yaadpyar Reviews

Meet Me at Christmas (2020 TV Movie)

One of the WORST of the Hallmark Xmas Movies

[1/10 · 25 November 2020]

I love Hallmark Xmas movies. I know they are trite, and I know what will happen - which couple will end up together. I love the fairy-tale mythology of Hallmark movies, that Christmas magic will brings true love. But this movie isn't worth the time getting to that sometimes delightful payoff.

Catherine Bell is as flat and lifeless as I've ever seen her, with a character that goes from 0-1 in 120 minutes. Almost nothing happens in the entire movie, and the smallness of the story is as claustrophobic as the couple of sets the entire thing happens in.

The misunderstanding that runs throughout the whole movie has no basis in any context that would make me care. No chemistry in the cast, especially between the main leads, and I just eneded up fast-forwarding through the entire wedding scene get to the inevitable outcome.

The lead couple meet one time decades ago and then don't see each other again until now. But instead of enjoying this re-connection, Catherine's character spends the movie affirming her true love for her dead husband instead. Why? Why is this holiday movie about her mourning her loss instead of celebrating the return of a man who was in her life for a brief and magical time? No idea, but I think it was a mistake.

I really enjoy a lot of these movies. Nashville Christmas Carol, for example, was really a pleasure to watch. But there was something off here - the writing was formulaic, with the characters seemingly disconnected from each other, reading lines with no feeling. Catherine Bells character wasn't likeable or interesting, and her mopey performance seemed to unnecessary. I didn't care at all if they got back together.

So many cuter Hallmark movies to enjoy. Don't waste your time on this one.

The Women's Balcony (2016)

Felt like I was walking the streets of Israel watching this movie

[8/10 · 18 May 2019]

I loved this movie because I enjoy religiously oriented movies and loved the Israeli authenticity. The movie raises the issues that all religious communities encounter when they face differing beliefs and practices. I really enjoyed the unapologetically strong female characters, the close community relationships, and the frank confrontation between the Orthodox and the Ultra Orthodox.

My big complaint is that the movie too easily demonized the Haredi rabbi, making him such a clear villain by the end that he loses credibility. I would have loved the approach to be less blunt and simplistic, so that viewers could wrestle with the real complexity of religious conflict that defines so much of life in Israel.

The Cakemaker (2017)

Engaging, but really unsatisfying - so many unanswered questions.

[4/10 · 18 May 2019]

No plot points here - plenty of other reviewers have that covered. I loved the Israeli character of the film with so much of Jerusalem life in focus, and it kept me watching until the end...that, and the hope that something would finally come together in terms of story or character development. But it doesn't come together. Watching this, I often felt I was seeing an actors studio of acting exercises, like how to go from laughter to tears, or how to show sorrow with just your eyes. But it felt too forced. Oren tells Thomas he will never leave his family, family is everything, and then we find out that Oren is killed in an accident after he tells his wife he's leaving her and moving to Germany. But Oren doesn't tell his German lover of his plans, that he's leaving his wife?!? Thomas goes to Israel for...? To see his dead lover's life in person? Why doesn't he go with a box of cinnamon cookies a tell her he was a close friend of Oren's instead of silently inserting himself into their lives? Why does Oren's mother decide to take Thomas under her wing? Why does she ask him if he wants to see Oren's room? How/why in the world does Motti get Thomas a GORGEOUS downtown apartment at an affordable rate?!? How can Thomas afford to leave work behind and to to Israel for an indeterminate amount of time? I wouldn't care if the movie had grounded something, connecting plot and character and giving me, the viewer, some perspective through which to understand why anyone is doing what they do. Why does Thomas, a gay man in love with Oren, then sleep with his dead lovers wife? What are we supposed to understand from this? And why is everyone ok with Thomas never talking, never saying anything, never engaging, never asking questions or offering answers. What is the religious undertone here about Anat's conflict with the Kashrut authorities and her brother? It feels thrown in, and I find it interesting, but it's another undeveloped tangent. And why does Anat go to Berlin just to watch Thomas ride away on his bike? So much potential. So many unanswered questions.

Life on Mars (2008–2009)

Totally loving it!

