RSS
Hello! Welcome to my blog. Here is where I review movies I have recently seen. Good and bad. I'll waste my time watching bad movies so you don't have to.

The Iron Lady


The Iron Lady, nominated for Best Actress in a Leading Role (Meryl Streep; Julie and Julia, Doubt) and Best Makeup.  The Iron Lady tells the story of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and how she broke through the barrier in a male-dominated world to become Britain's first female prime minister.  The movie starts out with a present day Thatcher, showing her struggle to get over her deceased husband.  The film uses flashbacks to tell the powerful story of Margaret Thatcher.
Streep has been nominated for 106 Oscars, but has only one two.  She won Best Actress for 82s Sophie's Choice and Best Supporting Actress in 79s Kramer vs. Kramer.  It's disappointing that Streep hasn't won an Oscar in about 30 decades even though she's been in some pretty good films.  She's an excellent actress which may be overlooked seeing as she is up against some other good actresses.  However, none of the other nominees have won an award, and they certainly haven't been nominated as many times.  Streep's portrayal of Margaret Thatcher was excellent.  It gave me a great insight in what she was and is like.  She's a powerful woman playing another powerful woman in a role that was fitting for her.
As for the Makeup, one of the first comments I made was how they did a great job making her look older.  I didn't even recognize her in the first scene.  I'm always fascinated with special effects makeup in movies, and even though this one was just a matter of making Meryl look like an 85 year old woman, I still think it was a great job done by the makeup artists.
This movie to me was sad because her holding on to her late husbands stuff reminds me of someone I know who has recently lost someone, so it really helped me feel bad for her and empathize with her.  Definitely a must see, especially if you're a history buff.

The Artist


I had the pleasure of seeing the Oscar nominated film, The Artist, this past weekend.  The Artist was something very different than the usual films we see today, but that's what made it enjoyable.  Set in Hollywood of the late 20s, the Artist is a silent, black and white film about two actors who's lives were drastically changed upon the introduction of "talkies" (films with sound) into Hollywood.  It takes place around the span of a few years.  I was a couple minutes late for the film for reasons beyond my control, so I'm not sure exactly what year the film began.  I walked in as a studio was holding auditions for dancers for their next film.  Newbie Peppy Miller (Berenice Bejo; been in mostly Spanish movies) gets a minor role, but slowly starts rising to the top by starring in multiple talkies.  Meanwhile, silent film veteran actor George Valentin (Jean Dujardin; French films) can't find work and slowly hits rock bottom.
The Artist was nominated for ten Academy Awards;  Best Picture, Actor in a Leading Role (Jean Dujardin), Actress in a Supporting Role (Berenice Bejo), Cinematography, Art Direction, Costume Design, Best Director, Film Editing, Music (Original Score), and Writing (Original Screenplay).
It's easy what makes this film stand out from its competitors.  It takes you back to a time where unemployment was at its highest, but Hollywood was still finding ways to bring people to the theater.  I've watched a lot of films that have taken place in the past, and this was probably the first time I actually felt transported to a different time.  Everything from the music and costumes to the exotic looking actors (with the exception of John Goodman and a few others I recognized) made me feel like I was actually watching a silent film from the 20s.   I can't wait to see the other nominations for Best Picture so I can start choosing my favorite.  I hope they're all as entertaining.
I think that acting in a silent film is harder than acting in a talking film.  Because you can't use your voice to express feeling and emotion, actors must rely on their body movements and facial expressions to send a message to the audience and tell their story.  Bejo and Dujardin did a great job of being very dramatic and animated that not only were they believable, but the audience could understand them without hearing them.  You have to be pretty talented to be able to pull it off.  As I stated earlier, being actors in foreign films, I didn't recognize them and that helped me believe that I was watching a film made in the 20s.  They both also had that natural beautiful look that is rare in actors today, more often found in actors from that era.  So either one has a chance of winning the Oscar, although I still have other movies to view before I can really compare.
Along those same lines, great acting is normally due to great directing.  The Artist was directed by Michel Hazanavicius who has done only foreign films previously.  With actors and a director who mostly do foreign films, it makes sense that this film is similar to foreign films.  Michel has done a great job of directing his actors to have extreme emotions in their face.  I don't think I'd ever be able to direct actors in a silent film, so for that I believe this is another nomination well deserved.
I think The Artist has a great chance of winning the music category.  I personally loved the score, and without it the film probably wouldn't have been as great.  Musical scores are very important in a movie because the right tempo helps you decide what you should be feeling at that moment during the film.  The music for The Artist did just that, it got me really excited, sad, scared, happy, etc for different scenes.
I loved the fashion of the 1920s.  It was a rebellious time for women, skirts and hair were getting shorter, and heels were getting higher.  I thought the costumes were great and gave me a great feel of what people wore during that era. 
Art Direction and Best Writing are two other awards I think it has a chance of winning.  Although I don't think it's Best Picture material, I think its still worth paying the money to see.

