Tag: Adaptation

JARHEAD (2005)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Sam Mendes
Written By: William D. Broyles Jr. 
Based on the book By: Anthony Swafford 
Cinematography: Roger Deakins 
Editor: Walter Murch 

Cast: Jake Gyllenhaal, Jamie Foxx, Peter Sarsgaard, Lucas Black, Ming Lo, Brian Geraghty, Scott Macdonald 

A psychological study of Marine’s state of mind during the Gulf War. Told through the eyes of a U.S. Marine sniper who struggles to cope with boredom, a sense of isolation, and other issues back home.

This film is a visually stunning coming-of-age story set in the armed forces. That might be a great Anti-war film in itself. As it shows men who believe in their country and want to go to war to defend it, but not that much happens as there is no war really going on. So we see the rigors of the day-to-day life of the platoon and how they slowly become disillusioned.

Though there are still plenty of stories to tell as we get more into their backgrounds and day-to-day lives. Much of it seems like much ado about nothing.

That provides a portrait of the rage and frustration of a group of soldiers. Who joined up looking to spill blood and kill but rarely ended up seeing any action. So they end up trying to find outlets for their aggression. 

Jamie Foxx plays their angry commander. Who is also looking for glory days, but keeps coming up short. 

While feeling the soldiers’ frustration is the film’s aim. You also feel frustrated with the film at times, for while it is vivid, barely anything happens.

So it ends up becoming a character study that truly only explores two characters deeply. Those played by Jake Gyllenhaal and Peter Sarasgaard. As the rest are more comedic.

So that the film offers a grand scale presentation and dark comedy throughout. Though more built around its star.

Despite all this, the film manages to make a small impact, more than some other films about the military or even war. The movie CHERRY with Tom Holland comes to mind. Even if at times it feels like it is presented as pop art of military life. Like a modern-day CATCH-22 only not as deep. 

As the film is based on a book, really a memoir by the author of his time in the armed forces. So that it becomes a character study of the situation of the young man. The deprivation he experiences through it all. It seems more about the frustration of joining, thinking you will be a hero and make a difference, and then coming back home feeling like a failure and that you really had no impact. Though still a one-of-a-kind experience of male bonding. 

Grade: C+

MONEYBALL (2011)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Bennett Miller
Written By: Aaron Sorkin And Steve Zaillian 
Story By: Stan Chervin
Based on the book “MONEYBALL: The Art Of Winning An Unfair Game” by: Michael Lewis 
Cinematography: Wally Pfister
Editor: Christopher Tellefsen 

Cast: Brad Pitt, Jonah Hill, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Robin Wright, Chris Pratt, Stephen Bishop, Reed Diamond, Brent Jennings, Tammy Blanchard, Nick Searcy, Arliss Howard

Oakland A’s GM Billy Beane is handicapped with the lowest salary constraint in baseball. If he ever wants to win the World Series, Billy must find a competitive advantage. Billy is about to turn baseball on its ear when he uses statistical data to analyze and place value on the players he picks for the team.

This film feels like a classic story. It is told simply not in a flashy way with plenty of dramatic scenes and even leaves room for light humor. Though it is intricate in the details and methods it is told. 

It feels like a film that has confidence in itself and how important it is. Whereas for the audience your enjoyment of the film matters in your interest in the subject and even the sport of baseball. As the film feels strong and partially nostalgic about the feeling of baseball and what it represents for some but also represents the players who seemingly

Give their all even when they might have run out of what makes them special, but also by making it more about numbers and probability. While trying to humanize these players it also undercuts them as at times liabilities more than anything. 

Why is it that baseball is the most respected sport when it comes to movies? Even though it is the sort that had a public cheating scandal in its heyday? As it strangely seems to represent Americana. As it has always seemed to be around and played?

Jonah Hill underplays In his role showing he can be quite effective without really doing much and more letting the character stand out for his skills rather than his behavior or words.

Bennet Miller behind the camera directing is always a joy. As he always seems to disappear and once he comes back around to making another film it stands out in many good ways. As they always seem more prestige than anything else. Good but they seem to lack passion or too much emotion. Here he has another home run. 

As a director, he tends to be very atmospheric. Especially when it comes to a consistent tone. As he seems to seek to say so much. While seemingly doing very little but it feels bigger. It’s hard to believe he only came onto this project after Director Steven Soderbergh left the project. 