[10/10 · 14 December 2008]

This is one of my favorite shows at the moment. I'm not even a little familiar with the British version, so can't comment on the comparison. But I love this show. The writing is intelligent, and I'm completely drawn in by Jason O'Meara.

He approaches the complete confusion and uncertainty of his character's situation, even while not really knowing what his situation is, by being completely engaged and present, and bringing the viewer right alongside of him.

I'm not very interested in the political issues, but find the show interesting on multiple levels - the political, the cultural, the "cop show" story of the week, the spiritual, the relationships...

I'm amazed that network television has managed to bring so much talent together in one place and not screw it up! Can't wait to see where it all leads.

The Dark Knight (2008)

So much to offer, and yet so much still missing

[4/10 · 27 July 2008]

This might be a useful review for other folks like me who saw the movie, but are not typical action/comic book movie fans. I went in not expecting this to be my kind of film; for fans of this genre, it will admittedly rate higher.

Firstly, Chicago looked great in this film. Gotham, and its look and feel, is as important as any character in the film. Chicago's architecture was wonderfully suited to this film.

Heath Ledger was brilliant. The rotting stench of human decay poured over his putrid yellow teeth and through the screen right into my seat. He brought an energy and interest to every scene he was in, and the other characters were made more interesting wherever they interacted with him. Watching his performance, I felt the tragedy of Heath's death all over again.

The movie is too long - I found that its extraordinary length ultimately diluted the impact of the story. And I was frustrated that with such a long movie, there wasn't more good storytelling, so much as there was a lot of complicated and over-wrought action scenes. The fight between good and evil is the oldest story, and I needed more to make it one I could really care about.

Here are my thoughts:

1. Heath Ledger's Joker was brilliant. The character, the costume, the atmosphere he created - he was completely engaging and completely repulsive at the same time. But who was he really? There is no back story, other than the Joker's various versions of his past. Did he truly spring into Gotham having never before made an appearance? I wanted to understand him as more than a plot device to forward the Batman story.

2. Christian Bale's Batman/Bruce Wayne feels wooden and heavy. We 'know' how he feels, but don't actually feel any of it. He seems overwhelmed with the burden of being the last defense against evil, and his character and the story are both suffused with this heaviness. I wanted to see more of his own spirit and conviction at work, instead of his inevitable resignation at being 'the Batman.'

3. So many philosophical/moral/spiritual issues were raised. Can you overcome evil without becoming evil? Can ordinary human goodness be heroic enough to combat evil? Is the ordinariness of people evil in its ordinariness? What is the impact of one agent of chaos on organized society? What do you lose by not destroying evil for the sake of goodness? Can society survive when the scales between good and evil are tipped in favor of evil? Lots of good questions, but questions that were overwhelmed with too many plot tricks and complications.

4. I was frustrated that the "truth teller" in the movie was so completely evil. The Joker speaks a wise and unfiltered truth without fear and is willing to lose everything (much like Hannibal Lechter in Silence of the Lambs). While Alred the butler, and Morgan Freemen are clearly the conscience of Batman, they speak openly only to him, and then they say very little. The Joker is the only character of complete originality and creativity, crafting a world of his own design. I wanted Batman to offer us the same depth and insight. I wanted him to be energized and excited by the fight for good, just as the Joker is by chaos.

5. Aaron Eckhardt/Harvey Dent was initially a warm and three-dimensional character, ready to take the helm from Batman, so his decent into evil felt contrived, too quick and too predictable. Clearly he was broken hearted at Rachel's death, but it's not clear why his integrity, which stood strong against every other opposition, suddenly collapsed. I wanted to see his struggle, not just the evil that followed.

6. The acting by all was generally solid, but mostly uninteresting. I wasn't really pulled into the story and the only character that felt 'real' was the Joker.

7. The directing was generally solid, but action sequences and story line got muddled and overdone. I got lost again and again in over-long action sequences and in the incredible plot twists...suddenly the police commissioner has come back from the dead! But how? No explanation of this miraculous occurrence, and so I just felt shut-out of the story development.

The Matrix proves you can mix action and philosophy, stories and special effects. I wanted to see a closer marriage of that here, but never felt the divergent elements of the film working together to truly support the underlying message.

