bob the moo Midland City is a perfectly ordinary American city. Within the confines of this small world, dealership owner Dwayne Hoover is a celebrity despite the fact that his wealth and success has only served to make him more and more unstable and unhappy. His wife is suicidal and his secretary offers limited relief in their affair. Not that many others have it better. Harry Le Sabre is his sales manager and is full of guilt over his cross dressing and active sex life. With this community breaking down, small time porno-mag article contributor Kilgore Trout makes his way to the city to take his place as the guest of honour at the arts fest – not quite sure how anyone has heard of him.Another commentator on this site has said that if you showed this film to ten people then probably eight would hate it; those praising it have claimed it to be a wonderful version of Vonnegut's novel. Not having read this, I can believe that he (and this) is an acquired taste because I found it to be an almost unbearably messy affair that was delivered in a silly manner that offered little of interest. Indeed for much of the film I wasn't sure what to make of it. Perhaps it tried to do too much but there seemed to be so many characters rammed in here that most of them just seemed out of place and with no development whatsoever. Of course it didn't help that I didn't see much about those given plenty of time either. Dwayne himself is the perfect example of this; his madness seems to have a reason but the film does a terrible job in bringing this out.Rudolph seems passionate in his direction but it seems he is too close to the material and his direction might assume a familiarisation with the material that the mass audience will not have. The delivery is too silly and knowingly manic – it takes away from the material and it left me feeling like perhaps it was my fault for not having read the story before watching it. It annoyed me as well that such a starry cast were mostly wasted – presumably they saw something in the material that did not make it to the screen. Willis tries hard but is not supported at all. Finney spends most of the time in his own film, not really fitting into the narrative. Nolte is amusing; Hershey is wasted; Epps has been told something by the director that the rest of us aren't let into. Patton, Wilson, Haas, Lewis and others provide thankless supports.This may well be perfect for fans of Vonnegut, I cannot say but suffice to say that I am not one of them. However for the casual viewer this is messy, disjointed and pointless to the point of being painful. I gave it two hours as I tried to work it out, hoping that it would make something out of itself but in the end I was left out of pocket with nothing to show for my investment.

f_boone_99 I thing there is a popular misconception that Vonnegut's novel cannot be adapt to the big screen, I disagree, If you look at films like Mother Night or Slaughter House 5, it shows that with a little effort and care a Vonnegut film can be done perfectly. I think the problem that most filmmakers have is that they try to "reinvision" his work and this always leads to failure. This is the case with Breakfast of Champions a movie that veers so far of the course that you wonder if anyone involved read the book The casting is perfect, Bruce Willis and Albert Finney as Dwayne Hoover and Kilgore Trout are dead on perfect but all the whimsey and humor are gone this is suppose to be a story of two men on an journey but this film just turns it into a bad comedy about a used car salesmen *Spoiler and correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Dwaynes wife being dead a huge plot point in the book, and here she's alive and kicking whats that all about my advise to all filmmakers attempting to do Vonnegut, or any novel, Respect the source material

petrinurmi This movie is the worst film I'we ever seen. I tried to see it three times but fell asleep EVERY TIME (so you can't blame me for trying). I did this to try to understand this film and maybe find the hidden wisdom behind it all. Needless to say, I never found it. This movie tries to be crazy, smart and innovative but ends up to be unbelievable boring and idiotic. The movie is a waste of money and talent. I consider "Barfly" being a smart movie, "Eternal sunshine of a spotless movie" a crazy movie and "Fight club" an innovative movie, "Breakfast of champions" didn't live up to any of these good qualities. If you are planning to rent this movie, read a book instead.

artimusduck I'll keep it short: absolutely loved the book, for over 20 years. Still holds up and retains the quirky, sarcastic and sardonic elements that made me fall in love with it when I was 15. The movie is yet another failed adaptation of Vonnegut's work. It tries, it swings for the fences, but ultimately, it completely misses. I wanted to like this movie. I tried reeeaaalllll hard, but let's face it, it stinks. I'm not a literature snob, I think many outstanding films have been made from great books (To Kill a Mockingbird, for one), many great films have been made from sub-par books (Being There, in my opinion is one), and pretty good films CAN be made from Vonnegut (SH5 was a pretty good adaptation and Mother Night was very good, Ithought). This one was not a good film, or even a decent film. It stunk big head cheese left on a hot Texas porch in July.It wasn't for lack of trying or talent, it just failed to understand the material or simply wasn't able to translate it to film (and I just gotta say, I don't care if BoC is Willis' favorite book, he can't pull off Dwayne Hoover and his presence, while being the sole reason for this adaptation's existence, kills the film, from his acting to his obvious control over it behind the scenes as a producer and a financier). Imagine if William H. Macy was in it. That might be a good film. Try to avoid the temptation to see if this group can pull the movie off. They can't and you will be left unfulfilled and depressed, or even p*ssed off. Like I was.