Wrong

Name: Wrong
Genre: Drama, Comedy
Released: March 29, 2013
Duration: 94 min
Rating: 58
Cast: Alexis Dziena, Arden Myrin, Eric Judor, Jack Plotnick, Maile Flanagan

2013

METASCORE

Mixed or average reviews based on 17 Critic Reviews

See All

USER SCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 14 Ratings

See All

6.2

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6.2	Your Score
6.2	User Score Generally favorable reviews based on 14 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Play Sound

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

Wrong

Now Playing: Wrong

Movie Details & Credits

Drafthouse Films | Release Date: March 29, 2013 | Not Rated

Starring: Alexis Dziena, Arden Myrin, Eric Judor, Jack Plotnick, Maile Flanagan, Mark Burnham, Regan Burns, Steve Little, Todd Giebenhain, William Fichtner

Summary: Dolph Springer wakes up one morning to realize he has lost the love of his life, his dog, Paul. During his quest to get Paul (and his life) back, Dolph radically changes the lives of others -- risking his sanity all the while.

Director: Quentin Dupieux

Genre(s): Drama, Comedy

Rating: Not Rated

Runtime: 94 min

See All Details and Credits

More You Might Like

Wrong Cops

Reality

Rubber

The Beach Bum

Don't Worry, He Won't Get Far on Foot

Watch Now

Buy On

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

Eric Kohn

Mar 26, 2013

In its wonderfully irreverent way, Wrong makes it clear that this reality is never to be trusted as anything more than a succession of strange moments that coalesce into an abstract representation of the subjectivity that traps us all. This is the essence of new film noir, which challenges our perceptions through a series of compellingly ambiguous moments. Read full review

Film.com Eric D. Snider

Mar 30, 2013

Wrong is more absurd and more laugh-out-loud silly than “Rubber;” it’s also less focused and more pointless. Read full review

Adam Nayman

Apr 18, 2013

Truth be told, Wrong isn’t as funny as "Rubber," which played kamikaze games with horror-movie tropes. The tone here is flatter and more meandering, and more than a few of Dupieux’s digressions feel like dead ends. At the same time, there’s a winning confidence to the filmmaking, which is deceptively stylish. Read full review

Ignatiy Vishnevetsky

Mar 27, 2013

The movie is flimsy, glib, and occasionally pretty funny. Read full review

Bill Goodykoontz

Mar 28, 2013

Fichtner is always good; just trying to sort out his accent here is kind of fun. Plotnick is the key, however. He plays it straight, even as the world around him grows weirder by the minute. Often he seems confused by the proceedings, which is fitting: Join the club, pal. But we’re having a better time of it than he is. Read full review

Mar 25, 2013

It doesn't seem to have any pretensions beyond the regimented unveiling of a parade of odd occurrences, plodding along under the banner of absurdity. Read full review

Nicolas Rapold

Mar 28, 2013

Wrong lets most of its random gags and view-askew premises twist in the wind like hamhandedly wacky improv comedy, punctuated with synthesizer effects. The film’s misguided flatness is perhaps its fatal flaw, not so much deadpan or existential as just monotonous. Read full review

SEE ALL 17 REVIEWS

Write a Review

User Reviews

gentlegiant1972

May 27, 2020

I first watched WRONG when I was in high school. I had already seen Rubber and thought it was fun. WRONG was disappointing. I thought it was a boring incoherent mess, and I even fell asleep partway through. I re-watched it recently and it left a much different impression. On my re-watch II first watched WRONG when I was in high school. I had already seen Rubber and thought it was fun. WRONG was disappointing. I thought it was a boring incoherent mess, and I even fell asleep partway through. I re-watched it recently and it left a much different impression. On my re-watch I found it way more engaging and really funny. Most of the reviews classify this as a surrealist film, but I think Dupieux, whether intentionally or not, created an existentially comedic masterpiece. I'm not going to go into why this film works so well if you read as existentialist, because it'd be full of spoilers. The spoiler free version is that characters are constantly placed in an absurd reality that they take completely serious. There is one sequence near the end of the film that typifies this perfectly. The thing that makes the comedic aspects of this film work so well is that unlike most existentialist literature where characters would recognise the absurd futility of their reality and rebel against it, none of the characters in the film seem to even consider the absurdity of their situations, nor use their free will to do... anything really. The result is a tension between the characters and the story world that I found extremely funny. In summation, this film isn't for everyone, but if you have a high tolerance for the bizarre and enjoy dry humour, I think this will be a really fun treat.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

Kawan

May 21, 2019

Crazy, funny, fresh, in between "Rubber" and Lynch, worth a look, even if it's just to see Ramzy speaking English !

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

LeZee

Dec 24, 2016

Seems everything is wrong, but in a funny way.

Surely a much better film than the previous one by the director. 'Rubber' had the innovation, but the type of dark comedy was not for everyone, especially not for me, though I appreciated the effort. I liked this one, it was simple and slow yetSeems everything is wrong, but in a funny way.

Surely a much better film than the previous one by the director. 'Rubber' had the innovation, but the type of dark comedy was not for everyone, especially not for me, though I appreciated the effort. I liked this one, it was simple and slow yet they knew how to end it. It had twists and turns, but the small ones. Plus, the actors were very good. So it's a decent indie film, feels like I might have rated it low.

A man wakes up in the morning to find his dog gone missing. But as his neighbour advised him, he proceeds his rest of the day thinking the dog would come back and it does not. So he goes after some mysterious message and learns it has to do with his dog's missing. He follows all the instruction and waits for a good news, but what happens at the end is a little surprise.

Apart from the snail pace which actually deliberately done, definitely the film can be enjoyed. Not easy to understand the meaning of the title, but that's what this film is about where everything seems wrong. If you decide to watch it, forget the logics, sit back and enjoy it. Because you won't see films like this everyday. I suggest it for those who are looking for a break from the regular comedies.

6/10… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

Broyax

Jan 15, 2017

C'est Gogol qui a perdu son clebs, alors il appelle un détective privé, le gars est un spécialiste du genre "profiler" qui se met à profiler la merde du clébard, une sorte de coloscopie à distance pour retrouver le fugitif. Le cabot accusé à tort est bien entendu innocent et ne sera, à notreC'est Gogol qui a perdu son clebs, alors il appelle un détective privé, le gars est un spécialiste du genre "profiler" qui se met à profiler la merde du clébard, une sorte de coloscopie à distance pour retrouver le fugitif. Le cabot accusé à tort est bien entendu innocent et ne sera, à notre grand soulagement, pas inquiété. Il n'a pour l'heure pas donné suite à nos demandes d'interview.

Bon là j'ai brodé et extrapolé un brin, car l'humour absurde n'est pas donné à tout le monde et certainement pas à Quentin Dupieux. Pour cela, il faudrait un petit peu de talent et demander conseil à David Lynch à côté duquel ce Quentin n'arrive pas à la cheville. Et pour ce qui est du "non-sens", il aurait dû se renseigner chez Kafka, un creuset inexpugnable.

Quentin Dupieux se débat donc tout seul dans son délire à deux balles et n'a pas hésité à recruter l'un de nos grand débiles nationaux en renfort, Eric Judor (Ramzy n'a pu se libérer, car les vécés en feu étaient fermés de l'intérieur). L'ennuyeux Quentin Dupieux délivre en fin de compte un étron filmique des plus vaseux et de surcroît très prétentieux : si absurdement con qu'on se hâte de tirer la chasse au plus vite.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

SEE ALL 4 REVIEWS