This is one of Brad Pitt’s better performances where he seems to be in a role later in his career. As in the role, he plays it as more neutral, cocky, and as much of a show-off as he has done in the past. Here he doesn’t have to rely on looks, personality, or charm. 

The cast is full of heavy hitters who never let the film or the material down.

As this film is a true story it doesn’t have a storybook ending. But even as it is downbeat it is a quietly satisfying one. 

It not only takes you behind the scenes of the organization but also a great story with real characters going through inner turmoil. Though they stay in check of their emotions, you can read the drama clearly on their faces and in their eyes. 

The story is all about the details that shape and define it. 

GRADE: A

VANYA ON 42ND STREET (1994)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Louis Malle
Screenplay By: Andre Gregory 
Based On The Play “DYADYA  VANYA” By Anton Chekhov
Play Adaptation By: David Mamet 
Cinematography: Declan Quinn
Editor: Nancy Baker 

Cast: Julianne Moore, Wallace Shawn, Lynn Cohen, Larry Pine, Brooke Smith, Jerry Mayer, Andre Gregory, George Gaynes, Phoebe Brand, Madhur Jeffrey 

An uninterrupted rehearsal of Chekhov’s “Uncle Vanya” played out by a company of actors. The setting is their run-down theater with an unusable stage and crumbling ceiling. The play is shown act by act with the briefest of breaks to move props or for refreshments. The lack of costumes, real props, and scenery is soon forgotten.

though you can tell it’s more performance, so stripped down and organic that it sometimes feels like the actors’ lives and drama might be bleeding into the performances. Keeping the audience on its toes and feeling magically

Though from time to time you can see the people watching. As an audience as well as the director. The film begins traditionally as the actors and director arrive to let us see the setup and give us a New York street view placing the location to a degree.

How it works, not such a staged production, but any distraction. No illumination. So that we are close in the middle of the action and relationships and characters as the camera stays close, rarely moving, and is always close in and tight on their faces. Feels like it is giving us intimacy with the characters.

Wasn’t quite sure exactly when the play started as it seemed more like a general conversation at first then all of a sudden moved on. Though serious it feels adventurous and experimental, open and free.

This is another collaboration that feels similar in spirit yet bigger and not as much of an endurance test. Whereas MY DINNER WITH ANDRE seems almost like a documentary of an intellectual dinner conversation between two friends that reflects so much personality and personality about the people involved. Though we know it is a put-on production, in reality, it was the actors using their real names and partial history but really two originally created characters. Here we have Andre Gregory break up the scenes and guide the audience a bit so that we are In New locations within the play.

Though we are with the camera and the theatrical viewers are right up on them they manage to establish being alone and to themselves quite well. So good it’s hard to tell the difference

Truly be amazing if done straight through act breaks need to explain what has passed and where we are at

Happy to see Brooke smith who over the years has quite a resume. Not exactly a star but a recognizable character actress over the years. Who has earned her success from small to significant supporting roles seems as if we can watch her grow up on the screen as I remember her early first role in THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. One of my favorite immoral films in junior high school and high school where I earned the nickname Hannibal the cannibal by fellow students and Jeffrey danger because of the similar first name and I was also quiet and unassuming. It’s always a surprise to see her even at first if she seems miscast like in BAD COMPANY.

Grade: A

HOLLYWOOD STARGIRL (2022)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Julia Hart
Written By: Julia Hart & Jordan Horowitz 
Based On Characters from the novel STAR GIRL By: Jerry Spinelli 
Cinematography: Bryce Fortner 
Editor: Shayer Bhansali & Tracey Wadmore-Smith 

Cast: Grace VanderWall, Elijah Richardson, Judy Greer, Uma Thurman, Judd Hirsch, Tyrel Jackson Williams, Chris Williams, Al Madrigal, Nija Okoro, Sarayu Blue 

Stargirl Caraway as she journeys out of Mica into a bigger world of music, dreams and possibility.

while better made than the first film. As it seems to have a larger scope. it also seems to have lost a little of its heart. This one might be a bit better because you know what to expect throughout. 

As it tries to keep a positive and romantic tone. It still is paced morosely.

As even though it’s a kid’s film it feels like doom or the rig will get pulled under at any minute.

