Can someone please explain why the movie got such bad reviews…
-
jefflief — 14 years ago(June 11, 2011 06:32 PM)
Dear, booger-28. You are speaking more like a 14 y.o. booger than a 28 y.o. booger. Clearly, you have very LITTLE experience of life.
Good luck to you in your future learning experiences - hopefully at a greater rate than your first 28 years.
P.S. Possibly, your difficulty in understanding how Nelson could have made such rash decisions is a result of your brain malfunctioning from eating too many boogers . . . -
sliptdisk — 14 years ago(December 03, 2011 11:17 PM)
And, why is that? Because he doesn't like your favorite, little, sappy movie? Please. How full of yourself you are, not to mention angry and bitter-sounding. Why are you so attached to it?
Do you ever wonder if other people see you as a sucker for cheap sentimentality, by the way? It seems to me that the 14 year old would be the one to suggest the things that you did, little boy.
"Careful, man! There's a beverage, here." -
Defenseman13 — 12 years ago(July 27, 2013 10:34 PM)
lol jefflief, this movie is a flaming turd. Good luck to you too moron, seeing as you TALK like a 12 year old.
http://us.imdb.com/board/22339870/ -
-
emailaddress-600-852845 — 10 years ago(October 17, 2015 11:23 AM)
You weren't paying attention. He had already lost his job, girlfriend, and presumably apartment soon enough, so she was only a choice that came after that.
Everyone thinks they can change a girl's mind. And it's true. For every gal you date, likely she has had many dates and multiple boyfriends but eventually settles down with someone, right around her and his age usually. Given the circumstances it isn't so unbelievable, to be intrigued by someone who isn't sucking up to him because of money and a fancy car and clothes, someone who had a successful business and gave it up.
Real love isn't always for better or worse, not when it was built upon a premise where one person really loves another but the other person failed to disclose something, like being terminally ill, or still married, or a serial killer, etc.
Loving someone can also mean letting them go. It is plausible that she would want to spend her dying months with her family, a family that never met him and would disapprove of his presence given the short time they knew each other. It's not only plausible but expected since the storyline already told that they disapproved of her lifestyle.
He wasn't a stupid person at the beginning of the film nor was he at the end. He had merely spent his energy learning certain life skills instead of others. This is quite common for highly successful people though he wasn't old enough to be considered that yet, and yet that's also why such a person has a little mental flexibility and curiosity left that enables them to make life changing decisions.
By the end he was enlightened, not in some extreme way but rather that there are things worth pursuing in life besides only money and career.
He did win a victory refusing to work for that powerful employer. I would do the same, not willing to have a constant babysitter a-hole boss like that for any amount of money. It's not necessarily that I think it would right any wrong in the world but rather that I refuse to help anyone who is that abusive and wouldn't want to be the target of that abuse either which is inevitable any day it's rainy instead of sunny.
Apparently his friend didn't take a huge risk arranging the meeting since that friend was dismissed as not being an important player. Did you think that Frank was going to go tattle on him to his employer about the meeting? These things don't happen, or else nobody would be able to steal employees away from other companies if even meeting with them carried such childish all or nothing risks.
At the end of the movie he's where he started with her. Along, unemployed, and has nothing more except that he learned something about himself. That's better off, not worse, and we can assume this personal growth helped him find a job more suited to his further evolved self.
Believe it or not this is not only believable but the way things usually work in life. You work one job like a dog because you need a way to support yourself, then want the extra income, then eventually find it's not worth it and move on to a better job. As young people grow up, outside of the institutional learning environment, they finally have a chance to grow and find out about themselves, IF they have enough free time to do it instead of spending too much of it on their work.
Otherwise, you are wrong about his general situation. You wrong he ended up with nothing but obviously he was in no rush to move on. Even after a month he had money to buy her presents, so obviously he had some savings built up. It's not surprising considering he wasn't a drug addict, not a gambler or any other expensive vices, had no expense from driving a company car, but was presumed to formerly be making a lot of money in advertising. Someone like that is in exactly the right position to crash at an intriguing woman's place until he decides what he's going to do next.
I suspect you merely think it's unbelievable because it's a unique situation. Most people don't have top-of-their-game downtown power jobs, and most people aren't near the end of the remaining months of moderate health before dying of cancer. It would take imagination to put yourself in that situation and most people don't have it today, instead just assuming everything is going to be a normal fairy tale state when it's not meant to be a fairy tale.
Real life is actually a lot more like this than the fairy tale BS romance movies that hollywood defecates. That doesn't make it realistic but more realistic would have turned away even more pumpkin headed people who had an expectation going into the movie and were disappointed when it didn't turn out to be what they expected. The main problem was that the storyline twisted into that too soon to be believable. It would have been better if he fell into a drug or alcohol binge and she picked him up off the street, and more realistic if some of her past months' men were stalking her, if the tranny wasn't a competitive ad-man, if it took more time bef -
xXenomicXx — 14 years ago(August 02, 2011 12:24 PM)
I think it received bad reviews because of the writing. The characters are almost unbelievable. You have this "Mad Men" advertiser who says he is the best, but is no Donald Draper. We first see him in action and he blows the deal with his arrogance and temper with no cause to why, and no backup plan to seal the deal. I thought he was the best? An advertiser is suppose to be persuasive and focused on they company they are after, not become rejected and throw a hissy-fit! On top of that, having Keanu Reeves play this character was unfitting and unrealistic. He was monotoned and unexpressionable throughout the movie. And we are suppose to believe this character who is so focused on work he doesn't pay attention to his own girlfriend, all of the sudden wants to hang out with the outgoing San Francisco hippie chick he just met? I can't see this guy leaving a world of profession to hang out irresponsibly with a women he just met for a month. They should have made him a an uptight Drill Sergeant on leave if they wanted to go that route.
