Reviews

It was so refreshing to find out about the web series, "Blue." I first became aware of Julia Stiles' work years ago at the Seattle Film Fest in 1998's "Wicked," a somewhat campy film. Nonetheless, Stiles' acting is part of what saves it from being a camp throwaway film. After that, I had the opportunity to see her in many other movies and have always admired her work as an actor.

"Blue" is the type of series that makes viewers care about the characters, where they have been and where they are headed. The struggles of a single mom are a fact of life in today's society, so many people can relate to them. Stiles' characterization is complex enough to find watching her in her day to day life interesting and provocative.

Julia Stiles has an amazing chemistry with Uriah Shelton, who plays her teen son. This is an essential aspect of the series, as her role as mother is one of the main driving forces for the tough decisions that she makes. While those choices involve illicit and illegal activities, she does not become a cliché - which would be very easy to do in this type of situation. Instead, she adds a frankness that is both troubling but at the same time, sympathetic.

Robert De Niro Jr. hosts a documentary about his artist father, who died in 1993. It is essentially a love letter detailing his father's life and work. During the 1940s-50s, Robert De Niro Sr. was somewhat famous on his own, as a new American painter. Clearly, De Niro Sr.'s work was influenced by artists such as Van Gogh, but without attempting to imitating them. However, his figurative abstract expressionism became overshadowed by even newer abstract art such as by the celebrated Jackson Pollack and later, Andy Warhol.

Nonetheless, De Niro Sr. continued to paint for the rest of his life. The documentary features certain journal entries during those years, providing insight into his artistic and personal struggles. His son, De Niro Jr. discusses these struggles, as several of his father's personal friends describe their take on his life and work.

Given that the actor, Robert De Niro has always been known as rather reclusive, rarely giving interviews or providing insight into his life - this documentary serves as a peak into his upbringing and relationship with one of his most cherished family members - his father. Also revealed is that De Niro Sr. separated from his wife, artist Virginia Admiral when De Niro Jr. was quite young. However, father and son remained close through the years. De Niro Sr. was also homosexual, but because of the times, never came out.

Another issue that is clear in this documentary is what is true for every artist - regardless of the branch: talent is never enough. In fact, what usually separates those who flourish on a notable level and those who do not is success at promotion.

De Niro Jr. maintained his father's studio and continued to promote his father's work to not only preserve his memory for the art world, but for his family. De Niro's aim in doing this documentary was to give his father his due - something he feels he could have done more about in prior years. Because of this documentary, perhaps the newer generation may become more aware of De Niro's father so that when the name Robert De Niro is heard, they may wonder if it refers to father or son.

I am a big fan of director Nicole Holofcener's work, as well as actors James Gandolfini, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Catherine Keener and Toni Collette - but I put off seeing this film as it came out right on the heels of James Gandolfini's death. I did not know him, but know people who did - so it felt "too soon" to see it. I knew I would see it one day - and that day finally came last night. "Enough Said" is one of those films I knew I would like; after seeing so many movies - you kind of know when something is going to be worth watching. In this case, the body of work of the director and players really speaks for itself, so I was confident that I would enjoy this film. What I didn't know, however, was just how much.

While billed as a "romantic comedy," this film is far more than that. It is an exploration into middle aged life; the maturity that goes along with having "been there, done that," but it also contains a great deal of wry humor that only can come from that experience. Thus, the film richly details the lives of two people who clearly have their own personal priorities - though the film doesn't concentrate much on them. Instead, the story focuses upon how these two interact with both those around them, as well as themselves.

This film is also written sans the obnoxious, in your face humor that seems so prevalent in today's American film comedies - which is one of the reasons it is so charming and smart. However, Ms. Holofcener demonstrates how acutely aware of the (often lack of ) manners and morals of the self-involved middle class of the West Coast. For instance, the attention paid to the various vanities and hypocritical antics of the characters exemplifies how their privileged existence defines their apathetic complacency, as well as passive aggression. And yet, it is easy to still care about all of them, because they are not so ridiculously written as to be entirely mean spirited.

The brilliant Julie Louis-Dreyfus approaches the Eva character as a real woman, who is a caring mother on a journey of self-discovery and a new life that is to begin as her daughter goes off to college - something that she has in common with James Gandolfini's Albert - also a parent on the brink of empty next syndrome. Eva faces various emotional challenges throughout the film, many of which are pure comic genius, without being over the top.

Unlike most other movies I see, I did not want this movie to end. I wanted to see how these characters continued on with their lives - ever hopeful that love would develop and prevail.

Part of the irony of this film is that it is James Gandolfini's last and that one gets the feeling that this role - unlike the many others he has played to perfection - is more like him than any other. In this film, he was able to show the softest side of himself that few would have otherwise ever seen. Acquaintances I have who know him has described him as very caring and playful, delving into intensity when necessary to "get to where he needed to go" (as he himself said on "Inside the Actors Studio"). Of course, this all speaks to his innate, natural acting ability - a remarkable gift that was never lost on him - though his friends and family, as well as the public will surely feel the loss.

Having seen a number of documentaries concerning American men who seek to find women in other countries, I had expected a much different documentary than this one. This story concerns only one middle aged man who had been pursuing Asian women for around 5 years.

I first wondered why Steven didn't consider Asian-Americans, but as I watched, it became more than apparent why he stuck to looking outside of the U.S. As a man of meager means, American women - regardless of their heritage usually have standards that exceed those of what he had to offer, particularly given the fact that he was 60 years old. For instance, while Steven managed to keep an apartment in San Francisco, it was cramped, crowded and very cluttered. He also had a working class job that probably paid little more than minimum wage - as a toll booth cashier - with little to no hope for advancement.

Before the Internet, Steven began his search for the perfect Asian mate using snail mail services. Having met a few women, he was still on the hunt in the digital age. However, he had since decided to focus solely upon Chinese women. The reason for this did not seem to have been made clear.

He'd met a few promising subjects - however, "Sandy" had now become the focus of Steven's affections. He'd made a few trips to China to visit with her and they seemed to have hit it off (but we don't get so see those visits). Not only was there a pronounced language barrier (in fact, so much so that director Debbie Lum functioned as their interpreter), but they were also facing a 30 year age difference.

