Rating: 
Summary: Pulp
Review: Shallow and contrived. Like it was made with a formula.Stories about writers, especially writers with writer's-block, should be outlawed - First Amendment rights or not. Tedious and self indulgent. The only good thing about the film is Bob Dylan's "Things Have Changed" that plays during the begining and ending credits.
Rating: 
Summary: Took a couple of viewings, but...
Review: ...I adore this film. Few directors can capture accurately the essense of a novel; Chris Hanson is among those elite few. Wonderboys is based from author Michael Chabon's (Mysteries of Pittsburgh, The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay) character-driven, interwoven, and heartfelt sophomore effort. (Oddly enough, the novel was written after Chabon himself was writing a 'perpetual novel' -so he scratched the entire project, and wrote Wonderboys.) Our heroine (not to be confused with the phonetically identical drug, which was about the only illegal substance not abused by him), Grady Tripp, Pittsburgh creative writing professor, has just been dumped by his beautiful young wife due to his innattention toward her. Of course, Tripp's estranged spouse was apparently unaware that he was engaged in an affair with the married Chancellor (Frances McDormand) of the English department, whom he finds out that night is carrying his child. This is only the tip of the iceberg. James Leer (Toby McGuire) is a macabre junior-level student of Tripp's, who has written a brilliantly truthful novel. Problem is, however, in order to get close to Tripp, he concocts numerous tall-tales in order to get closer to his venerable professor. Robert Downey, Jr., a struggling bisexual editor from New York City, appearing in Pittsburgh to check on Tripp's follow-up novel in order to salvage his fledgling career, becomes attached to Leer, seemingly converting him to homosexuality, while, at the same time, he feels that Leer's novel will revive his career. The story is about dependence, I believe -this seems to be the essense of the novel. And Hanson subsequently depicted this WONDERfully on film. Drugs are Tripp's primary dependence in the beginning of the story; but as time persists, he learns that people are his primary solice. Downey's character depended on Tripp's upcoming novel, and Tripp failed him; McDormand's character depended on Tripp to take responsibility for their child, and he almost does not; McGuire's character depends on Tripp for a number of things, and Tripp ends up getting him inebriated. Tripp realizes that he must first understand himself in order to fulfill the complicated demands of those who look up to him. This is the true beauty of the story, and it was marvelously acted and directed.
Rating:
Summary: From Wonder Boy to Spider-Man
Review: Okay...so the headline IS a little far-fetched, but I happen to believe that one could make a 2½ hr movie, solely focusing on Tobey Maguire's face and its expressions, without anyone losing interest....that boy is TRULY a talent!! That being said, this whole movie shines. All of the actors are, of course, great - especially Tobey and Frances McDormand - and the plot is...well, just fantastic. Rarely, if ever, have I seen a movie that so subtly changes moods in one scene (from tragic, to funny, to moving...) without you being aware of it, until your tears are replaced by laughter.
There's not much of extra material on the disc, but that's ok. The stuff there is is interesting, and kept in an offbeat way - exactly like the movie - and I mean this in a good sense!!
I'd have rated it 13 out of 10 stars....
Enjoy!!
Rating: 
Summary: One of the most under-rated films of all time
Review: This film did not do great box office business, and it did receive a few reluctant Oscar nods, which is a waste, since it is certainly one of the best films I have seen on the creative process, fate, and life's more complicated decisions. Michael Douglas gives one of his best performances in years as Grady Tripp, an English professor and published novelist, who has been writing his follow-up for seven years. In the meantime, his latest trophy wife has left him, and he has been having an affair for years with Sara Gaskell, very well-played by Frances McDormand, who happens to be married to the English Department's Dean. Enter James Leer, a very witty name for the character very well played by Tobey Maguire. James does, indeed, leer from the background. He is Grady's best student, a brilliant writer who seems to craft his work with amazing ease. He is also a compulsive liar, and he drags Grady into a crazy set of circumstances and, eventually, revelations. Robert Downey, Jr. does a great comedy turn as Grady's editor, Terry Crabtree, who arrives awaiting the novel that Grady simply cannot stop writing. The book has stretched to thousands of pages, and Grady cannot find a conclusion to his novel or to his life. The direction by Curtis Hanson is understated and superb, and the screenplay, by Steven Kloves adapted from the novel by Michael Chabon, is witty and fast-moving. There are so many good things about this film, and it is a must-see for any frustrated writer. The performances, including a small but memorable part by Rip Torn, are incredibly good, and the chemistry between Douglas and his co-stars McDormand, Maguire and Downey is superb. I cannot recommend this film enough. There are so many nuances that need to be viewed again and again. It is truly one of the best and most under-rated films out there.
