Ruby Sparks

I liked the movie a lot. I felt very moved and intrigued both by the premise and the complications to move the story along.

Big but: The lead character, Calvin, is not believable as a "genius novelist" nor even as a pretty good one. Why? He has no idea how to make Ruby, whom he completely controls, subtle and complex the way any good novelist would his characters.

He paints her happy and sad, joyful and childishly clinging with such broad brush strokes he is an incompetent "inventor" of a character/person, let alone his dream girl. If you or I created an automaton, WE might swing back and forth to the extremes while trying to adjust his/her behavior. Calvin should be an expert not a tyro at subtle shades of behavior. Granted, if he got her just right, we would have no crisis to force the story to a resolution.

And the resolution is Hollywood sugar. In Europe or Israel, the hero would be left with the sad results of his failure. (He stares out to sea on a deserted beach to ponder what happened and his bleak future?) Here, the filmmakers insist we leave the theater feeling good about Calvin and Ruby.

The film is a lot different from the trailer. It's very good, brilliant actually, fun and enjoyable but much darker. The film shows it as a light weight,playful film, not as a psychotic man who needs to control every small detail in his life including the woman he loves. It is truly brilliant, but go in with an open mind, don't leave the trailer to guide you through the film. I sound like I'm giving it a bad impression. I don't mean to, I came out with my dad and I absolutely loved it, we spent most of the journey home contemplating what we had seen. And in all truths, I want the mum's house, and their water slide, and more!

In a world full of remakes and sequels, it is becoming more and more rare to get something truly original. When something does finally come along it is always hit and miss. Backed by a strong cast including Paul Dano, Steve Coogan, Antonio Banderas, Annette Bening, and Elliott Gould, Ruby Sparks attempts to be that latest independent film to bring audiences something new and creative. Can a film with an idea that seems to be based on both fantasy and reality come together to deliver that refreshing film or be just another lost opportunity? Ruby Sparks follows a writer dealing with writer's block as well as a desperate attempt to find love. When the female character he is writing becomes real, his life spirals into various directions trying to determine where his writing will take them. While the story basis for this film comes off a bit unrealistic, the way it is handled makes you buy into the story. For the first half of the film it is pretty funny and creative delivering one of the more entertaining original films in sometime. As it moves forward and towards the inevitable darker tone it seems to slow down a bit making some moments drag a little. Everyone gives a great performance, but Paul Dano really steps up delivering a quirky uncomfortable innocence to the lead that makes it all work. Some of the characters decisions could have been looked at as a bit creepy, but thanks to the way he handled it comes off as a bit more enduring. This is easily one of the more unique romantic comedies to come along in a while stepping away from the normal format and instead taking a left hand turn creating something new.

This is a funny touching film that does get a bit heavy at times and while not a long movie does feel a bit too long at times due to pacing. As a whole, it still manages to work on most levels and accomplishes what it seems to set out to do. If you are ready and willing to take a break from the big budget spectacles of Hollywood, then give this character study a chance you will be pleasantly surprised.

http://www.examiner.com/movie-in-dallas/bobby-blakey

The storyline is original and very well written. I thought it was great. It's not about superheroes or an action movie or a thriller or a blockbuster. So who would enjoy it? Geeks, smart people, romantics, sci- fi lovers ... Regarding the latter, I'm sure the writer was not thinking in terms of sci fi, but it meets my #1 criterion for great sci fi, namely, it changes one aspect of ordinary reality, preferably the here and now and not the distant future, and through that change gives insight into that ordinary reality that we live in. Despite its' being about impossible fiction, it seemed more real than most movies. A lot of the best writing has a writer as the main character - so maybe it's true that one should write about what one knows best. Of course, it's about romance and objectification as well and that's well done as well.

In an age of cheesy, predictable, and sometimes simply stupid romantic comedies, let's thank the romcom gods for the work of brilliance known as Ruby Sparks. The films stars Paul Dano as a man with a a huge amount of genius when it comes to writing fiction and an equally large amount of ineptness when it comes to relationships. He finds strong inspiration in a dream about a girl and quickly writes many pages about her, only to find the living, breathing, figment of his imagination in his kitchen. Although she seems the perfect girl in every way (he made her that way, after al), having a girlfriend that he can totally control with a few strokes of a keyboard comes with a price. As a writer myself, I have found a few books and movies in which I look at the basic idea of the plot and wonder, how did the writer come up with that? This was one of those plots. On top of it, brilliant quirkiness of both Dano and Kazan plays up the wonders of this film. To some this review up in two words: see it.