Since the filmmaker herself is Chinese - this added another interesting element to the documentary in a number of ways. In addition to being the couple's interpreter, director Lum found herself in the midst of relationship discord as she interpreted communication when the couple hit stumbling blocks. In fact, they had both come to rely upon her, calling at off times when the documentary was not being filmed. Lum was generally uncomfortable with this; however, she took it all in stride and gently told them that she would not be able to continue to function in that way once the documentary was finished.

For instance, Sandy finds some photos of Molly - Steven's last serious Chinese "girlfriend" and becomes enraged enough that she considers going back to China. And yet, she decides to tough it out -- vowing to leave him after she gets educated and has a job. Unbeknownst to Steven, she brings this up on several occasions - each time she becomes frustrated with him.

Despite the many troubling aspects of this relationship - there does appear to be a mutuality in terms of their feelings for one another. At the end of the film, it is revealed whether or not the couple actually makes it, which makes the story well worth watching.

This TV series may just well be one of the best and most thoughtfully written, acted and produced of all time. The magnificent attention to detail of the era contributes greatly to its affect. Character arcs of Don Draper and Peggy Olson are masterfully portrayed by Jon Hamm and Elisabeth Moss. The rest of the cast beautifully blends into each story line such that it almost feels like watching a docudrama at times.

Early on, the way that Peggy handles her pregnancy by the married cad, Pete Campbell (played brilliantly by Vincent Kartheiser) seems well beyond that time period, and yet, as driven as she is - she will stop at nothing to succeed in her career - so it all makes sense. And yet, the delicacy of her personality is a sharp contrast to the decisions that she makes. Her mentor, Don, becomes her nemesis and later works for her -- an endlessly intriguing plot twist to watch.

It's hard not to feel empathy for the icy Betty Draper -- after all, how is a woman supposed to act with a blatantly philandering husband? It's not like she has no romantic interest in him; in fact, quite the contrary. It is heartbreaking to watch her pine away for her own husband. And yet, during those times, infidelity was not only rampant, it seemed to be accepted - along with all of the other indignities that women suffered during that era.

Of course, it wouldn't be fair not to mention how office manager Joan's strengths become increasingly accentuated. Not only does she have a respected place in the firm - to the point of being included as more than just a stenographer during executive meetings. However, watching her be sent up like a sacrificial lamb to screw a prospective client is not only distasteful, but in many ways makes no sense. However, as stated before, this was how women were ultimately treated then -- like objects who were created for the pleasure and service of men. So, in a way, her stature at the firm is just another way to exploit her talents, as opposed to actually respecting what she brings to the table.

While I am sorry to see the end of this magnificent TV series - it's very interesting to see how the story line plays out as the 1960s unfold - and businesses such as these progress into the future -- discarding the old guard -- or, do they really?

In any event, as Don Draper's demise continues, it is great to see how perhaps the female characters in this series not only struggle to receive their equal due, but may go down in the historical cultural record book as American role models, despite whether or not it was intended. But then, with a brilliant writer, creator and producer such as Matt Weiner (whose credits include The Sopranos) - it's all probably "on purpose."

It was so refreshing to see a comedy that was geared toward the forgotten audience -- that is, people past their 30s. This film is so great that any age audience could enjoy it. Granted, they may not get all the jokes, because some of the irony is something you get over time - but it has enough to keep just about anyone's interest.

It is important to keep in mind that this film is meant to be lighthearted and funny. Thus, it should be enjoyed that way, rather than trying to make it something it was never meant to be. Nor should it be compared against other dramatic work of the actors.

The pairing of Meryl Streep, Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin is brilliant. All of these actors possess a pedigree such that their names speak for themselves. Therefore, watching them in this movie is a pure joy.

Alec Baldwin's teen-aged antics are positively hilarious. Just about everyone can find themselves in a situation where the are reunited with an ex for some reason - so even this story is fathomable, making it all the more funny. More, please! Hollywood -- are you listening? We don't need more stupid movies with Katherine Heigl and Jennifer Aniston -- we need movies that celebrate all ages of life. People over 40, after all, are not dead yet!

Much like "It's Complicated," this film utilizes the stellar acting chops of actors with a great deal of both comedic and dramatic experience. That is probably one of the factors that makes it so great.

The pairing of Keaton and Nicholson is brilliant. Their chemistry is undeniable - and their ability to make their uncomfortable situation palatable speaks to their acting chops.

While the story may seem unfathomable, life can be stranger than fiction so it isn't hard to suspend disbelief on this one. Especially keeping in mind that this is a romantic comedy, after all. This film is not meant to be taken too seriously. But it IS seriously hilarious!

Having been a fan of Stevie's for over 40 years, I was thrilled to find that this documentary provides an intimate view into her creative process, which few artists ever offer in such an open and honest way. Also, having a bird's eye view into her first time writing a song with a collaborator in the same room was very interesting and could prove helpful and instructive for those interested in writing songs with other people.

Watching her write songs and interact with band members and musicians was a real treat. It was more than evident that her passion and skill as a singer-songwriter has only become stronger over time.

I'll admit that I'm a bit of a snob when it comes to the teen horror flick genre, which I assumed this was. I was wrong. It became available for me to watch - so I thought "Why not?" I've grown to like Jennifer Lawrence's work - so I figured I just may like it.

What I thought would be predictable actually had enough substance to keep me interested, which is rare in this type of film. But then, I already admitted that this was not, in reality the type of film I thought it would be. That is, a film directed mostly at teens. I'm sure they were going for the teen audience and got it, but as an adult, I was pleasantly surprised by the writing and acting.

The story line starts with a mother and daughter, retreating to the woods in a gorgeous home with low rent, due to a tragedy that took place at the house next door. Mother and daughter have their own crosses to bear and relationship to heal after somewhat of an estrangement, which provides the tension necessary for rebellion (not that a teen ever needed that to rebel).

While mother thought the house was empty, she is soon alarmed to learn that the sole survivor of the tragedy, a brooding young man, now lives alone in the creepy house. A little factoid that apparently she was not told by her slimy realtor (who has an equally slimy son). Buyers and renters beware: It just goes to show you, "if it is too good to be true, it probably is."

And, you guessed it, her daughter becomes enamored with him the next door brooder. It would at first seem, simply because her mother doesn't want her to. It makes sense though, because recovering wounded birds such as her daughter often seek to help others as part of their own therapy.

