A Good Year

I thought the movie was very good... Much better than I expected from the previews.

It's not going to be a Best-Picture Oscar winning movie (I think that should go to "The Departed") but it is not intended to be...

If you need explosions, sex and violence every 10 seconds to keep your attention then no this film is not for you. If you just want a relaxing, well-acted, non-American crappy plot popcorn movie then go check it out.

Well worth the $11 for the ticket which is getting pretty hard to say nowadays...

I have to admit this 2006 movie based on the book by Peter Mayle (whose "A Year in Provence" is a favorite of mine) starts rather unpromisingly since it carries the same smug, self-satisfied attitude that its hero has. Director Ridley Scott takes a while to find the right rhythm for this romantic comedy, but he eventually does, even if it means recycling elements from other similarly executed fish-out-of-water films like "Baby Boom", "Lost in Translation" and "Under the Tuscan Sun". In fact, the whole venture feels decidedly old-fashioned with formula elements feeling like they come from some Universal film made in the 1960's, but the retro-chic aspect somehow works like a fictionalized account of a lifestyle cable channel program since there is little in the way of real dramatic conflict.

Atypically cast in a lighter vein here, the naturally pugnacious Russell Crowe seems to be channeling one of the Grants (Cary or Hugh, take your pick) in portraying a Machiavellian-level London investment banker named Max Skinner, who unexpectedly inherits a dilapidated château and vineyard in Provence from his uncle Henry, a figure he loved as a child but has since become estranged due to Max's selfish, greed-obsessed existence. Written by Marc Klein, the bulk of the movie is about what Max does with the estate as he argues with the longtime vintner and becomes entwined with two women - pretty Christie, who claims to be Henry's illegitimate daughter from a tryst with an American, and the too-perfectly-named Fanny Chanel, a beautiful local restaurateur who tries mightily to resist Max's romantic overtures after a most bumpy start. As Max weighs his options, his unforgiving career and jet-setting lifestyle back in London appear to be in jeopardy.

More like a Cagney than a Grant, Crowe has the type of aggressive screen persona that takes on all comers, so he seems more in his element being a jerk. However, he acquits himself more than you would expect as the story begins to humanize his character, and he is more deft as a comic actor than even Scott presumes. For example, there are extended sequences in an empty swimming pool and during a tennis match when Scott seems to mistake action for slapstick. Max may be Crowe's most likable role since the loving gay son he played in the 1994 Australian indie, "The Sum of Us". In flashbacks, Freddie Highmore, Johnny Depp's protégé in "Finding Neverland" and "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory", affectingly plays Max as a child, even though the lack of physical resemblance is a bit jarring. Better is Albert Finney as rhapsodizing Uncle Henry since his casting hearkens back to the actor's youth in south-of-France-set movies like "Two for the Road" and "The Picasso Summer" in the late sixties.

Australian actress Abbie Cornish convincingly portrays a guileless American with more than a passing interest in wine, while Marion Cotillard is a stunning, feisty presence as Fanny (although the obvious age disparity between her and Crowe makes some of the back story a bit of a head scratch). Entertaining though more standard rom-com contributions are made by Tom Hollander as Max's realtor best friend Charlie (in an update of the usual Gig Young third-wheel role), Didier Bourdon and Isabelle Candelier as caretaker Duflot and his playful wife, and Archie Panjabi as Max's jaded but devoted assistant Gemma. The wine-growing region of Provence hardly needs more exposure in movies, but Philippe Le Sourd's cinematography brings it glowingly to life. A most idiosyncratic soundtrack accompanies the film with genre-irrelevant chestnuts like Patti Page's "Old Cape Cod", Harry Nilsson's "Gotta Get Up" and a French cover of "Yellow Polka-Dot Bikini" by Richard Anthony. This is the kind of movie where you can see the ending a mile away, but I have to say for the most part, I enjoyed the ride.

This is definitely the first time I have gone to see an Russell Crowe and/or Ridley Scott film at the cinema, fully bracing myself to be disappointed and...

I am very pleased to be able to say that I enjoyed it thoroughly. It has a very warming glow to it - beautifully played; gorgeously shot. Anyone who isn't just a little bit seduced by Provence after seeing it needs their head (or more likely their heart) examining. The lessons may well have been taught in a hundred films before, but that doesn't make them any less relevant or resonant for the commercial era in which many of us now live...

So, why the terrible reviews? I really don't know. The comedy was not overplayed in the way implied by the critics at all. To be blunt, it was not really necessary, as the warmth and effectiveness of the film and story lies in the romantic drama. The comedy is fine, but doesn't really add anything to the film. However, it does give it a very upbeat, cheerful and likable feel and maybe that is reason enough.

Max's character and Russell Crowe's performance? It's in the quieter moments where Crowe really excels and shows just why someone would want to cast him, as opposed to say Hugh Grant, in a film like this. His reactions to memories and the things that other characters do and say are just so much deeper and more real than Grant is capable of: which is why Grant always comes off as the same character in these films (a variation on the Grant formula) and Max comes off as real.

It almost seems as though the critics have a film with this plot pegged into a box: because they can only see (and can only expect to see) a Hugh Grant characterisation, they cannot accept anything other than a Hugh Grant characterisation. Whereas the actual reason that Crowe doesn't come off as Hugh Grant is because he isn't channelling that kind of characterisation at all. This is a very different kind of film.

Also, the critics seem to be completely off the mark in assessing the character, when they say that he starts off a bastard and ends a bastard too. Actually, this is far more about unearthing other qualities - not completely rejecting those 'bastard' qualities that he begins the film with, but refining and diluting them, as he becomes more and more adjusted to his past. He doesn't change, he opens his heart and mind to qualities that he has been ignoring within himself. You can see that other Max from the moment he opens the letter telling him Henry is dead - but he tries to resist the feelings that are clearly there, in large part because he doesn't want to face the fact that he has let his Uncle down - and all of the guilt that is allied with that.

The film is not the best film I have ever seen. The questions it asks are fairly fundamental, but they aren't startling or especially thought provoking.

But the film is highly enjoyable, from start to finish; and it's warm, something that is pretty rare in films these days.

So, to end, clearly I am not in tune with the critics - but then, increasingly that seems to be the case nowadays. I just think that I see completely different films to them...

Watched this film on Amazon Prime. Not the usual type of movie for Russell Crowe, but definitely one of his better ones. It helps when the movie is directed by Ridley Scott, based on a noel by Peter Mayle and has a supporting cast of Albert Finney, Tom Hollander and the drop dead gorgeous and under-rated actress Marion Cotillard. The essence of the plot is a man deciding what he wants from life, and the enjoyment of the movie is watching him reach that decision. Contains occasional swearing (to be honest I'm a Londoner, so I never notice it) and has no nudity, so I'd call this a family movie. Two thumbs up from me.

I enjoyed this movie, it had class and character with some lovely ladies. Also I enjoyed the London footage with the contrast against France. Crowe, I think did very well and I was surprised at the end because I didn't now it was a Ridley Scott movie. It would now be interesting to read the book to see how closely it is represented. All things seemed to fit, and it was evident in last encounter with Crowe and his French girl from the scene of when he was a boy at the pool. Great romantic portrayal of an English French relationship. The movie also maintained a good level of humour encased with good vocabulary. I had heard this was a good movie and am glad to able to cement that in words.