Damien Chazelle's first feature length film isn't an easy one to dissect. Filmed like an early John Cassavetes' movie and told with little to no dialogue at all, Guy and Madeline on a Park Bench is much more so an exploration into how difficult it is to maintain love than it is a musical like Chazelle's latest feature, La La Land. But it's Chazelle's grasp on the ups and down's of relationships that make this yet another interesting directorial effort from him. All 3 of his films to this point have involved Jazz, and all 3 of them have also dealt with characters trying to balance their love life with pursuing their Jazz related dreams. 'Guy and Madeline' isn't as intense as Whiplash nor as viscerally memorable as La La Land, but for a first- time feature, it definitely impresses. An occasional dance number, unique camera movement, and long unedited takes make for quite the viewing experience. Again, there's little dialogue, so I can't say I was as invested in the characters as I should have been, but sometimes scenes are more powerful when less is said (see: the final scene). If anything, this was an interesting watch considering all we know about Chazelle's career up to this point.6.7/10

The defamation and exposure of Chazelle's dirty little secrets continues. This film is another rip off of Jacques Demy's work. He rips off the restaurant dance sequences straight from Young Girls of Rochefort. It's also another two character romance story that rips exactly off of Umbrellas of Cherbourg. Why is this guy allowed to make three of the same movies about the same message: obsession with art and ambition, while making the same three remakes that rip off of a true artist? Picasso truly has ruined art. This is embarrassing how this guy has manipulated everyone into thinking he is some original genius, but he is just as much of a hack as Tarantino.I give this film a fat 0/10.

I'll start with full disclosure: this review is based on the first 30 minutes of this movie, because that's as much time as I was willing to waste on it. When the girl started singing--not quite in tune--I gave up.This movie is all about being pretentious--the filmmakers, not the characters. The jerky hand-held camera work is just trying to be cool; it does nothing for the film. The same goes for the lack of dialog, the random dance numbers (filmed so you can't see the dancers' feet), the disconnected storytelling, the grainy black-and-white look, and of course the ultimate I'm-so-hip posing of hiring an ultra-cheap symphony orchestra to provide a score. ("Look at me! I've heard of Bratislava! I'm so much better than all you people who think Boston musicians are just fine!) Save your money. Or go see the latest Chipmunks movie; at least that's schlock with a plot.

Save yourself the time and trouble as this is more of a "first-year film student" type of picture. It was painful to watch and my first was reaction was "that was 90 minutes of my life I'll never get back." I should have gone with my first impression and walked out after the first ten minutes. There is basically no plot to speak of, very poor cinematography, no character development, poor acting all around and generally no redeeming qualities to speak of. There were some great opportunities to show some of the more interesting sights and sounds of Boston. However to film instead chooses to show irrelevant close-ups of the actors for no apparent reason. The sound mixing and quality is very "unusual" to say the least and you may want to consider bringing your ear-muffs. The picture qualify is even less finished. There was perhaps one sequence in the entire film which would be considered big screen worthy, that of restaurant dancing/singing number. Overall, one of the worst movies I have ever seen.