I only watched this movie because it's August and there's nothing new on television. I am also a film buff AND enjoy photography which is why I kept watching even tho' I thought it was rather tedious and boring in the end.Firstly, the actor portraying Dean was nothing like him really and he didn't make me believe. And he was so sleepy and mumbly it made me wonder how on earth James Dean ever got a film contract in the first place.Secondly, the vomiting over his son scene (Stock) was revolting.Thirdly, when they got to Dean's childhood farm home in Indiana and visited the town I could not stop thinking about where it was actually filmed as it looked so familiar to me and so Southern Ontario. And sure enough it was!!! Lastly, Ben Kingsley as Jack Warner. Ick. Talk about chewing the scenery.Best thing about the film were the real photos in the credits.

The glimpse into old Hollywood was the only redeeming feature of this film. Dane DeHaan appears to be doing an imitation of Edward Furlong if he were doing an imitation of James Dean. Pretending you are a rebel by not having the energy to open you mouth when you speak is not acting, Dean was withdrawn but could enunciate. Dean had a look and a vibe, that DeHaan is far too dumpy looking to pull off. They say Dean was "bi", but, DeHaan had "gaydars" on blast from his seen. As always, Robert Pattinson is one dimensional, a card board cutout may have had more depth. This could have been a much better film with better casting of the two main rolls. I be surprised if Ben Kingsley isn't embarrassed by the this stinker. I want my 111 minutes back!

After watching Life on Netflix, I'm not really sure how I feel about it. The movie portrays Dennis Stock (played by Robert Pattinson) as a photographer who self-assigns himself to take pictures of James Dean (played by Dane DeHaan) for Life Magazine in 1955, the start of James Dean's big yet short career as an actor in films. The story itself was interesting, and I felt myself interested in the film, though some reviews called it slow and boring. The only thing really boring are the actors. Dane DeHaan seems held back throughout the movie and portrays James Dean as not a particularly interesting person, but more of just a bland guy off the streets. The same goes for Robert Pattinson, who I feel does a lot of things wrong in a few scenes he's in. I found myself, for both actors, mimicking how I personally would've directed the scene. I thought the director of Control, Anton Corbijn, would make a fascinating movie about the early career of James Dean. He succeeded, but at the cost of boring actors and some scenes that I just found to be pointless to the story, particularly the relationship between Dennis Stock and his family. As for recommendation, I definitely suggest you check out the movie. It's currently on Netflix, and is worth a shot, even if you don't feel the same as I do.

I wanted to like this movie, in fact I would have liked this movie but for one very important thing: To watch this portrayal of James Dean by someone with such little charisma and animal magnetism and sorry Dane Dehaan "sex appeal" play someone like James Dean was just painful to watch, and utterly disappointing. I am not saying he is not a fine actor - IN ANOTHER ROLE - but let's get real, James Dean would have never been THE James Dean had he not been swoon-worthy, on screen and off, and I'm sorry but that simply does not apply to Dane Dehaan, at least in this role. (I haven't seen him in anything else that I can recall so I can't say he isn't fine in another role.) Unbelievable and unrealistic that any studio or the masses would have been pursuing THIS James Dean. The movie had so much potential but this unfortunate casting choice for the single most important part in the film killed it for me.