As usual, Lawrence has a naturally disarming screen presence that serves to add credibility to an otherwise, what may seem to be a questionable situation. But life is stranger than fiction, so I never felt entirely comfortable dismissing story lines the same way that so many others do. For those people, I say go watch some documentaries; movies for entertainment, by their very nature - were meant to be less than plausible.

The creepy boy next door does have shades of Norman Bates, but that similarity is limited. But instead of his mother, his fixation turns out to be on his long-dead sister. Or is she really dead? Truth is, I found this film entertaining and was not bored for one minute. I don't know what that says about me, but I don't mind admitting that I really enjoyed watching this film and found the final twist very well written, presented and quite satisfying. And it wasn't painful to watch the entire movie to get to the truth.

It is no easy task to do a film about a writer, given that what occurs inside a writer's head is so intimate – and often misunderstood. Everything is open to interpretation – and each reader can tend to translate an author's words differently.

Gwyneth Paltrow's portrayal of the author is compelling; she deftly neither over or under plays Plath. Daniel Craig as Ted Hughes displays a chemistry with Paltrow that is very believable. As a result of their renderings, the story has much more power and significance than it would if the actors were more obvious and dramatic in their portrayals.

For all of its gloom and doom, "Sylvia" provides an introspective look into the life and world of a woman struggling to find her own identity – both as an individual and as a woman. Long before the cultural feminist awakening, Plath wrote astounding poetry that detailed the victimization, rebellion and resultant rage of so many women. As such, she essentially paved the way and gave "permission" for women to write in the most honest, raw and soulful way possible. It is important to know this before seeing the movie; otherwise, much of its true meaning may go lost.

The story begins with Plath as an American studying at Cambridge. Her writing appears to be less than well received. However, this is to be expected during this particularly male dominated time. She meets the dashing poet, Ted Hughes, at a party she is attending after becoming aware that those responsible for her latest less than favorable review will be there. Ted insists that it was the editor who ripped her piece apart into shreds – but it is clear that Sylvia knows differently.

Still, Plath recognized the brilliance of his work and winds up kissing him by the end of the evening, whereupon she bit his cheek, which drew blood. Thus began their passionate love affair. They move in 1956 to her Massachusetts hometown, where they marry and she sets about teaching at Smith. Four years later, upon struggling to write there, Ted insists that they go back to England. In a lonely country cottage, Sylvia develops the same writer's block problem, favoring baking over writing. Ted notices this, encouraging her to "find a subject" and write. Could be her life was too idyllic to find a subject; Ted would provide plenty of material in the future.

They have two children. Plath struggles to separate herself from wife and motherhood in order to express something relevant. Sylvia confirms her suspicions that Ted is having an affair, whereupon they separate – but not before she burns some of his belongings. One could say that this behavior is outrageous – however, so is having an affair while married.

However, as a student of psychoanalysis, Plath comes to the realization that she, in fact, had a hand in Ted's adultery; insisting that she "conjured" it – essentially willing it into existence. It is an interesting point that is rarely explored in this type of film. That Plath would take the entire blame for her husband's adultery suggests that at the base of suffering from depression and mental illness is a low level of self esteem and self worth, coupled with the inability to differentiate fantasy from reality.

This could be why the heartbroken, 29 year old Sylvia embarked upon her extraordinary journey of self-expression, also perhaps prompting her to arrange for a brief coupling with her estranged husband. However, this last ditch attempt at reconciliation is dashed when Ted informs her that the woman he has been having an affair with is pregnant. While he could have decided to reunite with his wife, it is clear that he had no intention to do so. For the already emotionally fragile Plath, this had to be a major devastation.

During her marital estrangement, Plath wrote some of her most compelling masterpieces. Unable to reconcile her life, Ted's betrayal and the end of her marriage, Plath gassed herself at 31 years old in the kitchen after setting out food and taping her children's door to protect them. After her death, her final collection, Ariel was published, as were the books Crossing the Water and Winter Trees in 1971. As is the case with many artists, her work became ever more notable, garnering the Pulitzer Prize in 1981 for a book of her Collected Poems.

I have a confession to make. I think that fashion is basically banal. I mean, how much of fashion just isn't recycled over and over again. Not that anyone cares, but I also watch Fashion Police on E! – but only to hear Joan Rivers rip all those celebrities to shreds – that only she can do. h Is there ever really any originality in fashion? I suppose fashionistas would argue otherwise. But all of that is really beside the point. So the main reason I even watched this film was to see how Gina Gershon handled the role of the woman who basically took over the "creative vision" of one of the most edgy designers of our time – perhaps any time.

Given the lack of complexity of fashion itself and what it stands for – the shear shallowness of it all – I thought the writers and actors did a very good job of rendering an interesting film. Gershon captured that cartoonish quality that women like Donatella have – that ridiculous way of taking herself way too seriously. I mean, it's only clothes. I suppose all these high priced designers hinge upon the latest celebrities wearing their stuff - but given that they already had the connections – seems like a bit of a slam dunk. So why on earth they act like they are performing heart surgery is beyond me. Oh, wait! That's what a large portion of anyone who works in entertainment does. Been a long time since I lived in LaLaland – so it's easy to forget. Especially when that is what you are trying to do.

Many designers and creatives have a jerky side, and neither the Gianni nor the Donatella characters disappoint in that regard. The sniping between them is believable --- especially given how big their egos must have been at the time.

However, the one thing that surprised me was how callous Gianni turned out to be – leaving everything to Donatella's daughter, Allegra – rather than to his sister. All in all – campy, vapid good fun and a great source of guilty pleasure. Thanks, Lifetime!

I can't help it, but I keep obsessing over one of the lines in the very first part of the movie. "...it smells like a skunk's ass crack back here." Of course, we find out why later - and it wasn't just because the dog farted. Robert DeNiro's Fred Blake (actually Manzoni) apologizes to the dog later for that misinterpretation.

Unfortunately, Giovanni Manzoni (Robert De Niro) snitched on Mafia pals. We know where this leads and it is never good. Thus, there is now a $20 million hit on him. He sold his goomba soul to the devil FBI in exchange for this testimony so that he and his family can live in peace and tranquility in Normandy, France of all places. Whatever happened to Ohio or South Dakota? Oh, right. Too obvious. Guess the FBI figured it would be easier to get them so far away that no one would find them. Once again, the FBI underestimated the Mafia.

FBI agent Robert Stansfield (Tommy Lee Jones) has his hands full with this family, who insist upon turning everything into Custer's Last Stand. For instance, wife Maggie (Michele Pfeiffer) is prone to blowing stores up when she feels mistreated.

Luc Besson's brilliant and farcical comedic violence is extraordinary. It takes real talent to do that. The way that the actors, such as a deadpan Miichelle Pfeiffer submit to such absurdity is pure joy to watch.

As their parent's children who were taught well, the two kids immediately begin to case the school to see what type of mischief they can get into. Whereupon, the son takes over 50% of the black market prescription and cigarette business. Belle unwittingly accepts a ride with four French guys. In a regular movie, she would be the victim - but not in this film. Anyone who is sick and tired of watching women fall prey to men in films will love this scene. Of course, none of these shenanigans are ever discussed with their parents.

Meanwhile, Giovanni decides that being a writer would be a good cover. Except that the work he tells his inquisitive neighbor he will be doing he knows nothing about. It is also an understatement that the memoir he actually decides to pen is not exactly the smartest move for someone in hiding. That's a shame, since his story is so interesting that it is entirely unbelievable, yet entirely true. It also would not be good practice to break the plumber's legs because it is believed he is trying to take advantage of the situation.

Since Giovanni is perceived as a writer, he is fittingly invited to a film debate on "Some Came Running" that stars Frank Sinatra as a tormented writer. Of course, they wind up seeing "Goodfellas" by mistake, so poor FBI handler Tommy Lee Jones nearly has an aneurism. Robert De Niro as Manzoni watching himself play Jimmy in "Goodfellas." Nice.

I really don't understand why this film hasn't gotten better reviews. For starters, just the fish out of water angle of a crime family being sent off to Normandy, France in the Witness Protection Program is hilarious. Watching a bunch of psychopaths fail miserably as they attempt to assimilate provides enough good humor to make up for all those stupid Hangover movies alone.

Of all the documentaries I have ever seen -- and there have been numerous - this is probably one of the creepiest. This one even beats out films about sexual predators. At least I know what to expect with those. While I've been familiar with the concept of purity balls and seen other footage pertaining to it, this film truly proved to me how dangerous these attitudes are for individuals and society as a whole. But in this case, the people have decided to surrender their individuality, so it seems they'll never know the difference.

Watching the adoring women basically at the feet of these men was heartbreaking. All I could think about was how hard women have fought to have their own voice. And no one in this film honored that even one iota. It was like going back in history where women were born simply to service men, bear children, cook, clean and basically take whatever punishments were meted out to them. Guess that's why one of the "teachers" touted a book from the last century as gospel. The entire identities of these women were built around serving their families and nothing more - despite having brains and the capacity to create something other than a baby.

It was no shock, then, that women were actually trained to behave a certain way, while it was just assumed that men would do what they were supposed to do. "Welcome people with a smile," one of the instructors said. "Bend at the knee," so your cleavage doesn't show and your butt doesn't stick out. How about the men? Do they need to welcome people with a smile? Must they worry about how their chest or butt looks? Or are they just allowed to do as they wish and be truthful about how they feel? Boy, the women wearing burkas have nothing on these people. At least when you wear a burka, you don't have to be so obsessed with every gesture or movement, because they're already covered up! Maybe they should just get cloaks for all the women and then they wouldn't have to train them like monkeys. But even a monkey wouldn't be dumb enough to go for this.

Looking at movement leader Randy Wilson, who founded the balls, and his wife, all I could think about was fallen politico John Edwards and his poor wife, Elizabeth. Wilson has kept himself in shape, while his wife - well, not so much. It's not that women need to be thin -- but healthy, yes. And she did not really appear to be healthy. And then I thought about John Edwards cheating on his wife... and wondered -- hmmmm.... anything is possible. After all, if a woman is supposed to be in service to her husband but no longer can perform those services, what would prevent a man of God from getting that service elsewhere? It isn't that far fetched to believe that a religious order would justify that behavior based upon "wifely duties."

For the life of me, aside from the fact that they were related, I could not see a single reason why any of these women (or girls) idolized these men so. The sort of blind faith that everything these men would ever do would be honorable was probably the most ridiculous. But in order to give yourself so willingingly in this way - you really have to believe that.

In actuality, the concept of protecting one's sexuality sounds better and better as time progresses. It's the rest of the stuff that goes along with these concepts that is so troubling. Obsessing over ceremony in this way just seems --- cultish. The continual upbeat presentation and unwavering conviction of God's love just didn't seem genuine. It seemed more like a manufactured existence - and as the camera panned over the tops of the tract homes that many of these families lived in - only one thing came to mind. Stepford.

The idea of being God fearing is also troublesome. Why is being fearful used as a tool? Individuals should behave properly because they know it is right - not because they are afraid of the consequences of not doing so. Using fear to gain control is a great way to keep people exactly where you want them: compliant and in servitude. In a world like that, where is the innovation? How can life progress? It's apparent that this is of no consequence to people who spend their time in this type of existence.

This film is proof positive that many people believe that ignorance really is bliss. And that's the most frightening part of all. Because without individuality, self determinism and real education (the kind that also includes being exposed to society), there is really nothing worth living for.

Ironically, the people in this film talk about God continually, but seemed to be soul-less. When you give up your identity, you give up your soul. But that's what many religions are about - controlling people rather than uplifting them.

This film is short in length but long on meaning. As cliché as that sounds, the story itself could be classified as such. However, the fact remains that people just like this woman are trying to fend for themselves and their children in a world that seems to ignore their plight. It is easy to say that they created the situation. It is easy to say that they should change it. But it is far harder to face the truth: our country, in fact, the world, contributes to this form of life that women choose. As a result, these women make what seem to be poor choices, when in fact, they are using the easiest way they know how - just to survive.

People who live a life of abuse rarely have any mentors. Therein lies the problem. Without mentors of any kind, it is too difficult for women who make these choices to do otherwise. As a result, they continue to put their trust in the wrong people as they live destructive lives that continue to spin out of control.

It occurred to me while watching this film that some may say "why another film about this topic?" The answer is that until we get a better grip on single parenthood and make it easier and worthwhile for women who are left stranded raising kids on their own to earn a living -- this story will continue. Therefore, the dialog also needs to continue.

Rather than chastise the film subject, everyone who sees it should look for ways to contribute what they know. Regardless of what people may believe, it really does take a village to raise children. So let's work together to create positive solutions so that women do not need to degrade themselves or put themselves at risk just to earn a buck. And so that little girls have good role models who live productive, healthy and long lives.

I must admit that I find this movie one of the most offensive ever to come out of Hollywood. I can suspend disbelief, but this is ridiculous. Perhaps it is because I know too much about how this movie started, have lived in Hollywood myself and seen many documentaries on the real lives of prostitutes.

The original script was intended as a very dark, cautionary tale about class warfare and prostitution in the Los Angeles area. It was then completely revamped as a high budget romantic comedy. As a result, it became one of the most successful box office movies of all time.

First, while there are probably many handsome johns - they rarely are as good looking as Edward (Richard Gere). Nor are they as respectful. Well, maybe on one of those sugar baby websites. But that's different than picking up some random dude on the street like Vivian (Julia Roberts) did.

After their first sexual encounter, Edward hires Vivian for the week to "escort" him to social events. So she's giving it up for a whole week for 3K? Maybe that was the going rate in 1990. He also gives her access to his credit cards. I suppose that could make up for it -- and maybe there are some guys who have done that before. Seems like a stupid move to trust a woman who takes sex for money. She could run those things up in no time, especially in a ridiculously expensive town like L.A.

Vivian gets snubbed on Rodeo Drive. Well, that's believable, because anyone without their nose in the air gets snubbed there - street whore or not. But being snubbed at the hotel makes no sense. Many of those hotels make their living with high end prostitutes. Or at least bimbos who look like they are. Go to any fancy hotel and you will see decked out babes. Doesn't mean they're all whores -- but many of them look like they could be. I once found out in Vegas that many women who dressed up there were hookers. And I had a classy dress that revealed nothing - in fact, it wasn't even tight.

So we are supposed to believe that Vivian isn't capable of buying a dress or using utensils at the dinner table? Sorry, she is not street enough to believe that. She looks like some chick who ran away from Nebraska - not a down and dirty Hollywood whore. Or course, Heidi Fleiss had a stable of classy looking chicks. But that's the point - a woman who looks like Roberts is usually part of a service, not someone hanging out on the street.

I've heard that many johns like to tell their secrets and bare their souls to whores. So when Mr. Nice Guy reveals that he was estranged from his now dead father that could make sense. Because poor little Vivian was snubbed at the store, Edward comes to the rescue and takes her shopping.

I think the most dangerous thing about this film is that even though it is rated R, plenty of young girls have seen it. Glamorizing prostitution in any way is irresponsible. Some prostitutes may have married one of her johns. But that's something that happens less than the chance of winning the lotto.

Prostitution will always exist, but let's not make it out to be something it isn't. Sure, there are probably some happy hookers out there - but I've not met or heard of a single one. The truth is that most of the people I've seen or known of who have sex for money came from abuse, are on drugs or have very low self esteem.

This whole movie is so phony and full of lies -- not even the ad is real. They used a body double because little miss goodie two shoes herself -- Julia Roberts - while willing to play a street hooker - not only refused to do nude scenes, but the movie poster legs aren't hers, either. Or maybe she didn't look as good in the photo. I rest my case -- this movie is just a disgrace. I will agree that it deserved to be nominated for an Oscar and win some awards -- because so many movies are contrived, complete and utter nonsense.

Rarely is the public ever allowed to see the private journals written by major movie stars or public figures who die tragically. In this film - Marilyn Monroe is exposed in ways that reveal who she truly was. A woman trying to figure out who she was, using acting as therapy. Having been abandoned as a child, she spent her life trying to receive the love and approval that she never got from her birth parents.

One of the most stunning things about Marilyn is that she was poetic and far more articulate than anyone ever gave her credit for. Hearing her own words against the backdrop of the times shows her fragility in ways that have never been seen before. Told through archival and film clips, interviews with people she knew and film historians, actors provide dramatic readings of the materials written by both the actress and observers at that time.

Some startling revelations also exonerate and vindicate her to a great degree. For instance, the many stories about her being late to the set and unable to perform can be explained by the fact that her acting process was different. As Actor's Studio coach Lee Strasberg said - she was one of the most sensitive and talented of any actor he ever worked with. That would explain, then, why Billy Wilder had such a time trying to give her explicitly technical direction. Not to mention, Laurence Olivier thoroughly insulted her as she out-performed him on camera.

She was also dismayed by the fact that she was presented as so stupid that she wouldn't be able to tell that Jack Lemmon and Tony Curtis were actually men in drag and not women. That whole comic story line was dependent upon her character's stupidity. Only the joke was on her.

Her first marriage to Joe DiMaggio was fraught with turmoil due to the demands of her career. They divorced, but when she was lied to and locked away in a sanitarium without her knowledge and consent - it was DiMaggio who came to her rescue. Alarmed at how she had fallen in with people he felt exploited her, he asked her to remarry him on August 1, 1961, but she was found dead August 5. In fact, he loved her so much that he had red roses delivered three times each week to her grave site for two decades.

An acquaintance of Marilyn said that it was during her time with Arthur Miller that she began using barbiturates to sleep. It isn't any wonder, given that Miller told the press that they were to marry before he even asked her. It was clear that he used her. First, to get out of his House Un-American Activities Commission debacle, then to get material, writing unflattering and malicious things about her in his journals. Then he rubbed salt in the wound by putting these details in The Misfits, forcing her to make fun of herself in cruel ways. Miller also wound up schtupping a photographer he met on the set - apparently right under Marilyn's nose. No wonder it was her last film. Drugs are a funny thing. If you're fragile, you get hooked - for a lifetime.

But once Marilyn was rid of Miller, she was really looking to working with Lee Strasberg in her production company to create the kinds of projects that inspired her. That, and the fact that DiMaggio's son had spoken to her the night she died, saying she seemed just fine makes it apparent that she did not commit suicide. She was on a number of medications at the time so it was probably accidental. Her legendary romps with the Kennedy boys are the stuff of sordid tabloids, but it wasn't talked about until decades later. Marilyn was known to have a journal documenting her affairs and conversations. Before she died, rumors were circulating that she planned a press conference that following Monday. If that is the case, it would seem that the Kennedy boys, who had used and cast her aside would stand a lot to lose. Especially since Bobby Kennedy is said to have been at the scene before the coroner when Marilyn's body was found. Most likely, to destroy her latest journal. Who told him about it? Seems like maybe he already knew.