This one also benefits from a more well-known cast of supporting actors. Who gets more time to actually have their presence felt. Instead of the last film which focused primarily on the main couple. 

Star girl still seems to be a beacon of optimism And the guys she falls for seem to be the same type. Here she is not quite as mysterious. Not offering a surprising knowledge of music and classic hits. Though there are plenty of singing scenes.

Not quite a musical in the classic sense but more songs were performed without any choreography or dancing. The difference between seeing a performer and a show.

This film is also a romance but maybe as in the last film they spent more time on the romance and her doing the chasing while staying mysterious. This time around we get to know more about her and the romance just seems to happen. It’s sweet but doesn’t feel like it has as much depth this time around.

It pretty much goes through the numbers and is a sweet film. None of it is really believable but keeps your interest. Especially when it is more made to please its audience of Disney viewers 

Though everything feels rushed its pace is like molasses.

Grade: C

DANIEL ISN’T REAL (2019)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Adam Egypt Mortimer 
Written By: Adam Egypt Mortimer & Brain Deleeuw
Based On the novel “IN THIS WAY I WAS SAVED” By: Brian Deleeuw 
Cinematography: Lyle Vincent 
Editor: Brett W. Bachman 

Cast: Miles Robbins, Patrick Schwartzenegger, Sasha Blane, Mary Stuart Masterson, Hannah Marks, Chukwudi Iwuji, Peter McRobbie

A troubled college freshman, Luke, suffers a violent family trauma. He then resurrects his charismatic childhood imaginary friend Daniel to help him cope, not realizing how dangerous Daniel is.

This is a film I truly looked forward to watching and I will say that it is the work of an original filmmaker. Who definitely has talent, unfortunately, the film never seems to rise to how strong it seems to lead. 

The film offers a tale of a schizophrenic That can be compared to or seen as a dual personality. Here that other personality corns across as a long-lost imaginary friend. Who comes back during a mental break though the film presents as more supernatural.

Though a film that is more willing to examine mental illness and the effects it can have not only on you but those around you and how it can be hereditary. 

Which leads the film to be a strong and tight thriller. As the other personality is more of a bad boy, yet comes across as a hipster jerk or A frat brother type you would think most would want to avoid. who comes across as charming to most of the female characters. 

Which makes him more believable as a sociopath. Eventually, the Film reveals why the other personality is so murderous. That might be one of the few parts of the movie that feels like it needed to be stronger or at least have a stronger explanation.

The film attempts to make the supernatural elements help to build a world. Though even once it is explained it feels a bit vague. As you want more information. Though it does leave you guessing as to whether it is truly him or a split personality or something else altogether 

One of the perks of the film is seeing Mary Stuart Masterson in a film again. Here she as usual is strong in her scenes. 

If looking for a psychological thriller that has originality and doesn’t walk the familiar beaten paths this is the film for you.

Grade: B

DEATH ON THE NILE (2022)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Kenneth Branagh
Written By: Michael Green 
Based upon the novel by: Agatha Christie 
Cinematography: Haris Zamberloukos
Editor: Una Ni Dhonghalie 

Cast: Kenneth Branagh, Gal Gadot, Annette Bening, Russell Brand, Armie Hammer, Letitia Wright, Emma Mackey, Tom Bateman, Sophie Okonedo, Rose Leslie, Dawn French, Jennifer Saunders, Adam Garcia, Michael Rouse, Alaa Safi 

While on vacation on the Nile, Hercule Poirot must investigate the murder of a young heiress.

This film was postponed for release due to the pandemic and having a troubled cast member. That was meant to be released theatrically because of the big-name cast. Though quietly released onto streaming. While it has the beauty to be a more theatrical release, by the end it feels more compact and like a television movie with grand ambitions.

This feels like the British version of the movie. As most of the cast is more British stars and recognizable actors. Maybe it helps the film be more acceptable for a foreign audience. 

As it lacks the star power of Kenneth Branagh’s previous Agatha Christie novel brought to film MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS. While he directs and stars a detective Hercule Poirot is seemingly on vacation and brought into another murder mystery.

This film is much darker in spirit than the previous film. Which although had a murder plot came off a little more lightweight and his performance was more comedic and fun. In this film, it is much more dramatic. As it feels more personal for the main character. This leaves Branagh’s Performance much more melodramatic. Even if the rest of the motivations feel a little looser.

