terryreport
Joined Sep 2010
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews2
terryreport's rating
I see a good many movies on DVD and I have lately ventured into the rom- com field without much happiness or success. Movies in this genre are really intended as date movies that the girl drags the boy too so she can live out some fantasy time. This movie is supposed to be a fantasy from childhood come to life, but there is very little life in it. The imaginary friend who comes to rescue the lead character just as she is about to marry a self centered actor is likable enough, since he isn't obnoxious, but just about nothing else about the movie makes sense. Why is the imaginary friend able to stay in the real world beyond his supposed departure time? How did he know to come back? Why is there a little black kid popping up and advising him on the rules of imaginary friends?
If he has come back to rescue this girl, why doesn't he say so straight out? Oyvay! Who cares? Dumb and sappy, this movie really stinks. At least it follows one of the key unwritten rules of rom-coms: everything happens in New York City. You can have rom and you can have com, but if you want both, its gotta be in the Big Apple, right?
If he has come back to rescue this girl, why doesn't he say so straight out? Oyvay! Who cares? Dumb and sappy, this movie really stinks. At least it follows one of the key unwritten rules of rom-coms: everything happens in New York City. You can have rom and you can have com, but if you want both, its gotta be in the Big Apple, right?
This movie is unlike any you are likely to see this year or the next few years. It seems somewhat like a French or Euro remake in that the story revolves around a man who "flaunts convention" and sleeps with any young woman who pleases him, even though his family (ex-wife, adult offspring) are well aware of his bedroom adventures and taunt him about his behavior.
His current girlfriend, who apparently knows something of and tolerates his loose standards, presses him to go with her daughter to a college admission interview over a weekend out of town. When he seduces the daughter, it is a shocking turn of events that marks this film as strikingly different. When she reveals the blatant transgression, the shocks continue. (Am I in Paris here?) So much for the first third or so of the film, which really amounts to the set-up. Disaster follows Michael Douglas' character around like a bad haircut. His chance for a comeback in business, and life, is squashed by the influential relations of his now ex-girlfriend and he descends farther into a world only he would want to inhabit.
With a more traditional storyline, this is where he would either become some sort of psycho killer or pull himself up and out to rebuild his life. Nothing doing here. There is a lot more down and self degradation to follow. He's on a mission.
I was wondering what could trigger not just a moral collapse, but that of a human being who, were are told, was one day the toast of the business world in New York and made so many millions that he had a college library named after him. You see, Ben Kalman, the main character, behaves like someone with no moral backbone at all, someone who either knows no limits or is bent on self destruction.
Fearing that the audience couldn't figure this thing out for themselves, the movie serves an explanation up complete, as if Ben Kalman, victim of himself, could somehow suddenly understand why he was doing what he was doing and consider the idea of change. All too pat, and not believable to boot. We are made to, forced to, care about a deeply flawed character and given an explanation that just doesn't hold water. If he were capable of this level of creepiness, it seems very unlikely that he would have risen to such heights and been loved and adored by so many. Obviously, there must have been some deep character flaw in him all along, but we have no idea what it might have been.
Otherwise decent people do, every day, go off the deep end. Some people commit acts of unkindness, even violence, for which friends and family can never forgive. How can one bit of unfortunate news about possible health problems send a man so far away from his grounding on planet earth and cause him to ruin everything in his life? I don't know, which is one reason, although this is a startlingly original movie with good to great acting all around, that I ultimately don't care about it and wish I could forget it.
There was one truly wise scene with DeVito discussing why he never chases young women that was almost worth the price of admission.
Doug Terry
His current girlfriend, who apparently knows something of and tolerates his loose standards, presses him to go with her daughter to a college admission interview over a weekend out of town. When he seduces the daughter, it is a shocking turn of events that marks this film as strikingly different. When she reveals the blatant transgression, the shocks continue. (Am I in Paris here?) So much for the first third or so of the film, which really amounts to the set-up. Disaster follows Michael Douglas' character around like a bad haircut. His chance for a comeback in business, and life, is squashed by the influential relations of his now ex-girlfriend and he descends farther into a world only he would want to inhabit.
With a more traditional storyline, this is where he would either become some sort of psycho killer or pull himself up and out to rebuild his life. Nothing doing here. There is a lot more down and self degradation to follow. He's on a mission.
I was wondering what could trigger not just a moral collapse, but that of a human being who, were are told, was one day the toast of the business world in New York and made so many millions that he had a college library named after him. You see, Ben Kalman, the main character, behaves like someone with no moral backbone at all, someone who either knows no limits or is bent on self destruction.
Fearing that the audience couldn't figure this thing out for themselves, the movie serves an explanation up complete, as if Ben Kalman, victim of himself, could somehow suddenly understand why he was doing what he was doing and consider the idea of change. All too pat, and not believable to boot. We are made to, forced to, care about a deeply flawed character and given an explanation that just doesn't hold water. If he were capable of this level of creepiness, it seems very unlikely that he would have risen to such heights and been loved and adored by so many. Obviously, there must have been some deep character flaw in him all along, but we have no idea what it might have been.
Otherwise decent people do, every day, go off the deep end. Some people commit acts of unkindness, even violence, for which friends and family can never forgive. How can one bit of unfortunate news about possible health problems send a man so far away from his grounding on planet earth and cause him to ruin everything in his life? I don't know, which is one reason, although this is a startlingly original movie with good to great acting all around, that I ultimately don't care about it and wish I could forget it.
There was one truly wise scene with DeVito discussing why he never chases young women that was almost worth the price of admission.
Doug Terry