Good start, but then it gets ruined

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

I was disappointed bc I'm a fan of Jason Bateman and he usually has pretty good films. It was to mildly entertaining and just all over the place.

I've always liked the three main characters, Bateman, Wilde and Crudup. This is like a Doris Day style comedy with the feel of a more sophisticated script and style, ala Woody Allen. Even has a slightly more serious message than earlier Romantic comedies. Not a bad ride, as far as romantic comedies go. I would recommend it for it's interesting quirks and dialogue.

The premise is interesting - describing a crisis in a life of a spoiled, shallow, born-rich, almost-middle-aged guy, having a comedic view of it.Also, it looks very nice, too nice, really, essentially unreal, which is nice in comparison to this guy's life, which is also such.But that's basically all there is to it. It's not fun, though that is by design. It has but a few good jokes. There are no really fundamental observations on human nature. Well, except that someone who's been spoiled by their 40s needs to have a crisis to _start_ living in the real world - and that their life-long psychiatrist is a part of the problem, not the solution.The cast is actually mostly OK, except that Olivia Wilde being a model is a slight miss - though she's great in other terms. Essentially, they could have just made her an actress or a painter, or something.But the material is just even more shallow than our main character and, by the end, you're basically left with "what was all this for?".

'THE LONGEST WEEK': Three Stars (Out of Five)Romantic comedy flick starring Jason Bateman, Billy Crudup, Olivia Wilde and Jenny Slate. The cast is billed in reverse order, in the film's opening credits and marketing (for some bizarre reason), giving Slate top billing even though she's barely in it. The movie was directed and co-written (with Juan Iglesias) by first time feature filmmaker Peter Glanz. It tells the story of a spoiled 'man child', who is suddenly cut off from his parents' fortune. He moves in with his best friend and then falls in love with his girlfriend. Considering the talented cast involved, I found the movie to be pretty disappointing.Bateman plays Conrad Valmont; an unemployed writer who constantly tells people he's in the 'gathering stages' of writing a novel. He's almost 40 and is still living off his parents' wealth; having never had a real job of his own. He spends most of his time at his parents' successful Manhattan hotel; sleeping with lots of beautiful young women there. When his parents suddenly separate, they also decide to evict Conrad and cut him off from all their funding. Conrad then moves in with his best (and only) friend Dylan Tate (Crudup). Due to his obsession with pretty women, Conrad finds himself drawn to Dylan's model girlfriend, Beatrice Fairbanks (Wilde). The two begin a passionate affair together, behind Dylan's back.The movie was finished in 2012 and finally released recently, in a small amount of theaters, two years later. After seeing the film, I can see why. It's definitely a miscalculation, and that's putting it pretty nicely. The movie wants to be witty and insightful, but it fails. It often borrows a lot from filmmakers like Wes Anderson and Woody Allen, as well, to no avail. I always enjoy watching Jason Bateman, and he's still pretty amusing here; but ultimately he's wasted. So is all of the rest of the talented cast. The movie has some good ideas, it keeps trying to work out, but it's never very funny or involving. Glanz definitely still has a lot to learn about filmmaking.Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5es95jIdgR4