27 Dresses (2008)

Kinda Cute, but OMG - RIDICULOUS clichés

[5/10 · 28 January 2008]

Pretty cute movie, pretty standard romcom premise, and Judy Greer is worth a watch any time. Katherine Heigel is likable, Judy Greer smart and funny, and James Marsden is charming, and everyone else serviceable. But the sloppy story-telling and needless gimmickry took away a lot of the fun. The story of the dresses was pretty amusing.

But....c'mon - Heigel as the sort of ugly duckling sister in love with a fantastic guy who is oblivious to her as anything other than his assistant? Hard to believe her in that role. And this 'great guy' of a boss of hers who has every wonderful quality a man can posses and then falls for the hot blonde chic (who happens to be his assistant's sister) as soon as he sees her? The plot did not follow the characters much. Also hard to see much chemistry between Heigel & Marsden - just no sparks that I could see.

And the ridiculous scene when Heigel realizes she loves Marsden and follows him onto a boat super-hero style and publicly declares her love? So pointless. He wasn't leaving the country...she could have just met him for dinner and talked with him. This over-the-top scene ruined any chance I had of any cinematic believability.

If you like cute, mostly mindless romcoms, this will not disappoint.

Enchanted (2007)

Go - take the kids or don't, but go

[7/10 · 21 November 2007]

Thoroughly delightful for kids and grown-ups and wherever in-between you might be. Wonderful tongue-in-cheek send-up by Disney of its own iconic characters, without being cynical or ironic. Real modern-day fairy tale.

At the end of the movie, everyone spontaneously burst into applause. I think boys and girls both will enjoy the story - there's love and romance, and action and adventure too.

The characters are all well-acted. Amy Adams is the embodiment of believable innocence, and Patrick Dempsy plays the world-weary yet still caring dad with the perfect mix of modern man and prince charming.

The musical numbers are so over-the-top that you can't help but enjoy their nod to the classic Disney fairy tale musicals. And the Princess vs. Evil Stepmother battle is given enough time and space to develop and resolve without overtaking the movie's other charms.

It's the perfect holiday treat...light, sweet, satisfying.

Dan in Real Life (I) (2007)

Lovely, lovely, lovely

[8/10 · 20 November 2007]

If lovely, sweet, delightful, honest, gentle, human, and kind appeal to you in romantic comedies, then this is a must-see. I so enjoyed a family/holiday reunion movie that was respectful and caring to each and every character.

I can be the most hard-nosed movie-goer. I am typically cynical and sarcastic, and not one for empty sentimentality, so rest assured I don't just love romcoms or chic flicks. I do appreciate a movie that develops character even more than plot, and offers up people that I can care about in some real way. I soooooooo appreciated how much of all of that this movie did offer.

These are all people who loved and cared about each other, and showed it in all their very real interactions. I loved the way the story unfolded, and I particularly liked that it got me thinking about my priorities in a similar situation: loyalty to my sibling, surrender to true love, needing to be a good parent? A movie that makes you think and feel at the same time, and all of it good, is a rare find.

The Anniversary Party (2001)

I've seen better home movies

[1/10 · 20 November 2007]

I've seen better home movies, and I'm not sure how this qualifies as anything but that. It looked and felt like a self-indulgent, narcissistic and (the worst movie sin of all) boring home movie about folks I don't know and don't care to meet. It seemed a complete vanity piece, with me as the unwitting audience.

This movie reminded me of the incredibly silly "drama" that teenagers find important when they're out too late and lacking parental supervision. The content of the characters in the film was immature, unpleasant and unattractive.

I was tempted to turn it off numerous times, but waited until the end in case the redemption I was seeking was finally offered. It wasn't.

Lars and the Real Girl (2007)

Watching broken hearts heal

[8/10 · 19 November 2007]

I don't want to overstate, hyperbole never being useful in movie comments, but I just loved it. I loved the incredible originality of the plot, the authentic emotional response of the characters, the quality of acting and a wonderful story with an elegant resolution.

While the movie admittedly has a small-town quirkiness, the emotional honesty of the characters made everything real. Ryan Gosling was on-point with every single nuance, exhibiting restraint in his emotional expression that was instantly touching without being maudlin or sentimental.

