enjoyed watching this film, and wouldn't it be a wonder just to star in this film? It was a great movie, but I will admitt, I thought the plot a bit silly. Yet that's what makes this movie good! :o)
★ 6 / 10
Best described as "daffy"
moonspinner55
One of those quirky, post-modern comedies perhaps inspired by "Desperately Seeking Susan", but a bit late in the offing ("Susan" was released in Spring 1985).…
One of those quirky, post-modern comedies perhaps inspired by "Desperately Seeking Susan", but a bit late in the offing ("Susan" was released in Spring 1985). Rosanna Arquette is charming (as usual) playing eccentric New York waitress--and would-be escape artist!--who plots a major heist with help from British bartender David Bowie, who's in need of a green-card bride. Sassy script by Tamar Brott and Richard Shepard (who also directed), excellent cast including Eszter Balint (very funny), Marlee Matlin and Andre Gregory, and yet the film tends to have more energy than successful gags. A smoother direction and tighter editing might've helped, yet it's still rather fun, complimented by a wonderful music score by Thomas Newman. **1/2 from ****
6.2/10
2.2K
•••
Subs, please !