As this film cuts closer to his character’s heart as we learn more about his past and he is much closer to the characters and one of the victims.

The film feels too long and it takes almost 45 minutes before the initial death comes to pass. Where there is a lot of build-ups and setting up animosity and motives for various characters. Even though it seems obvious from the early part of the film who the killer is.

So that it feels like we are not really waiting for who did it, but more how and why. 

The relationships throughout don’t seem very romantic or warm. Yet we are told how much they care about one another. Some of the castings seem more like a stunt. Like having comedic duo Dawn French and Jennifer Saunders in the film and giving them nothing comedic to work with or having Russell Brand play a more dramatic role. Which he does well and without his long hair you barely recognize him. 

The film feels like it had a much lower budget to work with. As it seems to be a much smaller story and more limited in locations. It also seems a little less glamorous than the first film.  So it goes the opposite direction of most sequels. 

Though still beautifully filmed. Including a shot that showcases most of the cast In one shot that is obviously more for the trailer to show off. 

The film is a good time waster. As it is mostly entertaining as it goes along. Even though it is predictable.

Grade: C

THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK (1998)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Written & Directed by: Randall Wallace 
Based On The Novels “Vingt Ans Apres” & “La Victome De Bragalonne” By: Alexander Dumas 
Cinematography: Peter Suschitzky
Editor: William Hoy

Cast: Leonardo DiCaprio, Gabriel Byrne, Jeremy Irons, John Malkovich, Gerard Depardieu, Judith Godreche, Anne Parillaud, Peter Sarsgaard, Edward Atterton, Hugh Laurie, Laura Fraser, Leonor Varela 

Paris is starving, but the King of France is more interested in money and bedding women. When a young soldier dies for the sake of a shag, Aramis, Athos, and Porthos band together with a plan to replace the king. Unknown to many, there is a 2nd king, a twin, hidden at birth, then imprisoned for 6 years behind an iron mask. All that remains now is D’Artagnan, will he stand against his long-time friends, or do what is best for his country?

I remember being excited to see this in theaters with such a distinguished cast playing the musketeers and Leonardo DiCaprio’s first film right after TITANIC. Filmed before that film I believe but released relatively soon after. While I wasn’t a particular fan of that movie. I was a fan of DiCaprio. Who at that point. Had been gaining a lot of buzzes.

I really didn’t like the film as I watched it in theaters I remember being heavily disappointed and downright bored. It had its highlights but there were relatively few of them. Watching the film years later I have to say it is still disappointing.

It didn’t help that this movie was advertised as having more action than it ended up having. Watching it now even the action scenes aren’t very inspired or all that vivid. They lack any skill or any finesse and look like they are running and wrestling one another.

In fact, the only thing the film has going for it is the cast. Leonardo DiCaprio playing dual roles keeps your attention and shows here that he is much better in villainous roles. As he was on his way up to stardom and making quite a male for himself. This role showed he was more about the craft somewhat than the box office. 

Other than him the actors playing the musketeers are so loved and fun you almost want a separate film all about them. As they bring life to the film and their scenes. Putting a spin on each of their characters. So that they show charisma and can be both funny and captivating often in the same sentence.

The film feels like a movie made to be watched in English classes teaching the book to make the material more vivid for the kids. As everything looks like a set and bland in the background. As the film never displays any real passion or energy. So that it almost feels like reading the book. Which I never have. It comes off as a throwback to classic studio adaptations, Where they just throw stars at the material and hope it sticks in with a certain audience.

The female lead, Judith Godreche really has little to do. She just seems to be a pretty face here. Her character is more put there to be a means to an end. The curse of her character is her beauty which sets everything in motion. As she comes across as a plot convenience and somewhat eye candy. So later the fate of her character never even feels that shocking or dramatic. 

In the end, it feels almost like a school production only with a budget. The film at times tries but misses the target. 