There was genuine humor and genuine sorrow, and I felt I was watching broken hearts heal over the course of the movie: Lars finally finding intimacy with Bianca which leads to him connecting to wider humanity, his brother coming to terms with his role in Lars' broken-heartedness, the sister-in-law's genuine love for these wounded souls, and the generosity of their community in giving them the space and time to let the wounds heal.

There was no trickiness, no "gotcha", no mean-spirited 'reality' to crash into. The movie loved these characters, and I did too.

Fred Claus (2007)

Too Many Story Lines

[5/10 · 17 November 2007]

Could have been good. Predictable but touching story about the true meaning of Christmas spirit - that there are no naughty kids, but sometimes you have to look deeper for nice. Predictable can be told well and originally.

BUT - there were too many distractions from the main story of the sibling rivalry between Santa & Fred. The "efficiency expert" was completely unnecessary and created a terrible distraction. For example, the "Siblings Anonymous" bit was cute, but like so much else, needed much tighter editing. What should have been a sly wink turned into a club that beat me over the head with its cleverness, inevitably resulting in a headache for me.

The meaning of Christmas (love, forgiveness, family...) is always touching, but here it was in the most schmaltzy, sentimental way - too easy a cry, instead of going for the deeper, more real potential that such great actors offered. I don't know if it was the script, the editing or the direction that kept me yawning continuously, but I didn't fall asleep or walk out...

Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005)

97 minutes that I'll never get back

[1/10 · 28 February 2006]

I saw a piece of art in a famous museum. It was a huge canvas, painted black, with some texturing visible at a certain angle. That was it - a big black canvas. And I thought - why is this art? Why make the viewer do all the work of seeing the creative genius? Why not make the artist responsible for showing us the value.

And this is how I felt when I watched this movie. I can read all about this movie and why is has won awards, but it sure wasn't visible to me in any way. I was tempted to turn it off after the first 5 minutes, but figured I'd get to the point of redemption where its genius is revealed.

Alas, no such moment came, and instead I was left with a plot-less movie, insipid and fairly distasteful characters, bizarre situations that are inexcusably inappropriate, and a general pall over the film, as if everyone was in a depressed daze. Nothing rang true for me, except that I'll never get this 97 or so wasted minutes back.

The Station Agent (2003)

Don't think I got it.

[4/10 · 25 February 2006]

Basically, this is a character study of 3 individuals as their lives intersect. Such an interesting premise - a solitary man, isolated by his pain at the world's cruelty about his dwarfism, inherits a small train station, and his life unfolds in this new place with new people.

I was waiting for the magic I've heard about, and while Dinklage is wonderful in this role, I couldn't find the character development. The dramatic plot points seemed a bit contrived, and the quirkiness of the characters almost too evident. I would have preferred more subtle character development that really goes somewhere to the quirkiness that seems to nervously spill out from everyone.

It was a sweet little film, but I couldn't find the thread that connects these individuals in a meaningful way.

Murderball (2005)

Hope recovered in sports and wheelchairs

[9/10 · 25 February 2006]

Loved it! It's great to see a true documentary - a film that tells a story by documenting the lives and experiences of its subjects. This deeply compelling film about wheelchair rugby and its athletes excels. Murderball looks at how involvement in the world of competitive sports gave these guys what competitive sports gives all players - a sense of mission, family, purpose, a direction and outlet for their energy...it's a great sports story, told by guys in wheelchairs.

Not all the characters are cuddly-warm and lovable - real people, real stories, and it evokes a real human response, not just sympathy. True, body parts for these men are missing or malfunctioning but everything else is intact, and their frank, funny and compelling openness about who they are as athletes, quadriplegics, and men is wonderfully filmed. There's no sentimentality here, but their courage and determination are still incredibly touching.

What the #$*! Do We (K)now!? (2004)

Pretentious philosophy masquerading as science

[1/10 · 26 January 2006]

I heard such great stuff about this movie from many people who knew I would love it (never a good sign)! As usual, this prediction is the kiss of death for me, and certainly for this movie.

This movie pretends to be a documentary (investigative) approach to the place where science and spirituality meet, trying to convince viewers that it holds the key to some new kind of enlightened understanding.