And what better way to debase and invalidate someone than to insinuate that they were so unhappy that they killed themselves? It would certainly feed the male egos of the men who rejected her. But she got the last laugh, because her candle has been lit for half a century. Wherever she is, she must be smiling - especially now that her true voice has finally been heard -- for the first time ever.

I have been following the Jodi Arias murder trial, mostly out of fascination. Sociopathy has become more intriguing to me over the years - realizing that so many sociopaths walk among us and we are completely unawares. Much of what I have learned is from a book called "The Sociopath Next Door" by Martha Stout. The book is so good that it should be required reading in social studies. It could help a lot of people avoid tragedies like these.

I thought that Tania Raymonde did a great job of emulating Jodi and what many have come to believe her motives were. While what Jodi did was heinous beyond belief - the target of her affections which crossed into butchery was not entirely a saint. It was clear that Travis used Jodi for sex and then discarded her like yesterday's trash when he decided to pursue finding himself a suitable Mormon wife - but not entirely. He kept Jodi around like many men and women do to keep those booty calls handy.

Many of the true details of their relationship that I believe were critical were completely left out. For instance, the coy way that Jodi was heard to act like a little girl in real life phone conversations with Travis.

Also, the movie didn't cover any of the sordid sexual details that Travis himself admitted to on the phone. Tania seemed far more mature than Jodi has - and I didn't see any indication that she ever took on the role of a coy teenager.

I also got the feeling that Tania Raymonde's portrayal was more sexually mature than Jodi. I could not imagine Jodi being that appealing. Also, from the trial accounts there was some big todo about whether they were having regular, traditional sex or not. It seemed that they did certain things more regularly in an effort to conform with the Mormon faith that he espoused and she joined. Either way, they broke the rules because they weren't supposed to be having sexual contact prior to marriage anyway. And there is no doubt in my mind that Travis never thought of Jodi as marriage material. She became the booty call that he hid from people -- so the title really works here -- because she really was his dirty little secret.

Finally, the moments before Jodi murdered Travis indicated that she became especially peeved by a text message. The fact that she went to great lengths to dye her hair, get gas cans so she wouldn't have to stop for gas and turned her cell phone off -- all so she wouldn't be traced or recognized. It was always obvious to me that the murder was premeditated, making it ever more creepy and this was never even touched on in the film.

Travis Alexander, despite targeting Jodi directly as a sociopath in text messages - continued to have sex with her anyway. While that is not a crime and he does not deserve to be murdered for it - this should serve as a cautionary tale for anyone, man or woman who becomes resided to the fact that a romantic interest, friend or even family member is a sociopath. When you are sure of this - you must never confront them. Keep it to yourself and get as far away as possible. Make excuses and play a game, but do not let them close to you anymore. You've been warned from the second you know they're a sociopath. It never ends well. In my own personal experience, once sociopaths know they've lost, they are like animals who are out for the kill and will not rest until they either have control of you or they have done whatever they can to destroy you.

When Travis became aware of her evil, under no circumstances did he have any business letting her through his door ever again.

As I said before -- yes, Jodi is a sociopath. She will do whatever it takes to get what she wants, lying all the way through. Any tears she sheds is because she got caught. I wasn't expecting the film to go thoroughly into her psyche -- but I would have liked it if there was more emphasis on a lesson to take stalking very seriously. When a woman is stalked - films generally push how dangerous that is, but I didn't see that here. Perhaps it is a double standard since Travis was a male. Keyword: was. Had he gotten totally away from Jodi, perhaps he'd still be alive. But you don't get away from a sociopath by letting them back in your home at 4 am and having sex with them all day long.

In this out of the ordinary buddy film, the characters seemed to struggle with more flaws than usual. Or, do they? It looks like Jake had it figured out - he chose the life he had and he knew it. But we don't know that at first.

It would have been great to understand more of why Jake chose this life. We found out why his buddy did -- but not really for Jake. Perhaps he was disillusioned with society. Maybe he had a falling out somewhere; a loss. Or maybe I just missed a story line in the film. Nonetheless, I enjoyed this movie a great deal. The writing is great and the acting top notch. I must say, though, I did figure out why the buddy was buddying up to Jake before it was revealed. But that's more because I watch a lot of films. There aren't many plots left to twist.

But for me, the point of this film is that we ALL make our own choices. We can blame our parents, society, the economy -- but at the end of the day, we make choices. That doesn't mean that there is no issue with greed and privilege in this country. But someone else's greed is no excuse to take less for yourself. Figure out what it is you really want and go for that. The trick is to figure out what to do that would really create a sense of peace in your life. We're all brainwashed to some degree about what we should have vs. how we should be spending our time. Society tells us one thing -- but the soul says another.

Because so many people never connect with what their soul wants - and their true calling - they wind up with some agreed upon, meaningless standard. For instance, we're led to believe that we're supposed to all want the job and the house and the kids and the yard and on and on and on. It is the pursuit of things that makes a lot of people miserable. So -- you have that expensive car and house. Now you have to maintain it. In fact, you probably have to spend so much time earning the money to keep it all that you can't even enjoy these things you think you need, let alone yourself. The issue is that when you start to acquire stuff, it takes more money than people realize to take care of all of it.

The pursuit and maintenance of stuff does not a quality life make. At least, for a great deal of people. For soul-less people it could work. But really, many of them are also miserable and spend their lives making others miserable by exploiting them just so they can keep all their stuff and get more.

The buddy knew what he wanted - to write a book out of the experience. But, what did Jake want? I think he just wanted a friend. A true friend. But the buddy betrayed him, so he didn't get what he wanted. Or did he? The ending is unclear -- it could have gone either way.

Bottom line -- never trust a writer if you want to keep a secret. We can't help ourselves!

Parental abandonment is something that many people deal with. Some never reconcile it, choosing to ignore it. But the fact is that abandonment early in life can leave scars that affect you for the rest of your life. Pretending not to notice or shrugging it off can seem like it works for a while, but as one ages, the gravity of the experience begins to take form. This film will most likely bring to light some of the circumstances surrounding a viewer's own similar situation.

