Critic Review - ReelTalk Movie Reviews

The combined troupe do a good enough job to make the movie get by, but not enough to mask the huge gears running the story, nor the accidental and ironic anti-progressiveness the movie has the potential to convey.

December 10, 2010 Full Review Source: ReelTalk Movie Reviews | Comments (4)
ReelTalk Movie Reviews

Comments

jolana k.

jolana kondrc

Jeff,
You hit the nail on the head. I had great hope for this movie, that it could really deal with multiple non traditional family issues at the same time with great actors and writing but it truly fell short and gave homophobes justification. But not only that, it also left Mark Ruffalos's character hanging and looking like the villian, when all he wanted is love and to be involved in the family. He was perfectly fine before they came into his life and the he took the fall and fault for the whole affair. The movie just dropped the rest of the issues it brought up about meeting another parental figure. What happens to him? Why is it just his fault? Why can't he be a part of the family? Why can't the kids have him in their lives too? This film really sets you up with issues then never addresses them.

Why did the director fell she needed to mainstream the movie if she was going to backstab herself and her beliefs?

I was diappointed.

Jan 5 - 03:29 PM

Edward F.

Edward Fildes

Jolana, my understanding of how the movie was left was that Jules craved security which was why she was in such a dysfunctional relationship to begin with. Even when she was faced with the prospect of true love, she couldn't handle the destabilisation it would cause initially and so stuck to her existing relationship. I don't think Paul did end up looking like the villain, instead it seemed that no matter how decent a person you are and seem to have everything sussed your still always at the mercy of other peoples perceptions. That's what I gathered from it anyway.

Jeff, I havn't read your full review but based on your point about the "huge gears running the story" I felt that those huge gears were composed of many smaller gears, I feel like what I mentioned in the previous paragraph identifies one of those smaller gears. I'd be interested in what either of you have to say if you have time for a response.

Mar 19 - 02:43 PM

jolana k.

jolana kondrc

Jeff,
You hit the nail on the head. I had great hope for this movie, that it could really deal with multiple non traditional family issues at the same time with great actors and writing but it truly fell short and gave homophobes justification. But not only that, it also left Mark Ruffalos's character hanging and looking like the villian, when all he wanted is love and to be involved in the family. He was perfectly fine before they came into his life and the he took the fall and fault for the whole affair. The movie just dropped the rest of the issues it brought up about meeting another parental figure. What happens to him? Why is it just his fault? Why can't he be a part of the family? Why can't the kids have him in their lives too? This film really sets you up with issues then never addresses them.

Why did the director fell she needed to mainstream the movie if she was going to backstab herself and her beliefs?

I was diappointed.

Jan 5 - 04:27 PM

ratwod

Ray Wood

On the surface, this is just your traditional 1950s melodrama. A married woman has an affair, and then, after much soul searching, decides that her mate was the best person after all.

The only original part of the movie is that a gay family was portrayed as dysfunctional, rather than the usual, "Gay couples are wonderful together".

Aug 31 - 04:09 PM

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile