ridiculous rating

It is a performances centric movie

A bit overrated, but still an amazing film

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Another year is winding to a close and it's time to look back over the triumphs and the failures, friendships made and relationships ended. Whether you are celebrating with a huge party or a single glass of champagne at home, New Year's Eve is synonymous with reflection over the months gone by and what we seek in the future. Nevertheless, I can't say, the same with the movie 'New Year's Eve'. It's not worth remembering or celebrating in any year of your life. Released a few weeks before the 2011 New Year's Eve & taking its gimmicky influence once again, from 2003's hit holiday film "Love Actually', director Gary Marshall hope to ride the tiresome clichés big ensemble anthology holiday comedies back to the bank like he did with 2010s film, 'Valentine Day'. With twice the budget, this new holiday film was originally plan as a sequel to that 2010 film; however, with most of the cast from the original movie not returning; it cause the writers, to do a number of rewrites. Any recurring actors from 'Valentine Day' were rewritten into new roles in new locations, thus making this film, just a spiritual successor of the first film. Without spoiling the movie, too much, while, telling the new story about several couples and singles living in New York City on New Year's Eve; the film with all-star-studded cast felt a little too shallow, sappy and dull for me, even with the overused of passion monologues throughout the film. Though the messages are well meant and everyone's striving to be a good person, there aren't many believable role models. For starters, most of the characters were dealing with first world upper class problems that most people can't related to. The majority of people that lives in New York City, aren't high paying and rich, mostly white record moguls like Josh Duhamel's character, Sam Ahern, Jr. or rock-stars like Jon Bon Jovi's safe and generic character, musician Daniel Jensen who having dating issues. No, it's made, out of a number of blue-blood minorities from all of the five borough with mostly normal jobs, having to deal with paying the bills, and keeping alive. The focus on New York City was way off. It felt manufacturer, as if to act like a tourism brochure, rather than an in depth look of what life is really like in the city. After all, most of the cast is made out of celebs that honestly don't live in New York. Why couldn't they hired, more well-known New Yorkers actors!? Hardly any New York accents in this film. Better yet, focus on writing, well delivered characters that seem like they honestly do live there. You know, characters that seem like they bleed, New York. Another thing, for a movie about the people of New York City, where were the stories of the firefighters, police officers, or even the military. Don't get me wrong, not everything is awful about the characters. I do kinda like the storyline between Kim Doyle (Sarah Jessica Parker) is having trouble with her teenage daughter Hailey (Abigail Breslin) & a dying man, Stan Harris (Robert De Niro) evaluates his life with the help of a nurse named Aimee (Halle Berry). It's something, we can somewhat relate to, and the twist between them with Claire Morgan (Hillary Swank), was somewhat good, but the majority of the rest of the movie is mindless fluff. In my opinion, the movie should had given these stories, a little more real to earth conflicts, rather than having stupid, somewhat disturbing unrealistic conflicts, like two families, the Byrnes, Griffin and Tess (Seth Meyers & Jessica Biel) & the Schwab, James & Grace (Til Schweiger & Sarah Paulsen) trying to give birth, so they can win a lot of money or the stupid rat race to complete last minute, New Year Resolutions as if it's a bucket list with depression, lonely Ingrid Withers (Michelle Pfeiffer), & intrepid bike messenger, Paul Doyle (Zac Efron). It would make this movie, a lot better. Some of the stories, are so awful. I totally forgot about them. Some good examples are the Katherine Heigl's dating storyline and the Ashton Kutcher's elevator scene with Lea Michele. Despite that, most of the acting throughout the film was alright. Nothing too bad to get work up, about. However, nobody really stood out, because how disjointed, the structure was. The movie jumps around from character to character way too much. Sometimes, way too quickly. It really does confusing, whom story goes to whom character. I think, the movie had way too many cameos and not enough main and supporting characters to use as an episodic linking device. Added to that mess, was the large amount of highly visual mistakes. It was really jarring, how badly made, some of the shots were. Some good examples are, how comes, they didn't notice, that the film crew is visual in the train station!? Another, is how come, they didn't notice that the list of New Year resolutions, change between shots!? You would think, this movie, would notice that. Overall: I have to say, 2011's 'New Year's Eve' is like the New Year Baby. At first, it's cute to look at, but stressful and annoying to keep around and watch over. Don't recommended.

