Rating: 
Summary: Predictable and in the end annoying
Review: If the movie starts greatly, it sure ends really badly. The last 40 minutes are just a waste and repeat the exact same jokes than in the beginning. The story is not the exact same one than in "as Good as it gets" but you can feel that it is a copycat, and unfortunately, a really poor one. Watch it once if you can't help it, but please, even if you have watched it ten times, "As good as it gets" is way over this one. We can't even compare them because "Something's gotta give" just seems lame next to it. The only thing that made me give a 2-stars is because the actors are great, but the story is so poor.
Rating: 
Summary: OK
Review: I thought this movie was OK.. not good, not great, and I was suprised Ebert gave it 3.5/4 (I think there's some money being shuffled under the table with that guy?). I found the film to be mildly entertaining and it managed to keep my attention for its 2hr+ length, so that automatically gets it 3 stars. Oh yeah, and it got a couple chuckles out of me as well. Otherwise, I felt the story was very poorly written and full of painfully obvious flaws. First of all, Frances McDormand's character made a captivating debut early in the movie but was completely left in the dust. It's like after the first 30min Nancy Meyers forgot about the character and by the time she remembered, the story was too far along to even try to write her back in. Then there's Keanu, who's role is very flat and quite boring to be honest. His part is weak and, in the second half of the film, seems to be used exclusively as a tool to try and 'fix' the movie. Take for example the ending. I believe Meyers originally wrote the script having Jack go to paris, find Diane there alone, and they live happy dappy. Realizing this was too boring she decided to throw Keanu back in to add another twist to the plot. Great idea! Now all she has to do is rewrite the whole ending with Keanu, but instead she just kind of pushes everything around and shoves him in. Like when Jack sits down with Diane in the restaurant and later -suprise- Keanu walks up. Diane says something like,"Oh! I should have told you he was here, but I was so interested in your story!" Poor patching job there. Then on the bridge during the final scene. Jack asks, "Where's Julian?" Diane replies something like, "Oh, he saw that I was still in love with you and we broke up at the hotel." Please! Nancy Meyers really fumbled the ending. Then there was the whole deal where Diane was writing the play as it was happening to her, which was really supposed to be Nancy Meyers, and the play is called 'A Woman To Love' and it's all supposed to be the cliche movie about a movie kind of thing. But that doesn't work out either for some reason. It was obvious that the movie was intended to be titled 'A Woman To Love', like the play, but instead it's 'Something's Gotta Give'. WHY? Where did that title come from?? The number of flaws in this movie are many. I felt Jack only took his role seriously half of the time and Diane became quite annoying, especially after the prolonged supposed-to-be-funny(?) 'crying like a baby' scene. But all in all, I thought the acting was good (minus Keanu, of course), especially Keaton. Didn't want to be too hard on the movie, it wasn't bad, just that the errors in a film have never jumped out at me quite like they did in this one.
Rating: 
Summary: In praise of older women
Review: This movie reminded me of a romantic comedy of years gone by. Not so much with the language and brief nudity, but the feeling left after watching the movie. There were no all-too-familiar lulls in the movie, but non-stop entertainment. Anyone who didn't find this movie hilarious, I feel, must be lacking something in their own sense of humor. Watching Jack Nicholson "grow up" onscreen to accept his own maturity while he slowly begins to appreciate Diane Keaton's age and wisdom is pure joy (eg., "Who's the lucky boy?") I do feel that there was no explanation why her sister Zodie (played by Frances McDormand), who was to spend the weekend with her, seems to have disappeared. I would have liked to see more interaction between the two as sisters since they seemed to play well off one another. Hopefully, they can reprise their roles if, by some stroke of luck, a sequel is in the offing. When I watch a comedy, I want to forget my troubles and enjoy a good laugh. This movie certainly didn't disappoint me on any level and was much more than I ever expected. Bravo!
Rating: 
Summary: Tip: Don't buy the in-flight headset - nap instead
Review: Apparently, when airlines plan the in-flight "entertainment" on their cross-country flights, they go under three assumptions: 1. They have a captive audience. 2. This audience would rather look at a tiny screen in the dark than see the Rocky Mountains. 3. People that fly in airplanes are stupid and in menopause (note that, unlike this movie, I am drawing a distinction between these two groups).
