She's So Lovely

The beginning credits were difficult for me to read, thus I was not cognizant of the writer or director. Sometime into the film, I pondered the striking resemblance of numerous scenes to the work of John Cassavetes. Later, I impressed myself with the discovery of his name on the video package. Cassavetes wrote and directed some excellent cinema, but this film is more akin to his dismal "Big Trouble". The script is fragmentary and lacked character motivation. The story introduces Penn and Wright as urban lovers, then suddenly switches pace when Penn has a mental episode and is institutionalized. Resuming ten years later, Penn is released only to find Wright married to another loser. As her husband, Travolta reminded me of his "Pulp Fiction" character constantly cursing and chain smoking. Unfortunately, the scenes between Penn and him are flat. I don't understand Travolta's emotional reactions to his unrealistic predicament, while Penn remains mentally incapacitated like De Niro in "The Awakenings". Wright is fine, but her role is ill-defined. It was good to see Harry Stanton with a sizable part, and Debi Mazar is alluring with her Betty Page looks. I would recommend skipping this film and seeing "Husbands", "Faces", or "A Woman under the Influence". 2 out of 4 stars.

Let's go back in the past;1975:"a woman under the influence",John Cassavetes.Gena Rowlands plays a misfit,we follow her through two phases of her life:before and after the confinement in a mental hospital.The "treatment" she underwent had disastrous results because she tried to commit suicide soon after her release.

Now 1997 "she's so lovely":Gena Rowlands plays -fleetingly- either a shrink or a social worker,I cannot make up my mind.Sean Penn plays a misfit,we follow him through two phases of his life;before and after..well you get the picture.Her,against all odds,the treatment made wonders for Penn's mental health;if we consider the end of the movie.

Alas,Nick Cassavetes is not his father,and we do not find here the overlong,sometimes infuriating scenes ,devoid of any dramatization,close to improvisation ,John Cassavetes' trademark. All what remains is ,save for the bizarre and far-fetched ending , simply mundane.John Travolta is miscast.

The main reason to see this movie :Sean Penn.One of the best actors of his generation,he runs the whole gamut of emotions,and definitely demonstrates how an actor can single-handedly save a movie from mediocrity.He makes us believe in his unbelievable character.

I wish Penn could have his dream come true:Portraying the late Phil Ochs!

Nick follows in the footsteps of his old man, John Cassavetes, who supplied the screenplay and you can tell because the down and out characters walk about with cigarette in one hand and a glass of booze in the other. This is a very simple tale of manic love told with care.

I think this is a good movie. The characters are fresh enough, the plot avoids Hollywood cliches quite successfully. The movie says that crazy people have the right to love, too, and it shows how they realize this right. It is another answer to the questions: what is love and do love and morality have a lot in common. The weakest point is the ending scene. First, it made me feel that something needs to be added - a cue, a situation, anything - and, second, it resembles "The Graduate" too much. The last scenes of the "10 years ago" part are very good, Nick and Sean!

None of the major characters in this movie is particularly redeemable, yet it remains a fascinating film. Eddie (Sean Penn) is a hard-drinking working guy, devoted to his friends and passionate about his wife Maureen (Robin Wright Penn). Eddie's mentally unstable; he has a very weak grasp on the concepts of time and space, and thus often vanishes for days at a time without realising how long he's been gone (and without understanding why Maureen worries about him). Maureen is equally passionate about Eddie; but he's been gone for three days at the start of the film, and their neighbour Kiefer is pleasant and more importantly -there-, and she accepts his offer of drinks and later of dancing. Kiefer pushes it too far, however, and though Maureen tries to keep the truth from him, Eddie finds out. His tenuous grasp on mental stability snaps at this point, and this is really the climax of the film.

As has been mentioned before, this is not an Oscar-winning film. Not because it's not excellent -- with a script by John Cassavetes and command performances by both Penns (spectacular, really, both of them, in roles that would have been poorly played by clumsier actors) and John Travolta, and excellent supporting roles all around -- but because it isn't a Hollywood movie about Good versus Bad, with Good ultimately triumphing. People don't make good choices. People aren't particularly "good" parents. What ultimately happens isn't supposed to happen in the movies. But it does, and it's true to the characters, and it lifts this film up above the usual sugar-coated drabble we're so often fed by the cookie-cutter that is Hollywood.