The writing also gives away the plot and theme shortly after she asks him to stay for one month. We know we are going to have a "Coming of Age" with Keanu's character, and a "Tragedy" with Charlize's character. So we know this but decide to watch it unfold. With Keanu's acting, we hardly see any change in the character other then when the scene calls for him to be over acting..(exp the Christmas scene.)
Another thing bad about the writing is if Charlize takes in a guy every month, where are all the other guys at? Wouldn't they be around and fall in love too? And why is Keanu the only one that is so love crazy, he is borderline stalker?!?!?
The story is the only thing that holds this movie together. Its unique and a fantasy for someone to live a life like Charlize does, and is not very far fetched. I just see her character snagging bums, and dragqueens in for a month rather then high class business executives.
The ending was the only thing I liked about the movie, only because it was the only scene that was not predictable. It leaves the viewer wondering who her next project will be, and Keanu leaves supposedly a better person. Who knows, maybe he'll pull out a bag with 12 advertizing gifts to get his job back! -
IMDbProha — 14 years ago(August 03, 2011 06:45 PM)
Thanks for the post!
I don't agree with the assertion that the writing gave away the plot after she asked him to stay for a month. The scenario could have played out in many different ways.
There definitely was more to it that they could have explored. I was curious about the other months as well. -
poetessbynight — 14 years ago(October 01, 2011 01:56 PM)
I'm so conflicted on this because I see the good in this movie, but I realize there are cringe-worthy elements as well. There are a lot of cliches, but also unique touches. There's good acting and bad acting. It seems like the movie can be very conflicting in its qualities, which can sometimes be the death of a film's success. I actually feel this way about another Keanu Reeves film, The Lake House; however, I thought the acting in that film was pretty good across the board. Reeves seems to be my go-to guy for romantic movies that aren't technically great, but I love them anyway.
"She uprooted a mighty sequoia!"
www.myspace.com/poetessbynight -
matushka1731 — 14 years ago(March 04, 2012 10:41 AM)
I, for one, hated this in comparison with the 1968 original. It's a pretty whacky storyline; but played by Sandy Dennis and Anthony Newley, it was just perfect casting (with Theodore Bickel in a supporting role, too!). This 2001 version was just pure garbage in comparison and one of the many reasons why I generally despise remakes. See the original which has recently been releasedI actually found it to be much more interesting and touching.
It WAS really, really bad! -
Darkskythe2005 — 14 years ago(March 25, 2012 12:51 AM)
My advice to any who liked this movie, and even to those who did not is see the original (1968)
It's true, and potent, and for it's time quite charming, original and endearing. I think that the newer version isn't necessarily bad, but there's just something about a movie that is based off of an old movie that only succeeds in being a carbon copy with newer cars, and computers. Instead of adding anything new, any perspective. It kind of comes off as lazy and uninspired.
If you don't like old movies, I beg you make an exception. This one might change your mind.
But you may just think it too is just a sappy tear-tugging love fest. Though I doubt it. -
fred-albertyn — 13 years ago(October 22, 2012 10:55 AM)
you ask why because you love the movie,but it had to turn this way for the best effect in tragedy,if people are stil discussing it more than 10 years later they must have loved it.
i can personally relate to some of storyline
love the movie -
christopherteo — 13 years ago(November 13, 2012 06:32 AM)
Imo only the ending was crappy, rest of the film was alright. It's like those kind of movies unappreciated when first released and only gets better with time. I liked it because it showed how life was slower more than 10 years ago without the beep of modern 2012.
The ending just dropped the audience's expectations (that imo was unnecessary) of the happy ending set up when Keanu proposed. I expected them to get married and Keanu spending with her the last year or so of her life before she dies, she accepting life isn't perfect instead of being so immature and childish (and not wanting Keanu to remember her that way).
Ending crashed everything that was built up from earlier. Heard it was a remake of some original movie. Did it have a similar sucky ending as well I wonder? -
AtheistRevolution — 12 years ago(May 25, 2013 07:55 PM)
Well Charlize Theron wasn't too bad but Keanu Reeves was awful. I guess the story was somewhat okay but became quite mediocre. The cancer twist was ridiculously melodramatic and the end was poor.
- Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
-
fiatlux-1 — 12 years ago(September 05, 2013 09:55 PM)
spoilers below
When I first watched the film (and a couple subsequent watches) I actually thought
Sarah killed herself at the end!
The way they make a point of showing the highway, and Sarah runs thereand then says "I'm going home. They know I'm coming." I always assumed she was committing suicide.
But then up here they tell me she is JUST going home to her family?! What kind of dumb ending is that? She gives up Nelson & her place just to go home to die slowly?!
That seemed pointless.
And if that is indeed the ending, that changes the entire film for me. It does seem stupid & sappy.
"I'd say this cloud is Cumulo Nimbus."
"Didn't he discover America?"
"Penfold, shush." -
MTulliver — 11 years ago(January 08, 2015 04:11 PM)
Because it's a TERRIBLE movie. I only got through about 20 min. of it. Keanu's character is unbearable and his acting is worse. Charlize's character is annoying as hell. The entire premise is stupid. He moves in with a complete stranger who acts like a crazy woman? Yeah, ok.