Contentar Best movie of this year hands down!

Freaktana A Major Disappointment

Griff Lees Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Ezmae Chang This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

marco-galvez This original premise is executed funnily and poetically, with witty dialogue that carries no shame in getting hilariously awkward. Cinematography does however clip this movies wings, dulling things constantly. A completely static shot with barely any camera playing. I appreciate it symbolises the relationship and is paired with the benches. But it does get boring and repetitive fast, ignoring potential opportunities and at some times obliterating emotional peaks. Characters and script, do however standout enough for me ro keep this movie alive, being both passionate and beloving. With believable performances on both counter parts. 7/10

BBButler3 I loved almost every word of this script. With so much other great writing under his belt, I'm not sure how Victor Levin is able to remain in his skin. Even the ordinary words are placed like jewels in the sky. Most of the voice-over narrative read like a great literary novel, as it should. Certain other parts were also beyond well-done, for instance, the "good-bye" letter from Arielle. I wouldn't change a word.However, the casting did not reach to touch what the words were attempting to make flesh. The main character, Brian Bloom, was too young or too underwhelming or too lacking in passion to meet the expectations and hopes I had for his character; the love interets, Arielle Pierpont, was too predictable of a classic, standard-issue French lover to be believed as someone who would throw her entire life away, to give her heart to such a young man. Both needed something extra or different to create the needed chemistry for them to be sympathetic to the viewer--Brian to be more outwardly passionate and perhaps mature, Arielle to be covertly needier and quirkier than a collected dipomat's wife might be. I stayed with them in their affair, but more for what I had hoped for them than what they actually shared. For any romantic movie, the lovers must match. For this film, the lovers needed not just match, but create an epic type of passion that drags the viewer in an causes the viewer to be just as heartbroken, just as destroyed as the characters themselves. And, yes, the parting destroyed him and her both. Yes, time and a more mature view of life gave them both the ability to embrace the gift they had for that moment of time. But that gratitude could have been much greater if the on-screen passion of the actors and the desire of the characters themselves were also splashed across the screen with a little more of a Jackson Pollack type of abandon. 'If the casting and direction were a bit more senstive, this could have been another Dr. Zhivago but with less production costs.Would I watch it again? Sure! But only if it were a rainy day, I had plenty of popcorn, and I could share it with a woman I had a secret crush on.

stills-6 You expect a romance movie to have something to say about romance, the idea of romance or love. And while this movie has a lot of cheesy dialogue that would point in that direction, it ultimately has nothing to say. And when a romance movie has nothing to say about romance, you would typically expect to see a kind of chemistry that draws you in. And while the female lead attempts to portray this pretty well, the male lead appears to have no idea that his character is in a romance, let alone is in love. And when a movie like this has nothing to say about romance, and has precious little chemistry between the leads, you would at least expect it to have a smart script. Alas, the dialogue leads from one laughably clichéd line to another. The weirdly pointless bench taglines portrayed as "the best writing in NYC" should give us a clue about where the script is going and how the narrative will play out.Not to say this movie isn't worthwhile in other ways. The character of Jane, the editor, may be the only 3-dimensional one here, and she completely takes over many of the scenes -- of the precious few she's in. Her absence is sorely noticeable when she's not there. The male lead's parents, while not quite as fleshed out as we'd like, are nevertheless extremely enjoyable. The story itself is nothing special -- it plays out as melodrama (stock characters in a situation that forces them to act in stock ways) which isn't necessarily bad if it's well done, but it just isn't.Something else to mention about the story: The universe in which this story exists is one that rewards and ultimately revolves around complete sincerity. This is intensely aggravating, not just because it makes the whole thing unrealistic, but also as it implies that the people here have no interior lives. That the only thing that matters is what they have chosen to do in a completely sincere manner. That is, the important thing is not who they are, but what they do. For a purportedly delicate character study, this is a weird narrative choice.There is one piece of irony that is probably not intentional, but which completely destroys any integrity this movie may have had at one point, and the following isn't a spoiler. The line "What would you do for love?" is intended to apply only to the woman and her life decisions, but it ultimately applies to the man as well. Because his own implicit answer to this question is what leads this movie to go into the depths of self-indulgent pretension. All of which could be forgiven if any of the other faults mentioned above were also addressed.

doappel I had no idea what a great movie this would be. Or how good Anton Yelchin actually (already) was, as an actor. This is the best romantic movie that I've seen for several years, with incredible dialogues. It is so rich, in so many ways, combining wisdom, life experience and humor. Nothing but love for this one.