Grade: D+

CANNERY ROW (1982)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Written & Directed By: David S. Ward
Based on the novels “Cannery Row” and “Sweet Thursday” By: John Steinbeck
Cinematography: Sven Nykvist
Editor: David Bretherton 

Cast: Nick Nolte, Debra Winger, M. Emmet Walsh, Audra Lindley, Frank McRae, James Keane, Kathleen Doyle, Art LaFleur, John Huston 

A depressed section of Monterey, California, known as Cannery Row from its string of now-empty canning plants is the backdrop for an offbeat romantic comedy about a pair of mismatched lovers. Doc is a lonely marine biologist (and former baseball star) who supplies specimens for science labs and classrooms. Suzy is a scrappy drifter who can’t even succeed as a prostitute because of her abrasive manner. When the two get together, it’s fireworks, though not the romantic kind. Not to worry, everything is in the hands of Cannery Row’s resident guardian angels, Mack and the boys, a band of drunken derelicts whose hearts are in the right place, even though their brains are not.

The film is atmospheric and feels enriched in culture but like John Steinbeck’s writing, it is based. It feels dull yet full of depth. It is a particular slice of life. 

The film has certain scenes that are full of charm and feel inventive. As well as a romance that feels like it takes place in real-time.

The character feels full and lived in and not necessarily caricatures. Where you could actually set stories around them individually. Which the film tries to do by giving them each time to shine. 

Debra winger comes off as charming. Especially as we learn more about her as the film goes along.

The film offers itself up more as a slice of life that feels like not too much happens. Thought the film will have A scene that will wake you up and then go back to being mundane. As the film in exchange for feeling lived in, never decides what or where it wants to go or to be.

Frank McRae plays another stereotypical mentally simple role but is meant to be more the lovable giant. This might be one of the first times he played the type. Before moving on to angry police captains in other films. 

The film feels like POPEYE the movie spin-off with a whole new set of characters but leftover similar sets.

As the film feels episodic. The film feels like a set of short stories coming Together to tie together the ensemble and focus on friendships and relationships.

Each character is lived in and feels like they have more to offer. As the film has scenes of absolute slapstick ingenuity and a hard-won romance.

One can see why the film might not have been a success, but also easily can be seen as a product of a bygone era. Even as the time period shows this more as a character-heavy periodic, episodic, and ensemble finding the story, character and themes 

This film works like that invention from the beginning of PEE WEE’S BIG ADVENTURE. Where we see the invention and its mechanics, the nuts and bolts of it all, and are amazed at its assembly d how it works as it seems to put in a lot of synchronization for it all to work at certain intervals. 

Even entertaining to watch themselves until finally at the end. All of that for something so simple. Where the mechanics are more interesting or captivating than the act. A lot of work for something basic, that is how this film feels. 

GRADE: C+

THE BIRDCAGE (1996)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By Mike Nichols 
Written By: Elaine May 
Based on An Earlier Screenplay By: Francis Veber, Edouard Molinaro, Marcello Danon & Jean Poiret
Based in the play La Cage Aux Folles by: Jean Poiret
Cinematography: Enrique Lubezki
Editor: Arthur Schmidt 

Cast: Robin Williams, Nathan Lane, Gene Hackman, Dianne Wiest, Hank Azaria, Christine Baranski, Dan Futterman, Calista Flockhart, Tom McGowan, Grant Heslov, Kirby Mitchell, Ann Cusack, Trina McGee-Davis

A gay cabaret owner and his drag queen companion agree to put up a false straight front so that their son can introduce them to his fiancée’s right-wing moralistic parents.

this film at the time was a little daring or a bit of a gamble for a mainstream audience. Though it was also self-assured because of the popular cast. Though behind the scenes you had a bunch of heavy hitters. Who managed to raise the bar on a familiar tale and still knock it out of the park. 

Which shockingly had some actors playing against type. Where we have a fun yet more restrained Robin Williams while playing more of a funny conservative grouch. Seeing gene hackman in drag is certainly different and new.

The film also tries to put in some satire of the political culture at the time and while camping up gay culture at least offers a glimpse inside of it and offers representation.

This film also is really the big screen introduction of Nathan Lane as Albert the drag queen lover who has been practically a mother to robin Williams son in the film. Playing a role that was abandoned by Steve Martin last minute due to scheduling problems. Thilough broadway star Nathan lane took it and made it a star-making Role.

Hank Azaria also makes his presence felt in his supporting role as the couples maid, assistant and cook. Who is also part of the slapstick laughs later in the film.

