Very Cool!!!

Simply A Masterpiece

It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

An underachieving writer plagiarizes a novel which turns out to be a best-seller. The actual author privately comes forward telling the background story. The plagiarist is torn between his false success and conscience. He unsuccessfully tries to correct things but it's too late to turn the clock back. The original author dies and the plagiarist moves on. This is a good and engaging story told in a multilayered fashion. While the acting, directing and cinematography are in general good, Jeremy Irons arguably shows his class among the cast. Despite its nonlinear narrative, the plot is not convoluted and easy to follow. The emotional story involving Jeremy Iron's young life sounds genuine with the exception of the final scene: his former wife's new life seems too perfect for a traumatized person and overly dramatizes his story. However, this doesn't take away much from the movie. It's not clear what the outermost layer adds to the movie with Dennis Quaid's lead except that it gives some kind of unnecessary ambiguity to an otherwise perfectly closed case.

Cheesy. Lukewarm acting. Amateur script. Painful to watch and not even sure why we wasted the time to finish it. Metacritic score and reviews were spot on.

This movie described part of my life. How was loss of precious little moments can destroy the entire of your life. I love it so much

The movie has not been received well by the critics. Not surprising at all. The public, on the other hand, likes the movie. This is a movie that tends to cause one to overthink it when it's structure is pretty obvious. This is where it falls apart. A story about an author who writes a story about and author who breaks the one rule no author should break when he steals the work of another unpublished author. Working backwards, the movie works until it fails to resolve the top level story. Leaving very obscure clues is not enough. Having a character without any connected background or confirmation of why they are in the story is the Missed it by "This Much." Open ended is fine but unresolved is not. Two of the three stories are profound but they rest on a shaky foundation that the viewer must now decide for themselves. "At some point, you have to choose between life and fiction. The two are very close, but they never actually touch." says Clay. Yes, we must decide whether it is life or fiction but, yes, the two do touch. Who is who is almost explained but not quite. The redemption which Rory seeks for his sins is obscure and the writers make it so because they do not want to be accused of being trite or cliche. Well in this one part, they are. The two inner stories would hold up just fine without the smoke that Daniella brings to the movie. In fact, remove all of the scenes in Clay's condo because they really do nothing for the story. It does nothing to conclude that Daniella's objective is to bed the famous author she has a crush on. We can be thankful that although she almost succeeds, she doesn't, at least not in this fiction. The critics who blast the movie because of its lack of literary acclaim are typical of critics who see only their version of the way things should be. Perhaps the fact that the final resolution is not so open-ended as it is simply confusing and leaves gaping holes in the story. We find 90% of the movie profound and enjoyable and actually very realistic. It's the 10% at the end in Clay's roost that we are left dangling without sufficient clue. The baseball is not enough.