Rating:
Summary: 5 Words- Cheech and Chong for Intellectuals
Review: When I first saw Wonder Boys in the theater back in February of 2000, I gave it an A- (or 4 stars) since I thought the film had a good, low key sense of humor about it but wasn't anything great. But I've found after multiple viewings that this film has definitely grown on me, maybe because I can relate to the main character, Grady Tripp, and maybe a tid bit with the character of James Leer. Perhaps it's because I am a writer myself, perhaps I have dabbled in such pharmeceuticals Tripp (pun intended?) brings with him in his car, or perhaps not. I say also that this is like a Cheech and Chong for intellectuals since it has all the weird, laugh out loud moments of an Up In Smoke or Nice Dreams, yet it has so much more intelligence and detail payed to characters, plus is has some subtle moments thrown in, like they're are on occasion in a C & C opus. The film is also a great look at the world of writers, how they're judged, and what choices the writer makes in the process. If you saw this film once, it's the kind of movie to see again, to pick up on things missed on the first viewing, and then if it's enjoyed more, why not another vide? Favorite scene- Professor Trip, with his just-scene-before dog shooting student James Leer, takes a Codine, gives one to James, which he spits out onto Tripp's jacket, and then go inside a packed assembly where Q is speaking. Worth it.
Rating:
Summary: Good movie
Review: Great Movie. I usually don't write any reviews cause I don't know English. But I HAD to say this: What the hype about Tobey Maguire is all about? He acts JUST like a robot! Same old face in all of his movies.
I couldn't stand him on The Ice Storm. You see him in Spiderman and you can see that for yourself, the kid has the same face for all the roles. He acts just the same. I feel better now.
I could say the same thing about Katie Holmes with her "Dawson" gestures, but she was good in "Go".
Rating: 
Summary: Not Movie Of The Year Material
Review: This movie takes a minute to understand. It's about a man, Grady Tripp (Michael Douglas) who is experiencing a forced midlife crisis. The plot tends to lack a certain something at times.
Robert Downey Jr. is Douglas's editor in the movie and throughout the audience is not quite sure whether Downey is gay or straight. He starts off dating a transvestite and then in turn jumps into bed with heart throb, Spiderman star, Tobey Maguire. Again throughout the movie the audience is not sure who Tobey Maguire's character is, much less decide which sex he prefers. Maguire is a genius writer in Tripp's class. So I ask if Douglas is Maguires professor than why does Maguire's character latch onto Douglas's so much? Why does Maguire's character lie so much? And why does Maguire grow smitten with Downey's character?
While trying to be philosophical, and dramatic with an underlying layer of dark comedy attached to it, Curtis Hanson does the opposite and the movie comes to be one big confusion. The audience really doesn't feel a connection with Douglas and most are left wondering why Katie Holmes was even in the movie because all she did was try to seduce Douglas's character. Once again I must ask more questions. Why was Katie Holmes even living with Douglas's character when he was her professor? As for Maguire, I'm left wondering about him. Why was he so apt on living with Douglas's character? Why did he lie about his whole existence? Why did he kill the dog? All in all the movie kept my attention for 112 minutes but really maybe something that is way above American society or just frankly sucks.
Rating:
Summary: Fiction about fiction
Review: Nothing's harder than for a professor of writing to admit that he himself is struggling with true inspiration for his own writings. The professor's editor wants to know when his novel is going to be finished. But the truth is that, after several thousand pages, the inspirationless author has yet to really get started. In the meantime, the professor's star pupil is so engrossed in the fiction piece that he is writing that he has begun to incorporate his fiction with his and the professor's reality. This makes for quite an interesting adventure between two of the most misunderstood characters on earth: writers. These two characters make for fine companions and discover more about each than they bargained for when they try to help each other get untangled from the web of deception they have created. I found great satisfaction in the characters of this movie and the surprises along the way.
Rating:
Summary: One of the most oddly compelling films in recent memory.
Review: Pittsburgh is a horrible place, and it feels like all the characters in this movie are mired there, flailing around as if they're attempting to get out of quicksand. I guess that's the whole point of the film. It features Douglas's least narcissistic (he looks like hell through most of it) and therefore truest performance, which is offset perfectly by Tobey Maguire being his, well, Tobey Maguire-i-est, and the always great-but-loony Robert Downey Jr., very well cast here. Frances McDormand is as good as she was in "Almost Famous," and I was enchanted by a lovely little cameo by the very-underrated Jane Adams. In all, a great movie for a rainy day, or when you're sick or depressed.
Rating:
Summary: YUCK!!!
Review: Michael Douglas plays a writer/professor with a major case of
writers block. His wife has left him. He's in love with the Chancellor of
the school. He is a heavy user
of recreational drugs. His young border has a thing for him. His gay
publisher (Robert Downey Jr.) is in town sniffing around trying to find out
when the next book is coming out. One of his students has latched onto him
but the student has his own problems that Douglas is having problems dealing
with.
I really am not certain what the point of this movie is. My wife
explained it had to do with Douglas coming to terms with his inner demons
and getting his life back on track. This could be true but for the most
part I sat there thinking, "This is a complete waste of time and they picked
that kid to play Spider-Man???"
|