And the Nominees are...


It's that time of year again. ...The Oscars!  And I have 33 days to watch and review the movies I haven't seen. Like last year, I've only starred the ones I've seen.

Looks like I've got a lot to watch!


Best Picture:
Hugo*
Midnight in Paris*
Moneyball*
Tree of Life*
The Artist*
The Descendants*
War Horse
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
The Help *

Actor in a Leading Role:  
Demián Bichir (A Better Life) 
George Clooney (The Descendants)*
Jean Dujardin (The Artist)*
Gary Oldman (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) 
Brad Pitt (Moneyball)*

Actress in a Leading Role:
Glenn Close (Albert Nobbs) 
Viola Davis (The Help)* 
Rooney Mara (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo) I won't see this until I read the books 
Meryl Streep (The Iron Lady)*
Michelle Williams (My Week With Marilyn)

Actor In a Supporting Role:  
Kenneth Branagh (My Week With Marilyn) 
Jonah Hill (Moneyball)*
Nick Nolte (Warrior) 
Christopher Plummer (Beginners) 
Max von Sydow (Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close)

Actress In a Supporting Role:  
Bérénice Bejo (The Artist)*
Jessica Chastain (The Help)* 
Melissa McCarthy (Bridesmaids) I really didn't want to see this movie so now I'm torn 
Janet McTeer (Albert Nobbs) 
Octavia Spencer (The Help)*

Animated Feature Film:  
 A Cat in Paris 
Chico & Rita
Kung Fu Panda 2
Puss in Boots*
 Rango

Cinematography:  
The Artist *
The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
Hugo*
The Tree of Life*
War Horse

Art Direction:
The Artist*
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 Again, I won't be watching this until I finish the books
Hugo*
Midnight in Paris*
War Horse

Costume Design:  
Anonymous
The Artist*
Hugo*
Jane Eyre
W.E.

Directing:  
The Artist (Michel Hazanavicius)*
The Descendants (Alexander Payne)*
Hugo (Martin Scorsese)*
Midnight in Paris (Woody Allen)*
The Tree of Life (Terrence Malick)*

Documentary Feature:  
Hell and Back Again
If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front
Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory
Pina
Undefeated

Documentary Short:  
The Barber of Birmingham: Foot Soldier of the Civil Rights Movement 
God is the Bigger Elvis
Incident in New Baghdad
Saving Face
The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom

Film Editing:  
The Artist (Anne-Sophie Bion and Michel Hazanavicius)*
The Descendants (Kevin Tent)*
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall) 
Hugo (Thelma Schoonmaker) *
Moneyball (Christopher Tellefsen)*

Foreign Language Film: 
Belgium, "Bullhead"
Canada, "Monsieur Lazhar" 
Iran, "A Separation"
Israel, "Footnote"
Poland, "In Darkness"

Makeup:  
Albert Nobbs
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
The Iron Lady*

Music (Original Score):  
The Adventures of Tintin (John Williams) 
The Artist (Ludovic Bource)*
Hugo (Howard Shore)*
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (Alberto Iglesias)
War Horse (John Williams)

Music (Original Song):
"Man or Muppet" from THE MUPPETS (Music and Lyric by Bret McKenzie) 
Real in Rio” from RIO (Music by Sergio Mendes and Carlinhos Brown
Lyric by Siedah Garrett)

Short Film (Animated): 
Dimanche/Sunday
The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore
La Luna
A Morning Stroll
Wild Life

Short Film (Live Action):
Pentecost
Raju
The Shore
Time Freak
Tuba Atlantic

Sound Editing:  
Drive (Lon Bender and Victor Ray Ennis)
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (Ren Klyce) 
Hugo (Philip Stockton and Eugene Gearty)*
Transformers: Dark of the Moon (Ethan Van der Ryn and Erik Aadahl) * 
War Horse (Richard Hymns and Gary Rydstrom)