I felt insulted by the use of a documentary format, when the subject matter was presented in a completely subjective manner. For example, one of the authorities quoted again and again is a channeled entity. The film's format implies that the woman speaking is a physicist or scientist of some kind, and this sort of trickiness undermines the credibility of everything presented.

The dreamy, animated sequences are boring at their most harmless, and pointless at their worse. The "enlightenment" this film pretends seems nothing more than re-hashed quantum mechanics and popular information about the opaque nature of the place where the mind and matter, spirit and body, meet. Didn't I first learn about all this stuff 20 or 30 years ago when it was new?

I wanted to like this movie. I wanted to learn something new. Instead, I felt the movie twisted truth and manipulated reality beyond my ability to trust anything I heard.

Brokeback Mountain (2005)

Still savoring the experience...

[10/10 · 25 December 2005]

I won't talk about plot here - the story has to be experienced; another summary just sounds trivial and reductive. The story is told with such honesty and authenticity, never stooping to clichés in character or plot, and while it's deeply touching, it's never sentimental.

Heath & Jake are both amazing at completely inhabiting these men, and bringing us in the middle of a love that is all about what happens when love can't be acknowledged or expressed, a story that transcends sexual identity in every way. Anyone who has loved knows the torture of trying to express what can't be expressed, and trying to hide what won't stay hidden.

I saw it alone, and would like to do so again. The solitude allowed me to immerse myself in this experience and not be distracted by anyone else's opinion. For a couple of hours, I was living with these two men and their families, pulled into their relationship and learning as much about myself as them as the movie unfolded.

I am so thankful to the original author for her story, and even more so to Ang Lee for creating a cinematic experience that I will savor for a long, long time to come.

Broken Flowers (2005)

A parlor trick to fool the audience into thinking that the mundane is meaningful

[1/10 · 26 August 2005]

After sitting through this movie, I felt I had just seen a bad student film. There's a great premise - modern Don Juan re-visits past to find if something lasting came from his former relationships (in the form of a son), but the most uninteresting choices have been made here. There is almost no character development, no story development that engages the viewer in any significant way, and a cast of characters that are cartoonish in their broadly drawn quirkiness: the aging Don Juan, the out-of-control Lolita, the warm family-man, the biker chic, the lost young man searching for meaning...this is a stable of old characters that take up time and space in this movie, but add nothing of substance.

We are reminded in every possible way that this man is a "Don Juan" and yet NOTHING in the story or character development suggests how someone so broken, so numb, so completely uninterested in life or people, could be that sort of man. We have no idea how or why he has become so broken, and so ultimately don't much care that he is. No light is shed on this at any point - the movie is just one long dip into a stagnant pool of listless nothingness.

I can only imagine that the transitions between scenes of simply fading to black again and again and again, and the endless travel footage (Don in plane, Don in car, Don reading map, Don sleeping in hotel) were one of three things: lack of imagination, self-indulgence or laziness. I can think of no other reasons as this just adds to the stultifying feel of the movie. The parallel between the film's pace and Don's life seems like an amateurish parlor trick to fool the audience into thinking that the mundane is meaningful - not in this movie! Here, the mundane is just plain old boring. All the symbolism is lurid in its obviousness (ex: Don watching the old/original "Don Juan" movie on TV as his life unravels) while the character/story development is so subtle as to be non-existent.

I could not imagine a more uninteresting use of major acting talent (not just Bill Murray, but the whole cast). In so many instances, the Don Juan theme seems a license for the director to show off the physical attributes of younger women - how else can naked Lolita possibly be justified in this story. Oddly, it doesn't seem to be Bill Murray's Don himself who is interested in these women, making the display of skin even more gratuitous.

I'm guessing the lack of resolution at the end was supposed to be indicative of Don's ambivalence about life's direction, but it just looked/felt like the scriptwriter had run out of ideas and so ended the movie. We were quite unsure that the movie had actually ended, and I felt so cheated as I left my seat. $9 and 2 hours of my time spent with characters I didn't get to know or like, and a story that went nowhere in the worst way - UGH!

If this had in fact been a student film, any good professor would have suggested that Jarmusch trim the self-conscious "subtlety" and develop a story worth watching.