This is one of those films that came around at the right place and right time. As the film and play was already a hit In France and waiting for an American remake for years that never got made which might have been out of fear in the 1989’s to portray a gay relationship. non chalantly with mainstream big name actors. So that when it did come along the culture was a bit more relaxed and if made today might not even bat too many eyelashes.

Luckily it is still hilarious to watch even on this day and age. Even when the Jokes are a little more obvious they still make you laugh. As there is wit on display as well as physical comedy and just plain old slapstick in the third act.

Out of the cast if anyone is flat It’s the young couple looking to get married played by Claista Flockhart and Dan Futterman though in a film filled with flamboyant and over the top characters you need some to be more quiet and seemingly normal to even it out a little. though they come off a little dull and Futterman Looks way older than Flockhart 

While the film is a laugh riot from beginning to the end it also has character moments that come off more serious and dramatic. As even after the so called Macho lesson the scene where lane tries to act like a straight male in a suit is a thing of beauty and partial pain.

You can feel its theatrical roots throughout it truly strongly in The theirs act where everything comes to a head. What truly is amazing is that while it was dating at its time it plays off so cute that now it feels like a more modern comedic classic that the whole family can enjoy. Even if there are times when it feels overloaded with stereotypes. 

It is so styled yet feels so haywire. That while it might seem like it is filling turbulence it’s always smooth sailing. 

Though there is an overwhelming comedic quality with heart and care that had me going to see it in theaters more than once or twice. 

Grade: A-

SOMEONE LIKE YOU (2001)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Tony Goldwyn 
Written By: Elizabeth Chandler
Based On The Novel “ANIMAL HUSBANDRY” By: Laura Zigman
Cinematography: Anthony B. Richmond 
Editor: Dana Congdon

Cast: Ashley Judd, Hugh Jackman, Marisa Tomei, Greg Kinnear, Ellen Barkin, Donna Hanover, Catherine Dent, Nicole leach, Peter Friedman, Colleen Camp, Mirelle Enos, Veronica Webb, Naomi Judd

After being jilted by her boyfriend, a talk show talent scout writes a column on the relationship habits of men which gains her national fame.

Way before the ADELE song on the same name. This movie came around when Ashley Judd was getting used to being a star. This was the film where it would really rest on her shoulders.

The problem is that this film is so generic. That even at the time it came out there felt outdated. It’s one of those films that came out in the 90’a and while you can tell it is a studio film it still comes across as no-frills. As there is no particular style everything’s made to look bland. So that when something that looks sharp in style and person. It is jarring. The film feels like it could have been a storyline on the television show FRIENDS rather than getting its own movie.

It also feels like everyone is too for their roles and especially to still have the character’s mindsets.

This film is disposable. So disposable I watched it recently and don’t remember much of this film. I know enough that I would never watch it again.

Hugh Jackson plays a cad who somehow becomes roommates with a co-worker played by Judd. She has recently broken up with her boyfriend and at first, they can’t stand each other (then why live together in the first place. It is New York after all so I guess desperate measures) slowly but surely, of course, they fall in love and he changes his ways.

I enjoy Hugh Jackman a lot. He is like one of those classic leading men from the 1940s and ’60s and at least the film in a scene shows why his character is so jaded and cruel as a ladies’ man. Though here he rarely has any chemistry with his female co-stars which really doesn’t help if you are making a romantic comedy. (Nor does the theory of double negative where the chemistry is supposed to be bad that it comes off charming eventually) Though there is something innately watchable about him.

Watching this film less for the romance and more for the comedy. As there is already little romance and more talk of it than anything. The comedy also never really comes other than some catty one-liners more from Jackman than Judd

At least Hugh Jackman seems to know he’s not in a necessarily good movie. He is just biding his time until each scene ends and is happy with the work. Not to mention a paycheck.

One can’t get mad at this film totally as it fits its conventions and lets you know what type of film it is. It doesn’t try to misdirect to make itself seem like it has more depth or one-of-a-kind filmmaking. Still even for its genre while competently filmed it is majorly disappointing in most aspects.

By the end, it also makes it obvious that the main character needed the break-up to happen for her to grow. As she would have been noted and settled into marriage with the wrong person in the first place and Even Though would have been happy. She also would have been bored and stuck 

The film is strictly painted by numbers and off the assembly line. I don’t even have that much more to say about it.

Grade: F