Sound Mixing:  
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (David Parker, Michael Semanick, Ren Klyce and Bo Persson) 
Hugo (Tom Fleischman and John Midgley)*
Moneyball (Deb Adair, Ron Bochar, Dave Giammarco and Ed Novick)*
Transformers: Dark of the Moon (Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers, Jeffrey J. Haboush and Peter J. Devlin)* 
War Horse (Gary Rydstrom, Andy Nelson, Tom Johnson and Stuart Wilson)

Visual Effects:
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
Hugo*
Real Steel
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Transformers: Dark of the Moon*

Writing (Adapted Screenplay): 
The Descendants (Screenplay by Alexander Payne and Nat Faxon & Jim Rash)*
Hugo (Screenplay by John Logan)*
The Ides of March (Screenplay by George Clooney & Grant Heslov and Beau Willimon) 
Moneyball (Screenplay by Steven Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin.  Story by Stan Chervin)*
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (Screenplay by Bridget O'Connor & Peter Straughan)

Writing (Original Screenplay):
The Artist (Written by Michel Hazanavicius)*
Bridesmaids (Written by Annie Mumolo & Kristen Wiig) <---- REALLY???!!   Why? 
Margin Call (Written by J.C. Chandor) 
Midnight in Paris (Written by Woody Allen)*
A Separation (Written by Asghar Farhadi)

50/50


I recommend this be read after you see the film 50/50 due to spoiler alerts.  I also recommend you see 50/50.  So now that that's covered without further ado......I give you my review.
Will Reiser wrote the film 50/50 with good friend Seth Rogen (who acts in the film) and based it on his experiences once he was diagnosed with cancer six years ago.  He decided to make it a comedy by showing how people react to others' illnesses.  In fact, after showing it to many cancer patients and survivors, they thanked him for not making it a sob story.  I still cried a little bit because they were some very sad moments, but I appreciated the humor as well.
50/50 was directed by Jonathan Levine (who has only directed less famous films like The Wackness and All the Boys Love Mandy Lane) and stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt (500 Days of Summer; Inception) as Adam Lerner who's diagnosed with cancer at the tender age of 27, and Seth Rogen (Knocked Up; The Green Hornet) who plays his best friend Kyle.  The film centers around Adam and the people around him's reactions to his illness.  After telling his mother (Anjelica Huston, The Royal Tenenbaums; Addams Family Values) who, even though she's already taking care of Adam's Alzheimer father, wants to move in with him and take care of him.  Adam refuses to let her.  Adam's girlfriend, Rachel, (Bryce Dallas Howard, The Help; Twilight: Eclipse) agrees to help him out by moving in with him and driving him to appointments.  Apparently, she wasn't ready for the pressure of loving a cancer patient because soon after she cheats on Adam.  I'm sorry but even if my boyfriend was bald and had cancer, if you looked like Joseph Gordon-Levitt, I would never in a million years cheat on him.  Unfortunately, like many other actors, Howard is becoming a character actor, always playing bitchy or evil characters.  I have to remember that it's fiction because ever since she stopped being in M. Night Shyamalan's films, I've stopped liking her as a person.  Even in Spider-Man 3.  Then there's Adam's young therapist, Dr. Katherine Mckay played by Anna Kendrick (Twilight Saga; Up in the Air; Scott Pilgrim), who's working on her doctorate and trying her best to make Adam feel better in a professional way.  I am proud of Kendrick's success outside of the Twilight films.  Unfortunately, her characters have similar personalities, so I'm having a hard time separating her from Jessica.  I hope in the future, once Twilight is over, she'll break out of her shell and try more dramatic roles.  Forgot to mention, fabulous job by Huston.  I haven't seen her in a while, and I liked her performance as Adam's mother.
All in all, I thought this was a fantabulous film.  Maybe even Oscar worthy.  The only thing that might bother some people is the relationship between Adam and Katherine, only because she is his therapist.  My sister is a psychologist, and although I thought it was cute (and saw it coming and rooted for them) she may just see it as unprofessional, which it completely was.  I think any person in the medical field would see that as well, and it may take away from the reality of the film.  I'm not sure, but it's probably something she could lose her job over.  Of course, I don't really know how often it happens either.  I think if she had a different job in the hospital, perhaps his nurse, then people would still get the message.  I personally think other than being unprofessional, it would be awkward to date your therapist.  I mean they know so many things about you that perhaps you wouldn't tell a significant other.  I guess I'm thinking too far into it, and that's why its fiction.  But anyway, see the movie.  They made having cancer into a comedy without making it offensive, and that's great.  I think someone that went through it is the only person that can pull that off.  Kudos!
All in all,

