Adrift in Manhattan

I enjoyed the movie. Didn't expect a lot and was pleasantly surprised by the storyline, the characters and the development. It is one of the movies that doesn't give enough information about the characters (on purpose) so that it leaves you with questions and wanting more. The inter relation between the characters is extremely light so that normally annoying feature actually added to this film.

Some of the features of the movie are a little disturbing but I wouldn't consider them weird enough to prevent most people from enjoying the movie.

For me a 7 means I enjoyed it and would definitely watch it again. I just wouldn't be thrilled to have paid $10 to see it.

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 We learn that Simon is extremely shy and withdrawn, apparently having very little idea of how to relate to people.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.

Although I usually find interest in interwoven character story lines from films such as Crash or Magnolia or Babel, I couldn't get my interests up for this one.

Now I'm not here to complain that the movie lacked explosions, action or a whole lot of plot twists - it doesn't attempt to be that kind of movie. The few plot driven elements are rather scarce and are mostly there to drive forward the characters rather then the story. The story itself is never the planned focus anyhow. It is my appreciation that some attention to have a more involving plot would have done the work a service.

In terms of execution (acting, directing) the effort is certainly solid although never really stellar : you won't find anything really worthy of seeing the movie on it's own. The problem therefore is the very blueprint on which the execution rests, and as I pointed earlier, the material given is too dry to make the movie a memorable one.

There just isn't enough happening here to make this one worth the look. Nothing much was achieved, and the journey alone wasn't exactly thought provoking nor entertaining. It isn't awful mind you, just very forgettable.

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

Had potential, but falls short of being profound, emotional or interesting. Some nice moments but that's about it.