IMDb user comments for
Adrift in Manhattan (2007) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Index

13 comments in total

---

19 out of 26 people found the following comment useful :-
Wonderful movie, 29 May 2007

Author: Bubbosh-paul from United States

I really enjoyed this movie. The film has this touching relationship between Heather Graham's character and the young man obsessed with capturing her in photos. At first, I was afraid it was borderline stalking, and I kept on waiting for something bad to happen to the young man. Gradually, the boy's photos reveals something deep and personal about Heather Graham's character. When they do finally meet, the outcome is surprising. All the actors put in good performances, especially Heather Graham. If you like character driven movies, then this movie will appeal to you. I also like the pacing of the film. It's slow and methodical. Often films rush through their stories, but this one takes its time.

---

9 out of 10 people found the following comment useful :-
Fragments of Coicidence and Connection, 5 February 2008

Author: gradyharp from United States

Though there have been many films of late that address the issues of the isolation of the individual in a society increasingly settling for homogeneity, few have the honesty and simplicity of presentation as Alfredo De Villa's ADRIFT IN MANHATTAN. Perhaps the reason this film works so well is that instead of dealing with the usual tropes, De Villa restricts his story to three individuals who are suffering isolation in the noise and autonomy of New York City and are thus 'adrift' in a life that seems flat and without a beacon of hope. The story De Villa weaves is one of interaction of these characters by almost serendipitous incidents, moments that change their lives - at least for a while.

Teenager Simon Colon (Victor Rasuk) lives with his overbearing mother Marta (Marlene Forte) and gets through his life almost without speaking, working in a camera shop, spending his idle hours photographing people in the park. Tommaso Pensara (Dominic Chianese) is an elderly painter and music lover who lives alone and supports himself by being the 'mail boy' in a large firm: his loneliness is heightened when he discovers he has macular degeneration and will go blind. The physician who makes his diagnosis is Dr. Rose Phipps (Heather Graham) who is grieving from the recent death of her 2-year old child and is unable to continue her marriage to literature professor Mark Phipps (William Baldwin).

The threads of coincidence begin to tie these people together when Simon begins to photograph Rose in a manner that resembles stalking, when Tommaso notices and desires and older lady at his workplace, Isabel Parades (Elizabeth Peña) and is encouraged by Dr Rose to share his potential blindness with this friend, and when Rose explores the attention Simon bestows on her, filling an emotional need for both parties. Naturally the development of these intersections is more complex but at the same time the manner in which they develop is very tender and gentle.

Some viewers may find the film meandering a bit too much: this is not linear storytelling but rather shifts in incidents and moods and gradual changes that occur among these simple but needy people, much like the coincidences and random kindnesses occur to the sensitive eye. The cast is very fine and the cinematography and musical score sustain the mood of the piece. This film requires involvement on the part of the viewer, and that involvement has its rewards. Grady Harp

---

12 out of 19 people found the following comment useful :-
Utterly Amazing!, 21 August 2007

Author: classic8363 from New York, United States

I recently had the distinct pleasure of seeing Adrift in Manhattan at the HBO Latino Film Festival in New York. The film made me laugh, almost brought me to tears and definitely kept me on the edge of my seat. The character development is unbelievable in this film. Heather Graham, William Baldwin, Dominic Chianese and Victor Rasuk (who I have loved ever since Raising Victor Vargas) all give multi-dimensional performances. Victor's character drew me in; Heather's character kept me guessing. You could tell there was something wrong by the distant/ unhappy look in her eyes. William Baldwin was extremely convincing as a husband trying to reclaim his life. Most impressive of all was Dominic's performance. It truly almost brought me to tears. Oh, this movie also has a VERY STEAMY SEX SCENE!

---

7 out of 10 people found the following comment useful :-
Enjoyable movie, 8 December 2007

Author: freitagfan from United States

I enjoyed the movie. Didn't expect a lot and was pleasantly surprised by the storyline, the characters and the development. It is one of the movies that doesn't give enough information about the characters (on purpose) so that it leaves you with questions and wanting more. The inter relation between the characters is extremely light so that normally annoying feature actually added to this film.

Some of the features of the movie are a little disturbing but I wouldn't consider them weird enough to prevent most people from enjoying the movie.

For me a 7 means I enjoyed it and would definitely watch it again. I just wouldn't be thrilled to have paid $10 to see it.

---

3 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
A dry movie, lacking entertainment or cinematic value, 29 August 2008

Author: the_docteur_lessard from Canada

Although I usually find interest in interwoven character story lines from films such as Crash or Magnolia or Babel, I couldn't get my interests up for this one.

