Tuesday, August 22, 2006

What's Better?: Being There or Being John Malkovich?




Hal Roach vs. Spike Jonze! Peter Sellers vs...well, John Malkovich.
These two items are both comedies that are actually funny but that are also surprisingly thoughtful and slyly provocative.

What's Better? Being There or Being John Malkovich?

6 comments:

DanBuck said...

Being There gets my vote.

BJM works until the third act, then it falls apart.

Whereas Being There's final act is a perfect culmination of the film.

John said...

I like to watch Being There more than Being John Malkovich.

Darrel Manson said...

Love the Spike Jonze film, but Being There still gets my vote. I like to watch.

T.C. Truffin said...

Bucking the system since 2006...

Gonna go with Malcovich.

bethr said...

Being There is transcendent.

Kenneth R. Morefield said...

Both are good, but I thought Being John Malkovich was funnier.