Carrie vs. Carrie


So here's something a little different, I'm going to compare two movies to the novel off of which they were based.  Stephen King published his first novel, Carrie, in April of 1974.  For some reason the book took place in 1979.  The original film was release in 1976, and the remake (so obviously a made for TV movie) aired in 2002.  In the book, both Carrie and her mother Margaret, are supposed to be large women.  Heaven forbid Hollywood put anyone bigger than a 0 in their films so in both adaptions, they were pretty skinny women.  As most people know Sissy Spacek played Carrie in the original, and as I mentioned in my blog about The Help, Sissy will always be Carrie to me.  Her unique facial features helped her portray her the best.  In the 2002 version, Carrie is played by Angela Bettis (Girl, Interrupted) who was 29 when she played the role, but even though she was only 2 years older than Sissy was she was not a very convincing Carrie.  Her face looked too old to be playing a high school kid (Sissy still had a young face) and she wasn't unique looking enough for me to believe her as Carrie.  The 2002 adaption shows the shower of rocks on the White household that is mentioned in the beginning of the book, and it also goes back to it as well.  The scene where young Carrie is talking to the sunbather remains in the newer version, something the original left out along with the rock shower which I found an ideal part of the story.  Another difference in the beginning of both films is the time when Carrie gets her period.  First of all, for all you men out there that are naive and believe everything the movies show you, women don't typically caress themselves in the shower, as these movies portrayed, or at least I don't so maybe I'm the oddball.  In the second film, the girls immaturely yelled "Period" at Carrie, which I can't imagine anyone their age doing.  The book and first film has them throwing tampons at her and yelling "plug it up" which I find a little more creative.  Instead, in the newer edition, they write Plug it Up on her locker and fill it with tampons.  In the principal's office, the director also decided to make her telekinetic powers less subtle by having her move the whole desk instead of just the ashtray like in the original. Shock value I guess. 
I like that both films showed how Carrie's mother's religious beliefs played a role on Carrie.  It was easy for King to describe the background in the novel since we were reading it.  In the first film, Margaret visited a fellow classmate's (Sue Snell) home to preach and ask for money for her church while in the second the teacher stated Carrie was excused from the evolution lesson in science class per her mother's orders.  I'm sure that's still likely to happen today.  
Before I get too off topic, I just want to point out something that bothered me.  The character Norma, in the first film, always wore a red baseball cap, even to the prom.  Maybe it's suppose to be symbolic or whatever, but I just found it annoying.  I would like to know what was up with that stupid hat.  If anyone can tell me, I'd appreciate it.
Another difference I noticed was the boy on the bike taunting Carrie as she leaves.  In the remake she has him thrown against the tree when in the original and novel she just tipped the bike over.  I liked the more subtlety because she is first learning of her telekinetic powers and to throw a boy into a tree is a little intense for a first time learner just like lifting the desk.
One thing that kind of bothered me is King describes an eerie picture hanging in the closet which is part of the reason Carrie doesn't like going in it.  Neither film versions had the picture which didn't give the closet such a haunting affect for me.
It seemed both films pretty much had the same script, except the remake kept the names that the original didn't.  In the Sissy Spacek version, they changed the name of the gym teacher Miss Desjardin and the highschool name, Ewen, was changed as well.  I also like how the remake included the scene with Chris's dad and him threatening to sue the school.  It showed how much the faculty cared for their students, and didn't tolerate bullying.  That whole dialogue between the father and the principal was probably my favorite in the novel because I liked how he sticks up for Carrie and was quick with the comebacks.
Finally, or course, I was glad that the sex scenes between Sue and Tommy and Chris and Billy were taken out.  In the novel, both girls use the sex to get their boyfriends to do what they want (Chris with the prank, Sue with getting Tommy to ask Carrie to prom), but both directors did a great job getting the point across without using sex.  So kudos for that.
Well, this has been my longest blog because I compared three pieces of work which I will most likely not do again thankfully.  As for the point of my blogs and rating the films, well they're both so entirely different but the same, but of course for me, nothing beats an original.  (Same is true in Vampire Diaries!)