Now I'm not here to complain that the movie lacked explosions, action or a whole lot of plot twists - it doesn't attempt to be that kind of movie. The few plot driven elements are rather scarce and are mostly there to drive forward the characters rather then the story. The story itself is never the planned focus anyhow. It is my appreciation that some attention to have a more involving plot would have done the work a service.

In terms of execution (acting, directing) the effort is certainly solid although never really stellar : you won't find anything really worthy of seeing the movie on it's own. The problem therefore is the very blueprint on which the execution rests, and as I pointed earlier, the material given is too dry to make the movie a memorable one.

There just isn't enough happening here to make this one worth the look. Nothing much was achieved, and the journey alone wasn't exactly thought provoking nor entertaining. It isn't awful mind you, just very forgettable.

---

A meandering film which is ultimately going nowhere, 10 July 2009

Author: hall895 from New Jersey

Ah, look at all the lonely people. Adrift in Manhattan focuses on three very lonely New Yorkers whose lives are destined to intersect. Heather Graham has the role which is meant to tie the plot together. She plays optometrist Rose Phipps, a woman who has suffered a great loss and who now lives alone while trying to piece her life back together. Dominic Chianese plays our second main character, Tommaso, an elderly painter, classical music enthusiast and mailroom worker. As we meet him he is being informed by Rose that he is going blind. And then there is young photo shop worker Simon, played by Victor Rasuk. One day Simon sees Rose sitting on a bench in the park and decides to more or less become a stalker, following her around the city taking her picture. He even follows her all the way home, taking pictures of her through the windows. Creepy? You bet.

As the film progresses we learn more about each of these characters. We learn why it is that Rose is seemingly alone in the world. We learn that Simon is extremely shy and withdrawn, apparently having very little idea of how to relate to people. This may have something to do with his mother with whom he has one of the most uncomfortably, bizarrely affectionate parent/child relationships ever seen. The focus of the story really is Rose and Simon. Which is a shame because Tommaso is far and away the most interesting character in the film. We see his frustrations as he deals with his failing sight, blindness akin to a death sentence for this simple but proud man who so loves to paint. And we see him fall in love with a much younger woman from his office, Isabel, played by Elizabeth Peña. Their relationship tugs at the heartstrings, their interactions always compelling. And Chianese and Peña easily give the best performances in the film. Rather unfortunately it seems the movie is always rushing through Tommaso's scenes so the focus can get back to Rose.

The film meanders about, cutting back and forth between our three main protagonists. But the story never really pays itself off. Tommaso is compelling, Rose somewhat less so, and Simon, barely even communicative, hard to identify with. Eventually Rose does something which makes absolutely no sense, something you would never believe anyone in her position would even conceive of doing, and from there the movie really falls apart. For a film which seemed to have some genuine promise, especially in Tommaso's story, in the end it just kind of limply fizzles out. Chianese did excellent work and created a great character and he and Peña work together wonderfully. But the story which surrounds them ultimately falls flat.

---

1 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
Interconnecting lives, 16 October 2008

Author: sol from Brooklyn NY USA

**SPOILERS*** Originally called "1/9" or the NYC Seventh Avenue subway line that runs the length of Manhattan Island and ends at the tip of The Battery "Adrift in Manhattan" connects three lonely people who live along its route.

20 year old camera store worker Simon Colon, Victor Rasuk, is obsessed in photographing people on the streets, as well as subways, of New York. One day Simon comes across this lady sitting in the park and becomes infatuated with her multi-colored, or rainbow, scarf.The lady in question Rose Phipps, Heather Graham, becomes very agitated, and even frightened, when Simon mails a number of photos he took of her at her brownstone.

We never quite get what Simon's reasons for mailing his secretly taken photos of Rose were but it almost gets him fired from his job. Instead Rose soon becomes almost as infatuated with Simon as he's with her to the point of inviting him into her home and, to Simon's utter surprise and delight, forces him, a virgin, to make love to her!

Like Simon we soon find out that Rose is not all there, emotionally, in that she's estranged from his husband high school teacher Mark, William Baldwin, and is suffering from a deep depression in the tragic loss of her and Mark's two year-old son Casey, Leim De Villa. Rose's sexual relationship with Simon soon starts to effect her work as an eye doctor in her treating a patient of her's the refined elderly and cultured gentleman Tommaso Pensara, Dominic Chianese.