For me, it was realizing how the lack of a father has affected how I view relationships and as a result, my own choices. Young girls learn about male energy and how it can be beneficial from their fathers. My father abandoned me very early in life, surfacing only a few times, one of which was when he was in ill health. Fortunately for me, I was not faced with the situation that Nick was - my father had the means to live on his own.

I also had a stepfather who never recognized me even as a family member. When he wasn't ridiculing me he was just ignoring me. Thankfully, my mother was a very strong presence in my life. But she was gone well before her time as well. Nick's mother committed suicide -- and there are many other more subtle ways to do this. Like ignoring your own health and well being and allowing yourself to become so ill that it is too late to repair it.

It seemed early on that Nick decided to be a writer because his father considered himself to be one. That, along with providing much inspiration by way of their own story - is another contribution to Nick's life that I'm sure he has acknowledged. The one thing that Nick's father did was validate his writing. For a writer, that can mean more than just about anything.

In order to get a sizable inheritance, Denis Leary is understated but hilarious as Doug, who must suffer the indignities associated with apologizing all of the women he has betrayed. Elizabeth Hurley, with her impeccably straight laced English accent is perfect as Anna, a rigid, nearly always thoroughly offended lawyer charged with chaperoning him on this perilous journey in what is sure to be the road trip from hell.

The first woman is a crazy cat lady - a wise choice to try to justify why he left her. Never mind that she may have become that way because he dumped her. The next woman is a sex maniac, so one wonders why he would dump that kind of chic. It would have made more sense to keep this one around kicks. Who knows, maybe she was too much for the old boy.

Christine is a militant African American mayor who publicly flogs Doug while he stands in her campaign headquarters. While she clearly used him as an experiment designed to see what would happen if she dated a white man, she is clearly still bitter about the situation. With good measure, she refuses to accept his apology. Anna insists he go back to renegotiate by admitting to disgusting things about himself as she feeds him the words to grovel for forgiveness. She relents. On to his next victim.

Angel is a model who embarrasses him because she doesn't remember their rendezvous. Then she drags him off to a private room while the director says tells the crew to take 5. Only Doug is unable to perform, despite trying to fake it. Again, Anna must listen to them trying to have sex as she waits by the car, but doesn't laugh enough to make the scene funnier. Instead, she modestly cups her hand over her face as if she is discovering something she shouldn't know about.

Emma's picture looks decidedly normal and sweet. She has a daughter and you can pretty well guess what this means. The girl says her mother died and that she does not have a dad. He could be her father, but the kid's granny sends him away. Anna shows some compassion and says she won't count that one.

He finds Erica at a strip joint but she is now a transsexual living as Eric. Then she busts a move using all her stripper guile. She became a man because she was sick of being a doormat. Then she whips out her junk. She says he was the first person she had oral sex with and that he'd told her not to worry that she would get the hang of it. When she finds out he stands to get an inheritance she demands that he perform oral sex on her new manhood. Anna comes to the rescue, just as Eric is beating the crap out of him. So this is the second time that she shows him compassion. We are well on our way to their mating ritual.

Will Sasso is hilarious as white trash trailer park Willy, the sister of the equally hilarious Alex Borstein (both Mad TV alum) who plays Doris. Of course, at least one of the babes he boned must have gotten fat -- so she has blown up like a puffer fish on steroids. Doris relates her tale of woe, telling him how he'd promised to marry her. He admits to being a cad during their high school years. No doubt, he probably deflowered her, too. Maybe there was a reference I missed. She asks for a kiss and then promptly jumps him in anger. I was expecting her to try to put the moves on him, because hot guys always seem to think that all fat chicks want them, despite what a douche they may be. So I was glad to see that instead, she throws him out and refuses to forgive him.

He can't get the little girl he thinks he fathered out of his head and returns to talk to granny. He finds out Emma fell for him, but when she realized she was pregnant, she knew Doug was an ass and didn't want him raising her kid.

Anna finds him weeping in his hotel room, consoles him and says he'll get his million dollars. She says she is not actually married. You know the rest.

Then POW! Anna is actually one of his victims! So she concocted the whole scheme up ... there is no inheritance! She's getting revenge for how he treated her when she was a mousy, bespectacled college student. As if anyone as beautiful as a supermodel like Hurley could ever be ugly.

Of course, he reunites with the daughter he never had. They run into each other and it is revealed that Anna perhaps regrets what he did to Doug to pay him back for breaking her heart. He turns to glance at her and we are supposed to know that eventually, they get together.

I realize it's only a movie, so there was probably not enough time to cover every woman he's ever screwed over - but if this is really all he had, this guy's got no game at all.

Of course, all the while that you know that the script will call for him to get together with his little hot lawyer, Hurley never appears to have much chemistry in this regard with Leary. That's probably a When Harry Met Sally tactic, but I'd still love to be able to ask him what it was like to work with her. In fact, maybe I'll pop him a Twitter and see what he says.

Stay for the out takes. They are worth it!

From the moment I heard that this movie was being made by Steven Soderbergh with Michael Douglas, Matt Damon, Rob Lowe, Dan Akroyd and Debbie Reynolds, who actually knew Liberace – I was hooked. I just knew I would enjoy this film, so I write this with a certain amount of bias. I find all of Soderbergh's films insightfully enduring and Richard LaGravenese's truthful writing refreshing.

I'd always been fascinated by the flamboyant, glittery Liberace since childhood. As a young adult, I guessed that he was probably gay, though none of the media talked openly about it. It was clear that most people thought he was gay – but no one cared particularly due to his popularity. Besides, back then, you just didn't talk about such things.

The film centers around the love affair between Liberace and Scott Thorson, based upon his book about their torrid and troubled relationship. I hadn't read the book so I found that the story behind their relationship turned out to be much more unnerving than many I've seen. I used to think that I couldn't be more creeped out than I used to be by the babes I knew in California who would get boob jobs and other bodily reconstructions to suit their men, but this one takes the cake. Since I already indicated there are spoilers, I will go ahead and say that I can find little more twisted than a grown man who insists that his lover have his face reconstructed to make it look like his own. I suppose it made sense that perhaps the reason he did that was because he intended to adopt the 17 year old young man, making it beyond disturbing, bordering on pedophilia and molestation by a father figure. Yikes!