The Help


My love for books and my love for movies always interfere with each other.  I understand its hard for a film to be exactly like the book for which it is based, even when the author is part of the screenplay writing process, because the director and author almost never have the same views as to how a box should be portrayed or a character or scene.  Anyway, because of this love for literature and arts, I can never answer the question "Which did you like better, the book or the movie?"  There are good parts of a book that are left out, but there are also added stuff that can sometimes be good.  My point is, when it comes to The Help, I can't tell you which version I preferred, but I can compare them.  And here it goes....

The Help, which was written by Kathryn Stockett, takes place in Jackson, Mississippi in the early 60s, during the civil rights movement.  It is narrated by both rich, white 23 year old Eugenia "Skeeter" Phelan, and much older, black maids named Minny and Aibileen.  A white girl is trying to write a book using the maids perspective on what its like working for white families.  Unlike the actual author, Skeeter receives help from "the colored people" as they are often referred to in the book.  Stockett did live in Jackson, Mississippi, however, I don't know if she was around during the 60s nor remembers it, so good for her for taking a stab at what it would have been like, because up north the 60s were completely different.  The film was directed by Tate Taylor (usually acts, but Pretty Ugly People was his first feature he directed), also not a white woman in the 60s nor a black maid.  The film definitely had a different feel to it than the book, and I believe if the film had been directed by a woman as well then the feel wouldn't have been so different.  To me the novel and film weren't just about race, but about feminism as well.  From the beginning, Skeeter was feeling pressure to find a man and get married at such a young age.  All of her friends dropped out of college to get married, and she was expected to do the same.  Same goes for Minny having the courage to leave her abusive husband.  This is why I think the film would have been better directed by a woman, because a woman would be able to focus on those issues more.
So anyway, back to the summary.  Skeeter played by Emma Stone (Crazy, Stupid Love; Easy A) has just moved back home after graduating college.  In her best efforts to become a journalist, she gets a job at the local paper writing the cleaning advice column.  Her lack of knowledge on this subject, causes her to seek advice from her good friend Elizabeth's (Ahna O'Reilly, Forgetting Sarah Marshall) maid Aibileen (Viola Davis, It's Kind of a Funny Story; Eat Pray Love).  During one of their discussions, in the book, Aibileen mentions her son Treelore, who has passed away three years before, and how he wanted to write a book talking about what it was like to work for a white man.  This was left out of the movie, but I thought it was a pretty important part because that's what inspired Skeeter.  During an incident at bridge club, where the evil friend Hilly Holbrook (Bryce Dallas Howard, The Village; Lady in the Water) insists that Elizabeth build a separate bathroom outdoors for the help, Skeeter feels embarrassed for Aibileen and this is the point where she decides to write her book.  I want to start off by saying, I absolutely hated the character of Hilly, in the book and the film.  She is such an evil bitch and ignorant person, and I have never hated a character so much in my life.  It might also have to do with the fact that she reminds me of my dad's second wife.  Everything she said and did made me cringe, and I will never look at Bryce the same again.  Of course I never looked at her normal anyway, I mean who names their daughter Bryce??  Ok back on subject.  Skeeter has already given the idea for her novel to the editor at Harper and Row, Elain Stein (Mary Steenburgen, Step Brothers; Elf), but Stein wants her to talk to at least a dozen maids.  
Aibileen eventually agrees to help out Skeeter, but they have a hard time finding other maids as they fear for not only losing their jobs, but they fear for their lives as well.  In the book, during all this Skeeter is also wondering what has happened to her maid Constantine who raised her.  The film doesn't portray her search as much but focuses a lot on the memories.  
In the book, Hilly puts her mother, Mrs. Walters (Sissy Spacek, I don't care how many movies she's been in now, she will always only be Carrie to me) in a nursing home and tries to have her mother's maid, who also happens to be Aibileen's best friend, Minny (Octavia Spencer, Dinner for Schmucks; Jesus People) work for her.  When Minny refuses, Hilly starts a rumor that Minny stole from her mother so no one will hire her.  In the film, she starts the rumor after firing her for using the indoor bathroom.  Luckily, with the help of Aibileen, she finds work with Celia Foote (Jessica Chastain, The Tree of Life), who the town ladies don't like because she married Johnny Foote (Mr. "Hotter with Age" Mike Vogel, She's Out of my League; Grind) who was at one point engaged to Hilly.  So much happens in the book/movie so I'm just going to skip around.  Eventually Minny joins, and after Hilly throws her maid Yule May in prison, a bunch of other maids start telling their stories for the book too.
So the one thing I'm deciding whether or not I agree with is the choice to cast Emma Stone as the role of Eugenia.  Granted she did a good job, but lets face it, she's whats hot right now, and that's probably why she was picked for the role.  In the book, it is discussed how Skeeter is an awkwardly, tall girl with long curly hair.  Emma Stone is known to be a very attractive woman.  But upon discussing this with my book club, they mentioned that it might be her idea of herself only due to her mother's perspective.  The one and only thing I did like that Hilly said was when she was trying to set Skeeter up on a date, Skeeter mentioned that she might not be his type.  Hilly told Skeeter that she doesn't like her looking down upon herself just because her mother put ideas in her head.  
Speaking of the date, that is one last thing I wanted to mention about the film vs. movie.  In the film, the relationship between Skeeter and Stuart (Chris Lowell, Up in the Air; Private Practice) isn't as dominant as it was in the book which is good.  It made it seem like Skeeter was sticking to getting her book done than finding a man.  In the book, she was focused mostly on work, but still fell in love.  Now I was angry with her because she took the guy back twice, TWICE!!  And he was a real dbag on their first date.  I felt that was very out of character for her, and she might be settling.  The film, however, without giving any details away, made her out to be more independent, and I like that.  The End.