This movie is nothing more grandiose than a low-grade soft-porn flick for old people. That neither the director nor the target audience realize this only further emphasizes the need for a serious re-evaluation of the voting privelages of the elderly. Personally, I would feel safer if our leaders were selected by 10-year-olds than by the ogling herds of fading Baby Boomers in elastic waisted pants that make up this movie's target audience.
Despite what the movie suggests, a man of Jack Nickelson's personal appearance and manner and age would only get a stupid young woman to eagerly wriggle out of her low-rise jeans if he was waving a couple of hundred dollars at her. (Note that the director eagerly waved a good bit more than a couple hundred at the actresses in this movie). Despite the fact that Jack once was young - he is not anymore - much like Joan Collins and Bill Clinton. He is an elderly, liver-spotted fool, and the movie only reminds us of this. I personally find this comforting, since it suggests that, one day, all of the Jack Nickelsons in the world will be dead - and we will thus be rid of them.
Of course Diane Keaton is just as laughable. Looking like she's had enough facelifts to safely tuck her chin(s) behind her ears (Diane to her private Surgeon: "COME ON! PULL IT TIGHTER! MY NEXT MOVIE IS SUPPOSED DEMONSTRATE THAT WOMEN SHOULDN'T BE JUDGED BY THEIR AGE AND LOOKS!"), she has all the emotional clarity that can imaginably be associated with a particularly ugly menopause. Diane is as likely to steal the heart of Keanu Reeves as she is to steal the heart of Alfonso the sea lion. Wait - scratch that - Sea lions are both overly amorous and near-sighted. Someone please tell Diane to steer clear of public aquaria!
In an effort to pile one insulting plot-twist on top of another, we are not only forced to watch Jack Nickelson and Diane Keaton hoot and hump all over the screen like a pair of manure-smeared orangutans, but they are unfortunately also given lines. We are thus faced not only with the impossible demand of picturing these miserable old fools constantly scoring young movie stars, but we are also asked to believe that they're clever and witty while doing it. I can only assume that they believe their audience is excessively gullible, lulled by the hormonal imbalances and extreme wishful thinking of a generation that thought JFK was an upright citizen. Then again, I was entrusting my life to a large chunk of machinery that was hurtling through the air 7 miles above the earth while I watched this movie. Who am I to talk about gullibility?
This movie demonstrates that, for the ideal retired person of today, the flower of old age - wisdom - has been traded in for a second go at the orangutan pen. If you're one of these old fools - by all means, watch this movie. If there's any dignity and decency left in your balding, liver-spotted skulls, it will awake screaming at the full-frontal assault this movie subjects it to. If this doesn't happen - may I suggest the SkyMall catalogue and a miniature bag of pretzels?
Rating:
Summary: agree with moviegrlll
Review: I coudn't agree more with moviegrlll-- how any self-respecting woman could find Jack Nicholson's character (and his real self) appealing to the point of givung up one's autonomy and self-respect is mind-boggling, and a bunch of patriarchal propaganda horsecrap.
Rating:
Summary: Intelligent and charming!
Review: To paraphrase a line found within this film, this is a movie to love! The writing and the directing are solid. It successfully delves into the realms of comedy and drama both without becoming too much of one and foresaking the other.
Is it intelligently written? Yes. Does "intelligently written" mean that it's "Citizen Kane"? Of course not! But then, would a romantic comedy benefit from an austere take on life like some whine is missing from this film? Probably not. Besides, there are other worthy films that achieve that goal and are available. Sometimes, I think cynicism is confused or equated with"intelligent". Rather, it's intelligent in the fact that it does not blandly parcel out the storyline like so many movies do these days. It doens't pander and go for the easy laughs and/or sight gags. I intensely dislike movies that seem as if written from a board room of Hollywood executives. Fortunately, this movie is not one of them whereas "Sleepless In Seattle" was (for me).
The acting is fantastic! Keaton and Nicholson could charm an audience by reciting the ingredients off of a soup can! They're chemistry together feels genuine and they hit all the right notes from the smallest inflections to the larger, overall actions within the storyline. All of the other actors are solid in their performances as well and lend credibility and their own sense of charm as well.
The music in this movie is great too and works well to support the tone without being intrusive.
My only criticism (and it's minor) is that it dragged just a tad three quarters through the film but picks up again towards the end. There really are no holes in the story which I was pleased with.