'New Year's Eve', despite its mammoth ensemble cast, doesn't quite leave a mark. Its, at best, a fair watch, that has a few interesting moments. 'New Year's Eve' Synopsis: The lives of several couples & singles in New York intertwine over the course of New Year's Eve.Katherine Fugate's Screenplay is ambitious, but not very well-crafted. The vignettes laced in the narrative, range from ordinary to dull. The only vignette that holds appeal is the one called Elevator, which features Ashton Kutcher & Lea Michelle. Garry Marshall's Direction is decent. Cinematography is picture-perfect. Editing lacks sharpness. Art & Costume Design are alright.Performance-Wise: Of the ensemble cast, Its only Ashton Kutcher & Lea Michelle who deliver confident, likable performances. The rest of the cast lend adequate support.On the whole, 'New Year's Eve' is a so-so fare.

Michelle Pfeiffer's subplot about quitting her job on New Year's Eve, and attempting to live out a list of fantasies was kind of amusing, but all other drawn out vignettes were either just boring or grating.Usually good Jessica Beil should be embarrassed about playing a self absorbed girl who (along with her husband) are pitifully more concerned with the childish novelty of having the first child born in the new year, rather than concerned about the kid about to be born. Her doctor, who refuses to help force the birth, is one of only a few likable characters in this thing. Another likable character is gorgeous Lea Michelle's groupie character, who is stuck in a lift with Ashton Kutcher. That vignette however, was as dull as Ashton Kutcher is himself (How is that dimbulb famous?) Katherine Heigl is just, ... well, ... Katherine Heigl. A stuck up, grumpy primadonna bickering with John Bon Jovi, even jovially throwing eggs at a poster bearing his likeness. Most of her excruciating scenes were fast-forwarded through as we watched this. John Bon Jovi puts in the most random cameo since Billy Ray Cyrus' cameo in Mulholland Drive (but Cyrus' cameo in that film was actually funny) DeNiro's elderly character is on his deathbed, but still wants to freeze his ass off on the rooftop, watching the ball drop at the stroke of midnight. Yawn. I've never understood what is the appeal to watching the infamous ball drop on New Year's Eve? What does the ball dropping have to do with New Year's Eve? A teenage girl pointlessly flashes her bright yellow bra at her mother in the middle of Times Square, trying to convince mom to let her go alone to watch that bloody ball drop, in a quite out-dated vignette, seemingly left over from the 1940s.Film is just an excuse to show a lengthy list of Hollywood A-listers, and present them in underwritten mini stories in this overly busy train wreck of a movie, hoping their fans will turn out to see them playing characters who are either just moronic, or repellent.It was like the filmmakers took a plate of spaghetti (with each spaghetti noodle representing one of this film's underwritten subplots, randomly presented) and flung it at the wall, knowing that some of it might stick briefly before falling to the floor, but in the end, it leaves nothing but a huge mess as a reminder, and ends up being nothing but a waste.

With a cast of fine actors, New York City as the set, great musicians and an over $55m budget, Gary Marchall's "New Year's Eve" remains an "OK, no big deal" movie.Robert de Niro, Halle Berry, Michelle Pfiffer, Zac Ephron, Catherine Heigle, Josh Duhamel, Sarah Jessica Parker, Hillary Swank, Jon Bon Jovi, etc., all gifted performers, couldn't save the film from falling into the "no big deal" category.According to many, New York City is a set to die for. Directors have used its atmosphere to create lasting works of art or just intelligent entertainment. In this case the streets that contain the stuff that dreams are made of could not save it from being just another "no big deal" movie.And finally even the over $55m budget was used to no avail. What a waste! However, in all fairness, the movie is an excellent case study on how to convert the awesome into mediocrity.