Read the book.  Watch the film.  Do both, I don't care.  It's a good read, and a good film.  Actually, the film was sadder than the book because its different seeing it up on screen coming to life.  It took everything I had not to cry in front of my book club.  I held it in, don't worry.  Either way, all your questions will be answered, and if you only see the movie without reading the book, and still have questions, let me know.  I'll answer them for you!  By the way, being a nanny and a waitress really made me appreciate this book, so treat "your help" with respect.  I don't care what color you are, or what job you have, no one is better than anyone, and I hope that's the lesson you walk away with from watching this film.

Crazy Stupid Love


I have to admit, when I first saw previews for Crazy Stupid Love, I thought it looked a lot like Hitch so I wasn't too interested in seeing it.  But all they hype, and posters (at least around Chicago) made me change my mind.  Plus Ryan Gosling was in it, and he's pretty hot.  Another reason I wasn't too sure about this film is because of the age difference between Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone who were playing love interests.  I don't know why this bothered me seeing as in real life, that much of an age difference doesn't really bother me.  Upon research I found that Gosling is only 30 and Stone is 22, but in the film she played a 27 year old.  I eventually got over it.  
I liked the quirkyness of this film.  It showed how much love can kick you in the ass with all the funny love triangles.  However, I don't understand why it seemed from the trailers and hype that Marisa Tomei had a bigger part than she really did.  Crazy, Stupid, Love was directed by Glenn Ficarra and John Requa (both of I Love You Phillip Morris fame).  They did a pretty good job considering this was only their second time directing.  It has an all star cast with Steve Carell (The Office), Ryan Gosling (The Notebook; Lars and the Real Girl), Julianne Moore (The Kids Are All Right; A Single Man), and Emma Stone (The Help; Easy A).  It opens up with Emily (Moore) wanting a divorce from her husband of 25 years, Cal (Carell).  After drinking two days in a row and talking about his wife's affair with David Lindhagen (Kevin Bacon, Footloose; Wild Things) to no one, womanizer Jacob (Gosling) takes him under his wing and helps him gain the confidence he needs to get over his wife.  While this is going on, Cal's son Robbie (Jonah Bobo, Choke; 30 Rock) is in love with his babysitter, Jessica (Analeigh Tipton, The Green Hornet) who is in love with Cal.  Also Jacob changes his womanizer ways once he meets Hannah (Stone) who has just ended a relationship with her boring boyfriend, Richard(Josh Groban, singer) after he wouldn't propose. Along with the crazy love triangles or squares, there is a twist towards the end.
This film teaches a good story about love and soulmates and not giving up.  Now I don't believe in all that crap, but I do like how this film showed it in a non sappy way.  The writers made love sucking into a funny thing, but they still kept it kind of romantic in a weird way.  I highly recommend it.  The ladies will love the romantic story and Ryan Gosling half naked, and the guys will love the bromantic story and the crazy antics of Michael Scott, but yet a different person.  It's worth the $6 I spent to see it, but I'd probably pay full price too.  Like the title says love is crazy and stupid, and this film follows through with its title.
 
Copyright 2009 Terri Talks Movies. All rights reserved.
Free WordPress Themes Presented by EZwpthemes.
Bloggerized by Miss Dothy