You won't be disappointed!

Why so much hype?

This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

I admire the filmmaker's ability to squeeze so much out of a limited budget. When you actually make a film yourself-- with the occasional incompetent crew member, the snags in acquiring permits and licenses, etc.-- you realize that its mere completion is almost a minor miracle. I also admire the filmmaker's courage to tap into issues that mainstream films would never touch such as (spoiler) incest or in this case, near-incest. However, I believe that this film suffers because its protagonist is probably not relatable to most people. At times he seems as if he is a DANGEROUS stalker, and the idea that Heather Graham's character was attracted to a stalker-- even in her poor condition-- seemed improbable. The acting is mostly good except for the very weak performance that the girl who played Heather Graham's character's former sister-in-law turned in. Her performance is cringe-worthy, actually. Overall, I believe that this filmmaker might eventually strike gold with a future project, and I wish luck to him.

Ah, look at all the lonely people. Adrift in Manhattan focuses on three very lonely New Yorkers whose lives are destined to intersect. Heather Graham has the role which is meant to tie the plot together. She plays optometrist Rose Phipps, a woman who has suffered a great loss and who now lives alone while trying to piece her life back together. Dominic Chianese plays our second main character, Tommaso, an elderly painter, classical music enthusiast and mailroom worker. As we meet him he is being informed by Rose that he is going blind. And then there is young photo shop worker Simon, played by Victor Rasuk. One day Simon sees Rose sitting on a bench in the park and decides to more or less become a stalker, following her around the city taking her picture. He even follows her all the way home, taking pictures of her through the windows. Creepy? You bet.As the film progresses we learn more about each of these characters. We learn why it is that Rose is seemingly alone in the world. We learn that Simon is extremely shy and withdrawn, apparently having very little idea of how to relate to people. This may have something to do with his mother with whom he has one of the most uncomfortably, bizarrely affectionate parent/child relationships ever seen. The focus of the story really is Rose and Simon. Which is a shame because Tommaso is far and away the most interesting character in the film. We see his frustrations as he deals with his failing sight, blindness akin to a death sentence for this simple but proud man who so loves to paint. And we see him fall in love with a much younger woman from his office, Isabel, played by Elizabeth Peña. Their relationship tugs at the heartstrings, their interactions always compelling. And Chianese and Peña easily give the best performances in the film. Rather unfortunately it seems the movie is always rushing through Tommaso's scenes so the focus can get back to Rose.The film meanders about, cutting back and forth between our three main protagonists. But the story never really pays itself off. Tommaso is compelling, Rose somewhat less so, and Simon, barely even communicative, hard to identify with. Eventually Rose does something which makes absolutely no sense, something you would never believe anyone in her position would even conceive of doing, and from there the movie really falls apart. For a film which seemed to have some genuine promise, especially in Tommaso's story, in the end it just kind of limply fizzles out. Chianese did excellent work and created a great character and he and Peña work together wonderfully. But the story which surrounds them ultimately falls flat.

Though there have been many films of late that address the issues of the isolation of the individual in a society increasingly settling for homogeneity, few have the honesty and simplicity of presentation as Alfredo De Villa's ADRIFT IN MANHATTAN. Perhaps the reason this film works so well is that instead of dealing with the usual tropes, De Villa restricts his story to three individuals who are suffering isolation in the noise and autonomy of New York City and are thus 'adrift' in a life that seems flat and without a beacon of hope. The story De Villa weaves is one of interaction of these characters by almost serendipitous incidents, moments that change their lives - at least for a while.Teenager Simon Colon (Victor Rasuk) lives with his overbearing mother Marta (Marlene Forte) and gets through his life almost without speaking, working in a camera shop, spending his idle hours photographing people in the park. Tommaso Pensara (Dominic Chianese) is an elderly painter and music lover who lives alone and supports himself by being the 'mail boy' in a large firm: his loneliness is heightened when he discovers he has macular degeneration and will go blind. The physician who makes his diagnosis is Dr. Rose Phipps (Heather Graham) who is grieving from the recent death of her 2-year old child and is unable to continue her marriage to literature professor Mark Phipps (William Baldwin).The threads of coincidence begin to tie these people together when Simon begins to photograph Rose in a manner that resembles stalking, when Tommaso notices and desires and older lady at his workplace, Isabel Parades (Elizabeth Peña) and is encouraged by Dr Rose to share his potential blindness with this friend, and when Rose explores the attention Simon bestows on her, filling an emotional need for both parties. Naturally the development of these intersections is more complex but at the same time the manner in which they develop is very tender and gentle.Some viewers may find the film meandering a bit too much: this is not linear storytelling but rather shifts in incidents and moods and gradual changes that occur among these simple but needy people, much like the coincidences and random kindnesses occur to the sensitive eye. The cast is very fine and the cinematography and musical score sustain the mood of the piece. This film requires involvement on the part of the viewer, and that involvement has its rewards. Grady Harp

I often get annoyed at movies like this, where you get too many character threads interweaving. These types of films tend to spend too little time on the characters, and thus have to rely on superficial plot twists and clichéd conflicts. I put Crash and Babel in these categories. Both enjoyable enough films, but they fail at their core because they focus too much on the events that the characters face, rather than their response to them. Enter "Adrift in Manhattan." The ambition here is less than a Crash or Babel -- it's not trying to explain the modern angst of society or draw global interconnectedness links -- but rather to simply explore the lives of a small group of characters in a one city whose lives happen to intersect. As a result, we get to really know them, see what's driving them (shockingly, through their acting and the filming, and not uninteresting plot twists -- most of the intense events that drive them all took place prior to the film), and then watch how it unfolds. There are no neat plot resolutions. Rather, the characters are left with their lives, but hopefully with a more evolved sense of where they fit in it, and how to take control of it. For me, this is great storytelling and a perfect kind of character-based film. In addition, nearly all of the performances are exceptional. Heather Graham seems to have pushed herself in a completely different direction from her typical fare. Anyone who thought she was just fit for light-hearted role (and I include myself in that group) is in for a remarkable surprise. Her character is grieving heavily, but Graham never overdoes it. Instead, she lets the grief speak for itself, and the result is undeniably moving. Ditto for a handful of moments that are truly hysterical. It's a revelation to see her play a comedic moment in a drama without laying it on. Similarly Victor Rasuk is exceptional, particularly given the dearth of actual lines he has. His eyes, his posture, and his hesitancy give his character the depth that it needs. He's a completely different character from the one we saw in Raising Victor Vargas. Withdrawn, shy, insecure... and yet, his camera convincingly and effectively draws him out of that. And perhaps the sweetest storyline is that of Dominic Chianese and Elizabeth Pena, whose tentative romance is one of the most tender I've ever seen on film.This movie is an honest 10. Everything in it is earned. The script is very strong, and not overpowering or contrived at any point. The cinematography is beautiful, and really catches the flavor of a real and gritty Manhattan. And finally the direction is superb. Given the tightness of the script, the movie has to rely on shooting to really show us the characters and what they are feeling. And it does so exceptionally. I recommend it unequivocally to anyone who enjoys a very well crafted character-based drama.