Tommaso is slowly losing his sight and in him loving to paint that's as well has him receiving a slow and painful death sentence. Tommaso is also in danger of losing his job in the mail room in that he can't see the letters and packages in order to correctly distribute them. It's Tommaso's co-worker Isabel Parades, Elizabeth Pena, who not only takes the time to help him out at his job but cover up all his mistakes. Isabel also falls in love with the some 75 year old bachelor who for the first time in years feel that he's wanted for himself not his talents; in his music and his art.

All three main characters, Rose Simon and Tommaso, in the movie interconnect with each other due to their proximity to the 1/9 subway line. And it's that very reason that makes their lonely and desperate lives, who are aimlessly adrift in Manhattan, that much more worth living!

---

2 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
When they say "adrift," they weren't kidding!, 29 December 2008

Author: charlytully from Rosebush

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Skimming through the nine comments previous to mine, they mostly seem to be from New Yorkers or New Yorker wannabes. If one does a general survey of this IMDb comments site, they will notice that comments coming from a film's location shoots tend to be disproportionately positive. Since New York City is notorious for attracting and harboring a coterie of people best described as self-centered navel-gazers who don't give a rap about the rest of the world, maybe it's not surprising they smugly go ga-ga over ANYTHING New York: Andy Warhol proved they'll even wax poetic over a 48-hour flick just showing paint drying, as long as it's set in New York.

If this creepy movie had been shot here in Rosebush, with a mom flashing her bare tits at her 20-year-old socially crippled son, who then loses his innocence doing Rollergirl doggie-style while beating her butt and telling her she's a bad mom because her toddler fell out the window while she was on the phone, and next stumbles across Nasty Mom Number Two's blind patient lashing out angrily with his cane in a local transit hub, New York moviegoers would accuse our town of being an inbred backwoods hell-hole with nothing to offer the world culturally.

For non-New Yorkers in search of something serious set in the Big Apple, go see DOUBT. For those wanting to see a well-done movie about intersecting lives, rent the Los Angeles-set SHORT CUTS. But if you want your skin to crawl watching a series of random amoral anti-erotic incidents happening to uniformly implausible characters, perhaps you also belong ADRIFT IN MANHATTAN.

---

0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Very Slow and Offensive, 31 May 2009

Author: (Floridiancritic) from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I know what this movie wanted to be. It wanted to be an ensemble movie of people facing traumatic cornerstones in their lives and overcoming, with the usual connection of characters such as movies likes Crash, 20 Bucks or Short Cuts. A noble gesture and not exactly original but OK. However , the fact of the matter is that besides being slow , this movie did what so many other movies seem they feel they have to do... Go right to seediness. A movie that is supposed to be inspirational, challenging , interacting and about making new friends turns into a flick about glorifying mentally warped individuals. By that I mean the glorification of a stalker. Not only was the stalker glorified but rewarded by cheap role sex as well. From an Oedipus complex stricken young man to an eye specialist , beautiful lady that just lost a toddler to an older, underachieving mail clerk losing his eye sight we have the proponents of a could be good movie. With a supporting cast of a vastly younger coworker, in love with older man and the separated husband of the eye specialist, trying to work things out after tragedy. I rambled enough, just thought the movie had great potential but it failed to deliver.

---

0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
something's adrift for sure, 31 May 2009

Author: jack-964 from Netherlands

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Watched it, enjoyed it, but...

Adrift in Manhattan follows the lives of 3 main characters for a very brief period, each having a problem. They connect at some point in the movie, but it isn't clear why they connect or why it results in something, if it does at all. I really don't need to have everything layed out for me, but some clue as to what is happening would be nice.

Spoiler: I only read here that their lives seem to connect cause of some subway line, or it is supposed to revolve around that. I never would have guessed that, so there is something pretty wrong with the movie. Actually i was wondering if some of them were living in the same building, or if it was all just coïncidental. Characters don't have a lot of lines so you get no information from there; no interesting dialogues.

The acting is OK. Camera-work is OK, its all pretty OK and i didn't fall asleep, but I'm pretty sure a few weeks from now i won't remember what this movie was about at all. I don't even think i know what it's about now. (?!) If the object was to show coïncidence on peoples lives, Magnolia is by far superior to this one. If the object was to depict people dealing with huge personal problems i know a lot of movies that pass this one left and right. So i guess i don't get what this is about, what the object was, or they messed up.

Something's adrift in Manhatten for sure, but what that is remains the question.

---

---

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	Awards
External reviews	Official site	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user comments	Your vote history