All in all, this is a movie that will give you a lift without sacrificing intelligence or compromising integrity for the sake of doing so. "Somethings Gotta Give" is not only a movie to love but one to own as well!
Rating: 
Summary: One of the funniest films of 2003
Review: Dianne Keaton and Jack Nicholson are on fire in this new romantic comedy. Finally a movie has been made for the over 50 crowd. Ironically it can appeal to anyone, not just seniors. I had so much fun watching this film. Amanda Peet, Frances McDormand, and Keany Reeves highlight the supporting cast. The film may be a tad offensive to the older folks, but it is completely likeable. Keaton reprised the Annie Hall type role once again, and Jack Nicholson plays a cooky Hugh Hefner type. I applaud this film. All Rom. Comedy film fans should see it.
Rating:
Summary: Mid-Life crisis at any age!
Review: Something's Gotta Give is a romantic comedy that can be enjoyed by viewers of all ages. Columbia Pictures presents an all-star cast in this 128 minute feature. Writer/Director Nancy Meyers, who wrote "What Women Want", puts a new twist on a mid-life crisis. Harry, played by Jack Nicholson, a 63 year old get-around who has never dated women under the age of 30, doesn't experience his crisis until he meets Erica Barry (Diane Keaton). As a beautiful, intelligent, successful play-write Keaton is the mother of Harry's latest fling. After a heart-attack in Keaton's home, he finds himself at her mercy physically and then emotionally. Dr. Julian Mercer (Keanu Reeves) who is Nicholson's doctor falls for Keaton and overlooks the age difference to see the beautiful person that she is. Meanwhile, Harry realizes that he's about to lose the love of his life. When a movie lets the viewer laugh and cry it deserves five stars. Something's Gotta Give will do that for you. This is a must-see movie that explores the changes that result from divorce and heartbreak and how they can be overcome. Watch it with an open mind!
Rating:
Summary: Funny yet longwinded
Review: Something's Gotta Give was not exactly what I expected from watching the movie trailer. I expected a movie to just knock my socks off especially since Jack Nicholson of all people was one of the leading actors. Overall the movie was funny but what kind of woman in her right mind, 50 or not, would pick her daughters ex boyfriend over a handsome doctor that was obviously madly in love with her because of who she was. Could you imagine sleeping with your daughters ex lover, icky! The crying scene seemed to last forever, I remember laying in bed thinking is this movie ever going to end. I don't mean to give this title a bad review just pointing out the obvious. Definately a good movie to watch but I don't reccomend buying it.
Rating:
Summary: Pretty average
Review: The premise is a 60 year old womanizer who has only dated women under 30 falls for a 50's mother of one of his dates. Jack Nicholson plays the elderly letch and Diane Keaton the woman who is able to cure Jack of his inability to grow up. To further emphasize the fact that age should not be a problem for women there is a side plot in which a much younger Keanu Reeves also falls for Keaton. The problem with the film is that it is simply not engaging. The initial scene is really pretty revolting. Nicholson has been able to chat up a young woman by a commercial favour. She is an auctioneer and he has bought a lot of the goods she is selling. They head off for a dirty weekend at her mothers beech house and shock horror the mother discovers them. The premise of the movie depends on Keaton finding the Nicholson character both interesting and attrative. One would have thought that the initial reaction of a mother to an elderly letch who tried to buy the affection of her daughter would be revulsion. However everyone is very calm about it all. Later a health scare throws Nicholson and Keating together. However the dialogue is sparse and it beggars belief that the two main characters could find anthing interesting in the other. Keaton is meant to be a succesful playright. However she never discusses anything from an interlectual perspective in the film. She plays the same role that she used to in Woodie Alan movies, that of a daffy sort of cute woman. One would have thought that a real life playwright would have at least some gravitas. A larger problem is that the film depends on Nicholson being attractive. However he is given no lines that suggest that he is witty intelligent or has much of an insight into life. In reality his one attraction is that he is rich a record producer. The film has one or two mildly funny scences but in reality it is simply not funny or witty enough to engage the audience. It depends on the audience starting with feelings of a posative nature towards Keaton and Nicholson as the script cannot really generate it. The script deals with an interesting issue, that is that young women are not the all in sexual attraction but the other values of the film, money in itself is attrative for one, overwhelm the viewer and make him/her slightly repulsed by the whole excercise.
|
