|Page 10 of 16:||           |
|Index||159 reviews in total|
Don't get me wrong... Tom Hanks is great! By far my favourite actor in fact, in terms of both versatility and talent. However this movie was very dull. I battled to keep my eyes open, especially listening to the speeches. I'm guessing politicians take that class? I couldn't fault the acting of any member of the cast and it had a couple of light slightly amusing moments, but the story line was more boring than watching grass grow. I loved the look Larry gave when he was put off. It was a look of heartfelt demoralization and devastation. I hope if Tom reads this review he does not get that same look on his face. Sorry Tom, but one of my faults is my candid honesty. If it were me I would respect the same.
Hanks' earlier films like the bachelor party, the money pit talk about average situations in comedy style. Then comes Forrest Gump and he's acting characters become a little bit "the lost man". (But its my opinion) This film is a little bit like Jim Carey's Yesman. But there is more moral say. Larry Crowne is answer on the question "quo vadis?" Back or straight ahead? The Company Men film is handling the same question from several views. Larry makes his decision. And almost everything is on his side. What is not, he makes it...Larry is for me something what Edison said Genius: one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration. He didn't look back, go and work with that, what he have or what the fate gives him. And because he is a good and honest man, a lot is given him. But after all, it could be more better with little effort-don't ask how... Good movie, I think....
Larry Crowne is essential an indie project with A-listers - this is not
big production or even a super feel good movie - instead it is a tale
of contemporary values in middle America - and is a tale about going
through the dip.
Larry Crowne has a touch of honesty and humor and innocence that has been lacking in cinema for a while. It is both a fairytale with the improbable knight, Tom Hanks, turning up on his improbable steed, a blue bottom of the line moped, to rescue the very bored princess, Julia Roberts, who is a teacher in speaking at a small college, and a tilt at the reality of the New Depression - but does so without resorting to massive flights of fancy, or becoming maudlin about it.
All in all, if you like romantic comedies then you will enjoy this - there are subtexts going on here about the meaning of success and purpose in life, and here friendships are the key, that are even inspirational and we really enjoyed it - simple, innocent, fun, and honest are not bad qualities in any movie...
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I asked myself, why are the ratings so low (less than 6 at time of this
review). It's a Tom Hanks movie with Julia Roberts, so why? Well having
read a few reviews and critics, I simply could not relate the comments
to the ratings, so to hell with the ratings. If we all had to rate life
on our planet or in our country, I'll bet the ratings would not be very
good either but hey, would we give up? No. That is exactly what Larry
Crowne does, he does not give up when life as he knew it comes to an
abrupt end; he loses his job and faces the prospect of losing his home,
well he actually does, past midway through the movie. However, he picks
himself up, goes to work at a menial job in a restaurant, goes back to
school to learn new skills and in the process finds exactly what he set
out to, a new life. Mercedes Tainot, played by Julia Roberts, also
going through the most joyless period of her life, with no motivation
in her job as a teacher, married to a bum, is the person Crowne found
to be the one who can make life worth living for. Ther are no no big
sparks flying, no passionate sex even implied, just a promise of what
can be; it's a kind of developping relationship that looks and feels
This movie has no special effects, it is no funnier than most of what we experience in our daily lives and the only action going on is cerebral. It wont have you on the edge of your seat, you can predict several of the scenes, the characters in the movie are nothing special, everything is so very ordinary; the 1980 movie 'Ordinary People' was nominated for oodles of Acadeny Awards and won four, including best picture, so ordinary is not such a bad thing. 'Larry Crown' has more simplicity than any movie I've watched in years, it is as contemporary as it gets. Hanks and Roberts manage not to overplay their roles and that is very good. If you are the kind of person who can smile when you look in the mirror, if you know that life and death situations are the only situations worth fussing over and if you can see beauty in the simplest of things, you will like this movie. Most viewers will expect more and thus we have low ratings; I can't say it is an exciting movie but it will leave you with a warm and fuzzy feeling if you let it; I believe that's what Hanks was aiming for when he wrote it. It's a nice change of pace from those Dan Brown extravaganzas.
