The biggest problem of the movie is that the movie has no effect at all which I recently learned that they call it deadpan. The reactions of the characters are extremely soulless. The movie is not humorous because of those except the famous dance scene and the guy who helps Kate. This short part is the only interesting part and the guy is the only acceptable character of the movie, as said, all the other characters are too emotionless. This cannot be explained by nihilism or Godard's 'anti-cinema' style. Simple Men is not a road movie, despite the main story is that two brothers leave the city to find their father. I had expected an interesting and colorful road movie, at least a movie. There is an emptiness feeling throughout the movie, so if you expect any kind of dramatic or stunning material, you disappoint seriously. Again because of this deadpan style of the director, no art, no entertainment. Cinematography is just OK, but owing to the problems mentioned above, finally the film is lack of an impressive cinema experience. The director puts up a solid wall between the movie and audiences, I don't mean catharsis or I don't mean empathy, these are not must, but this wall makes the movie distasteful and soulless. Some people complain about acting in the movie, but acting was not weak, there is no problem with acting, it was plausible. The thing makes them think like that is probably deadpan that the director likes. By the way, Simple Men is not predictable, but does not include any twist or surprise.

Imagine a Hartley film with good acting; these people just make his writing sound pretentious, but I'm sure it could sound merely clever in the mouths of better actors.One thing I'll tell you about this movie is its IMDb page is misleading in several ways. The genre listing "comedy," the title and the plot point of two lads betting about making a girl fall in love with them, might indicate you're in for a fairly lightweight, fun movie; perhaps even a teen-movie. But this is no She's All That; its a talk-heavy script and the actors perform it in a ponderous but stagey manner; there's no sense that this is anything but a staged reading of a Hal Hartley script.

"Trust" was so different from anything I'd ever seen that it just knocked me out--the dialog, the meter, the slightly-affected hyper-reality of the performances. "Simple Men" showcased a refinement of writer/director Hal Hartley's style, and I found myself watching rapt, not wanting it to end, ever. Untouched, unblemished, unstained by Hollywood, Hal Hartley makes his own movies his own way. He takes life's "little problems"--the ones that big Hollywood movies only mention in passing as a cinematic trick to achieve emotional buy-in--and examines them in exquisite detail. Now when is the DVD release!?

On first viewing, I could have sworn this was a Sam Shepard play. It has the short lilting dialogue for much of the film and sounds as though it were written for the stage. It is directed very much in that fashion and is a fascinating, captivating set of performances...understated and full of deeper meanings that don't shout at you in the more typical "Hollywood" tradition!