Matt Damon has said that because Soderbergh is so precise, it was much easier to do the gay for pay (my words) scenes. Thank goodness for small favors. Nonetheless, these two actors fearlessly go for an authentic look into an ill-fated romance that went south for more than a few reasons. Thorson has maintained that he was bisexual, found gay porn a turn-off and was disenchanted by Liberace's propensity toward promiscuity. One scene that makes Liberace look particularly hypocritical is when he tells his lover that they should see other people to satisfy their individual sexual desires, but then accuses Scott of having an affair.

Even more troubling is when Thorson revealed that all of the unnecessary facial surgeries, done to satisfy his obsessive lover, created an addiction to various drugs such as cocaine, biphetamines, Demerol and quaaludes, all of which were allegedly provided by the plastic surgeon.

The level of detail in this film is mesmerizing, from the elaborate costumes to the over the top décor that Liberace incorporated into his entire lifestyle. Surely, the costume designers deserve an award for their work on this film, as do the entire cast, crew and director. It's actually one of the best biopics I've ever seen. It really felt like I was entering the world of this man at a time in his life when he had gone far beyond his pinnacle, but remained very popular. Soderbergh's shots from head to toe accentuating the shimmering lifestyle that Liberace led are haunting against the backdrop of living inside of the closet for most all of his life.

Given Thorson's continued troubled life, it would be interesting to see an epilogue to this film. Exploring the affects of how a 17 year old boy's sexual relationship with a very famous and obsessive man, old enough to be his father affected him could be seen as a cautionary tale – at the very least. It is said that Thorson is working on the second part of his story to raise money for a legal defense fund. As he sits in jail, penniless - it looks look a movie advance on a book doesn't go far these days.

Hope Springs covers a subject that rarely is covered in any, let alone mainstream films. Middle aged and over love and relationships in any kind of in depth sense is not considered marketable by many film companies, especially given that they so shamelessly pursue the younger market. Therefore, any time I see a film that bucks that system, I am compelled to see it. Not that Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones aren't other great reasons to see any film.

This story concerns an older couple who seem to have lost their intimate mojo, in fact, so much so that one wonders if they ever had any at all. But as the story unfolds, it is apparent that they indeed once did. It just got set aside by life somehow. While at first, Tommy Lee's character does not seem interested in trying, he does love his wife and therefore, makes the effort to get back in touch with his her. If only more couples did this early on in their marriages, maybe there would be less divorce.

Steve Carell - known for being wacky, at times subtle and at times over the top, does a great job helping us forget what he is most known for. As the even tempered Dr. Feld, he exudes an affable seriousness that few probably knew he had in him.

Tommy Lee Jones is essentially known for his tough guy roles. Seeing him in this light, as the romantic lead is a testament to his ability as an actor. It goes without saying that Meryl Streep is a consummate performer and knows her craft so well that there is really no role that she hasn't or couldn't handle superbly. She has always been willing to fearlessly display her feelings and rises to every occasion. And now, so does Tommy Lee Jones. Be sure to watch through the credits for a bonus scene worth watching.

In the interest of full disclosure, just the actors alone first drew me to this film. To also know that it was penned by Richard Price made it fairly certain for me that I would respect the work of everyone involved. It is a kind of bias, but time is limited these days so I make my movie choices accordingly. The fact that I only now saw the film in 2013 should provide a perspective of how deficient my movie watching has become.

All of that being said, "Freedomland" assembles every element that makes a film superior, at least for me. The acting is realistic and the story compelling. The racial tension that becomes so palpable also seems very real - given what has happened through the years in so many major cities. One of my favorite lines in the film, during a Spike Lee-esque racial demonstration is when one offended member of the community says "Who do you think you are? This ain't Mississippi!" and then soon afterward "Hillbilly!" It should no longer be shocking to anyone in the U.S. how much things start to resemble much of the Southern region of the country in the heat of racial strife.

Watching two of the finest actors of our times - Samuel L. Jackson and Julianne Moore is mesmerizing. What they do with this material is utterly consuming. It's always easy to poke holes into films, especially in a story like this, but if you suspend disbelief at a few points, the characterizations are sure to draw you in. Both of these characters are aware of very distinct vulnerabilities that for reasons that may not be apparent will become so eventually. But not with any sort of traditional Hollywood roundup, which is another beauty of this film.

Another fine element of this film is the special treatment that relatives of police officers often get, since Julianne Moore's character's brother happens to be a hotheaded policeman. However, as it will soon become apparent, they are not exactly as close as one might have assumed.

Edie Falco does a turn as a representative of mothers of children who have been molested, kidnapped or killed. Her intimate conversation with Julianne Moore is the stuff of honest filmmaking and capsulizes what the film is really about. The rest of the story demonstrates what happens after convenient lies and their resultant assumptions are spun out of control.

I do not usually gravitate toward LifeTime movies, but I have to admit that their quality is increasing. I was mainly attracted to this film as a fan of Marcia Gay Harden, and as always, she did not disappoint.

There are many terrifying elements to this film. The first is the willingness of young girls to basically provide what amounts to sexual services to young and older boys just to get attention and to be accepted. This issue has been a problem in society forever. But this movie demonstrates how this whole issue is made to be far more complex than it is.

For me, this movie was not about STDs. It was about self-esteem. The root cause of the Syphilis outbreak was the inability to understand how to address peer pressure. The more that anyone preaches or warns teens, the more they rebel. Knowing that all they really had to do was get a simple shot to correct Syphilis is not the answer. Syphilis and STDs are not the issue; they are a symptom of a much larger problem.

Therefore, the only hope to avoid things like this is for teens to have a far more thorough understanding about how hormones affect their lives. It is not enough to have a biology or sex ed class that tells them how to avoid STDs and pregnancy. That's just using fear to try to prevent outbreaks and it has never worked.

Until young girls in particular are taught to understand the chemical dangers of early sexual activity and how oxytocin works, they will never be able to put the proper value upon their sexuality. It isn't something to just hand out like candy. If teens are not taught to understand the psychology of sex early on, they'll always fall prey to sexual promiscuity.

Also, it wouldn't hurt if fathers mentored their sons better and taught them how to respect young women rather than to seek to take advantage and manipulate them into sex.

We are still at a place in this society where far too much value is placed upon physical appearance, which is why eating disorders became so rampant. The whole focus of society needs to change and until it does, this is the type of thing that we'll always be left with.