Watched in 2011

I love character portraits!

Wendy is an interesting, affecting character. Her string of struggles not only tests her but wrings the watcher until she is a bundle of nerves and faint hope.

The rising action brings the protagonist to an emotional climax.

Very sad ending, satisfying if you can see it through her eyes.

Admittedly, I checked the clock a time or two. But that may be because I was restless the day I watched it. It was a slow movie, but engaging with its character portraits.

The story is charming and I enjoyed looking at a culture I was alien to.

I loved the ending - very good cinematography.

Critics are calling this "fun" but nothing else. I'm calling this "they should have followed the book." At least then it would make sense.

I understand, as a writer, the dilemma of cramming a sea adventure into a couple hours. However, their screen adaptation is lacking.

Listen to the critics and just enjoy it as a sea romp.

I loved how this movie handled the relationships of the characters. No cliched or hackneyed relationships, no sappy or last minute romance, no miracle worker, no "everyone takes care of the (autistic) main character."

And yet this movie had a definite feel-good quality. But unlike most Hollywood tales, it is a genuine feeling-good.

The main two characters are deep, their actors are skilled to say the least, and their ends are wrapped up in a pretty bow. Life continues for them after the film ends.

Brilliant!

Quirky but realistic, this dysfunctional family flick seems to have everything it needs. Each member's story is complete - presenting a crisis, driving them to climax, and providing a resolutin - very satisfying!

These archs construct the megastory without showing any cracks or seams.

Plus, the richness of the cinematography, the setting, dialogue, their interations are fun as well as well-written/shot.

I knew about the 22 directors going in. I wondered how well they had collaborated, if so many different perspectives/egos would cement so well in a creative media such as film. But, I thought this would be a consolidated script.

Instead, it was a web of vignettes linked by the setting, Paris. Though I enjoyed each individual vignette, some especially much, having 22 in a row was frustrating.

When I realized the first few narrative would not be resolved, I was irritated and felt cheated. Good writers know that they must make the reader/viewer trust them, they must give promises, expectations, and then must reward the reader/viewer for their trust.

What was especially difficult to swallow was that some had no resolution. Either they were a mere glimpse of a situation or only the beginning of a story. Like microfiction.

This would not be so difficult if, like a work of microfiction, the reader is left with time to soak it up and make what she wants of it.

Though I've been critical, I enjoyed this movie. Perhaps I would have enjoyed it more if I had pushed pause and savored the samples served by each director.

Among the better vignettes were "Place des Victoires" by Suwa, "Porte de Choisy" by Doyle, "Loin du 16e" by Salles and Thomas, and "Place des fêtes" by Schmitz.

And my favorites were: "Tour Eiffel" by Chomet, "Faubourg Saint-Denis" by Tykwer, "14e arrondissement" by Payne, and "Père-Lachaise" by Craven (which wasn't perfect, but still good.)

Though I missed some of the advantages of modern filmaking, this movie has the charm of old cinema!

A good story, though the second half is more interesting. While the first half is a shining comedy, the second half is grim.

It's been a while since I watched a teen movie and this reminded me why.

A pot-fogged romp of insipid romantic relationship, flinging F-bombs and loser characters at the view for an hour or so. Though, Adventureland is not so bad. But not really good either.

Plain.

The best part was the cheating amusement park owners. They were funny enough.

Too many "big risks" without the development of the story to back it up. For a movie about the dangers of damaging and damning sexuality in art, this film flaunted tons of it. It focused too much on proving its own points and forgot to let the story catch up. A film suffering from its own curse.

The cinematography (lighting, color, angle, symbolism, and frame construction) of this film is absolutely beautiful! I don't understand why this has a 5.8 rating.

The story was sometimes tender, sometimes hilarious. Though the ending of the romance was not exactly preferrable, it is realistic.

I found the exploration of the themes of romance, protection, female needs, and possession deep, the work of a man who has experienced this side of life.

Great script, fantastic movie!