NatrlBornThrllr

Opens this weekend. It was a great romantic comedy. I'm not a fan of the genre, so on the whole, I'd say it was only a "pretty good" film. It's sometimes formulaic, though it does have quite a few points of originality. Meryl Streep is great in her role, doing more with her facial expressions than most actors can with well-written monologues. Uma Thurman gave a performance different from anything I've seen out of her...and the relationships between the characters were drawn really well.

The humor only reached that laugh-out-loud level a handful of times, but was often chuckle worthy. The strength of the film lies in it's dramatic happenings...and I think it succeeds on that level. There's a very human quality to Ben Younger's writing. Between his imagining of the film's concept, and the movie's production...10 years passed. According to his Q&A after the film, Younger dreamed up the idea for this film before Boiler Room ever went into production. He waited, though, hoping he would eventually gain enough life experience to feel that he was capable of moving forward with the screenplay. In that, I think he succeeded. The relationships that were drawn between the characters rarely seemed forced or contrived. You could tell that they were written by somebody who had a little bit of life under his belt.

The movie is far from perfect. However, it features relationships that are grounded in reality...and the film is never scared to "go there." The film makes bold statements (not deep, mind you...just bold) about race, religion, and sexuality. Above all else...and I hate to say that before announcing my biggest praise of the film in spoilers, but, above all else:



I'd recommend it, especially if you're a fan of romantic comedies.

-JP

UKingdom

i saw a sneak preview of this several weeks back, and i must agree; this is a fantastic movie and worth watching.

scott shelton

I'll throw on the black hat again...

IMO, the film is terrible. Loads of older woman and younger man clichés (they make him a painter for christsakes) tossed into a rancid, needlessly broad script. The film would better if they found an actor who could give the role a moment of genuine intelligence. Bryan Greenberg does not possess that level of acting.

Once Uma buys a Nintendo system for the guy, I mentally checked out.

NatrlBornThrllr

That scene was obviously played for humor, though. I can understand if the film wasn't aware that it was using a horribly overplayed cliche...but it was. It knew how by-the-numbers the scene was, had a couple of friends explain that very fact to us, then played out the cliche anyway. Had they played that scene straight, I'd have agreed with you. However, the fact that they played it for humor based solely on the fact that it is a cliche is what, in my opinion, made it work.

I don't entirely disagree with you, though. I said it in my initial post: there are times when this movie becomes extremely formulaic. However, I think that's something that just comes with the genre. It'd be comparable to saying that a slasher film is guilty of being formulaic because it features all of these scenes where a killer chases a teenager. Anything within a very "been there, done that" genre is going to feature at least a handful of cliches. However, I thought this film held in itself enough nuggets of truth to make it worthwhile (and actually pretty great in the spectrum of modern romantic comedies...one of my least favorite genres).

I'm not going to make any bold claims about this movie. I realize fully that it'll never win any major awards. I'm aware that it'll likely be forgotten before the year's out. However, despite your complaints (most of which I happen to agree with on some level), I'd still give this film a recommendation and, if I happen to be talking to somebody who loves romantic comedies, a strong one at that.

-JP

Johnny Boy

I plan to see it based on one thing, Uma Thurman is in it. It's the reason I saw Be Cool, a terrible movie. But Prime sounds like it will be a good movie. Looking forward to it.

scott shelton

And I was irritated that Younger gave into cliche, instead of challenging himself, which PRIME had every opportunity to do. Younger gave up too quickly, proving to me again that he's a limited filmmaker with little to say.


Please elaborate on the nuggets. I couldn't find any myself.

NatrlBornThrllr

Sure. Every scene featuring Meryl Streep.

-JP

scott shelton

That I completely agree with.

Patman

I'm of two mind on this film. The 1st and 2nd act of this film is funny, engaging, sexy, and mortifying for the Meryl Streep character, of course played for even more laughs at the pathos involved as a therapist with a patient who's dating her son (unbeknownst to the patient for longer than it should have gone on). The last act gets more serious, a little bit cliched, a little forced in almost covering all the bases of what can go wrong with May-December romances (this time, it's an older woman, younger man-child). I think it's about 5-10 minutes too long overall (even though it doesn't quite develop the supporting cast as human beings, but moreso as comic relief), but still, it's got a nice rhythm in wringing out a lot of the comedic aspects from the central plot/hook of the film.

I did like the chemistry between Bryan Greenberg and Uma Thurman. Uma's pretty good letting the audience into her character's feelings and anxiety, and she still looks great for her "age". Streep is comedy gold in the early goings, but she still keeps on a maternal course in wanting the best for her son, even if it's not quite what she's suggest in her role as a therapist.

I give it 2.75 stars, or a grade of B-.

Giantrobo

Great movie.

It slowed a bit just before the end but it had lotsa heart. Uma looked A-MA-ZIIING and was very sexy in this movie. I also felt that compared to how "How Stella Got her Groove Back" ended, another moive about a May-December Romance, I strongly felt that PRIME'S ending was PERFECT. It made a lot of sense and was more mature.