Why they bothered to make this movie beats me. 2 of the biggest stars in Hollywood Julia & Tom couldn't rescue it. It was boring uninteresting totally unfunny. There are actually no laughs, romance, or drama. None of the characters were involving or sympathetic. The basic premise is depressing without any silver lining - a middle aged man gets retrenched, faces foreclosure, goes back to school and then finds love with his teacher. Julia Roberts looks prettier than of late. The color of her hair and her makeup somehow made her look quite lovely and young again. She is not suited to the cranky role. Tom Hanks is too old and puffy looking. You can barely make out the expressions on his face anymore. The supporting cast has such lame and silly roles from Wilmer Valderrama to George Takei. Overall - skip this one even if you are a huge fan of the 2 leads.
Within the first 10 minutes the movie uses the derogatory word retard multiple times. Tom Hanks is a legend and has always been a favorite of mine and fortunately he does not use the 'r' word but it is still OFFENSIVE. As an advocate for the special needs of this world I am very disturbed that this would happen in a movie with such an admirable actor. But after watching the whole movie that was the only offensive scene. I hope that in the future the director and writer of movies will take into consideration that the use of derogatory words is offensive to many and would consider revising the use of that word. Thank you for taking the time to read this and I hope many others will stand up for those who cannot.
I saw "From Dusk til Dawn" in a movie theater when it came out. I left
after about 10 minutes, but that movie was way better than this pasty,
silly, off putting, poorly written piece of nothing. If there was a
zero rating, I would use it here.
Acting and in extension script-writing, directing, has to be a) effortless and b) believable. Unfortunately this movie managed none of that. A script that was so incredibly unbelievable paired with acting of dubious (at best) quality made this a train-wreck of a movie. Train-wreck in the sense that although horrible, it is hard to avert your eyes. The make over of the Umart employee of the month to what he becomes, chain in his wallet and all. The over-acting outside Julia's door, looked a lot like Meg Ryan, it is one of the two moves she is asked to do in all movies she is in. The gang, brrrrrrr, horror of horrors... the gang...
We get it, economic downturn, you can make it work! Think positive! There must be a better way of showing it!
Save your money and above all, save your time.
I have seen quite a few problems regarding this film. Yet, I'd like to begin with something positive, so I have to say it is not that long and it can be considered to be... well, viewable... by most standards. Like some soap commercial. It tells you something about a soap in a most straightforward manner and that's it. In other words, you probably won't fall asleep watching "Larry Crowne". And that's about that. On the other hand, the list of "issues" this film has to offer is very long. First of all, I have seen it listed here and on some other places as a comedy. Comedy should, by definition, be at least somewhat funny. This film has exactly two places I have found a little bit funny. Not overwhelmingly-hysterically-over-the-top funny, but just funny. There are some melodramas that contain more humor than this "comedy". Secondly, the plot is a mishmash of several subplots vaguely related to each other. For example, the main problem at the beginning of the film is related to Larry losing his job. This problem becomes solved out of nowhere in the middle of the film. You can say this is a MacGuffin used to start up love story. But I think it's not the case. This dead-end story about Larry losing his job is here only to try to relate to millions of Americans who have recently lost their jobs. I am from Serbia, so I cannot relate to that problem, and watching it from the side, it becomes even more obvious that there is no explanation for this part of the plot. Then, there is a story of friendship with a much younger girl, and that part of the story looks just pathetic. There is no psychological explanation for that friendship, her "motorcycle gang" is composed entirely of no-name characters and literally none of them speaks a single word. Then, there is a love story. The main story. If there was a filmed love story with less on-screen chemistry, I have missed it. I just don't get it. Julia Roberts and Tom Hanks look like people from different dimensions, or, to be more precise, from entirely different films. Which leads to one of the main problems - acting. Tom Hanks is a great actor, he has proved that fact many times. But, obviously, he needs a director he won't be able to see only in mirror. His acting is flat, I wasn't sure if Larry was retarded or a genius, if he was unconfident or overly confident, I don't know what attracts him to Julia Roberts' character and vice versa, I know nothing about him. The director Hanks and the actor Hanks together work upon creating a totally inexplicable changes in characterization. Roberts, on the other hand, is a little better, yet again, far from her best. The other actors don't have much to offer, but I would say that Rami Malek and George Takei use their chances to make likable characters. Yet, that's far from enough. The whole film is a mess and just doesn't work neither as a comedy, nor a romantic comedy, nor a drama, it just doesn't work. And there are far too many problems regarding this film to say there was something that could have made this film better. It was irreparable from the very beginning, it's incoherent, slow and empty. And if you want to see it, think once again, that would be my most sincere suggestion.
There are two ways Larry Crowne could have been made, one the star
studded studio presentation that is being served to the viewing
audience currently and other a simple and a rather more independent
movie with no stars. The latter version would have received a limited
released and eventually slipped through audience memory, the same fate
that the real version is witnessing. At least the latter one would not
had taken down the movie careers of our beloved Tom Hanks and Julia
Roberts with it into the drains. Not that their respective fading movie
careers are all but over but this debacle sure have put a question mark
to the choice of movies they want to attach their names with.
Larry Crowne is a goodie two shoes innocent salesman at a local megastore in Texas, who is fired from his job because he does not have a college degree. This leads him to a college for further studies, where he meets the grumpy lady professor Julia Roberts. As the movie 'progresses', their relationship blossoms and finally they would hopefully get together and Larry would get the college degree which he needs.
So what is the movie about? It is just happen so that we sit through waiting for Larry to complete his first semester of college. To use the scenario of job loss in this current job climate could have people misconstrued that this is a humorous look at the middle class American's economic dilemmas. But it's none of that and we are introduced to one fictional and quirky character after another. With Tom Hanks at the helm it would have been easy to cast Cedric, The Entertainer and Taraji Henson as neighbors to Tom Hanks. They are wasted completely along with many known names such as Meryll Streeps daughter Grace Gummer as Larry's Classmate. But as Larry Crowne goes through his middle age college teen experience; he encounters a spunky teen Talia played by a very beautiful and talented actress Gugu Mbatha-Raw. She introduces Larry to her scooter gang lead by her boyfriend Wilmer Valderama who is not so happy with Larry and Talia's budding friendship. Larry fits in perfectly in the gang as he has just bought a scooter from Cedric's Garage sale. So everything is set for a nice ride to nowhere. Julia Roberts relationship to Bryan Cranston, who dutifully feels his off time feeding to the needs of his porn viewing addiction, is about to fall apart and Larry will come to her rescue on a scooter. After that there is nothing substantial to write about this film.
The movie would not put you to sleep for very long time at least. Tom Hanks manages to create several funny sequences that would keep you warm and charmed for few moments. But these scenes are few and far between, especially ECON 101 lectures of an astute Chinese Professor that Larry attends with few distractions. As soon as the movie turns to character development, the movie exposes its lack of story and direction. None of the scenes provides a way forward for the storyline and shows clear disconnect between each other.
As far as the actors are concerned; audience are advised to take the attention off from a lazy Julia Roberts performance and the very old Forrest Gump, to focus on the charming Gugu Mbatha-Raw. She makes sure the viewers do not lose interest from even the most clichéd sequences between her Larry and her boyfriend Valderama. The rest can forget they were even part of this movie, as they quickly forgotten by the movie's storyline itself.
Larry Crowne never looked interesting in its Trailers too, but the mega star pair of Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts kept a faint hope alive among me and many of their fans that it cannot be that bad if those two are in. But within first fifteen minutes the hope fades away as we sit through a middle age crisis of a fading Tom Hanks and his teacher.
For more reviews visit http://cinemadose.blogspot.com/
I agree with some other reviews saying that the poster and the trailer for the movie somehow makes people think that they are going to see a light but enjoyable romantic comedy. I was expecting to be good frankly. I mean Julia Roberts has Pretty woman and Notting Hill, Tom Hanks has You ve got mail and Sleepless in Seatle so the less you can expect from this actors together in a movie is good film. But I was so wrong. The characters are not likable at all. Tom Hanks really needs to take more rolls like Road to perdition he is already abusing of his role of the gold heart man and in this movie he looks really fake. Julia Roberts also fails terribly, she has lost the charm completely in this movie, they don't have chemistry at all I mean "this course changed my life I met you" really? I got mad at that point ( spoilers) and the main problem of Julia Roberts with her husband is that he watches porn? just plain awful I was going to give this a 5 but I reconsider is just bad. not the worst but very mediocre and disappointing. I finish by saying Tom Hanks get away from the directors chair and if you wrote this don't do it again please you are better winning Oscars
|Page 10 of 16:||           |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|