Here on Earth

Here On Earth is about opposite people who fall in love. They must change their whole lives to be together. Samantha is a teenager from a family with limited income. She has always dated Jasper. They love each other and will be together forever. At least that's what they thought before a boy named Kelly came into the picture. Kelly is a rich kid from the other side of town. Kelly and Jasper are in a car race and accidentally hit Samantha's family diner which causes it to catch fire and be destroyed. Kelly and Jasper then help rebuild the diner. Kelly and Samantha begin to like each other, and now Samantha must choose. Does she go with Jasper who she's been with forever, or does she go with Kelly who is different? She falls for Kelly, but it wasn't easy. They have numerous problems, everything from flashbacks of a parent's suicide to one of them getting cancer. Through thick and thin their love holds them together.

The main intention of director Mark Pizanrski was to show that if we want something bad enough. we will do anything to get it. Kelly and Samantha wanted to be together. They change their whole life to be with each other. They stood up to people they loved and had to face tough situations. But in the end it was worth it. Samantha declares that `some people live their whole lives and never fall in love, I lived my life and I fell in love.' All the hard work had been worth it. This is to me what Pizanrski wanted to get across.

My favorite part of the movie is the characters. They do such fine acting that the audiences feel as if they are a part of it. The characters will make them laugh and cry at the same time. Without the excellent acting of the cast, Here On Earth would not have been a success. They are what make the movie entertaining.

This film is a genuine five-hanky tearjerker that slathers on the schmaltz thick as marmalade. The story begins with a rivalry between a group of prep school boys and local townies that have a reckless car race that ends up burning down a local diner and gas station. The judge sentences the two drivers to a summer of community service rebuilding the diner. Kelley (Chris Klein) is a spoiled rich boy with attitude. Jasper (Josh Hartnett) is a local hick with a good heart and a bad temper. Needless to say, the two boys hate each other. To complicate matters, Jasper's girlfriend Samantha (Leelee Sobieski) is developing a serious case of the hots for Kelley. They begin an affair complete with dewy looks, running through fields, stolen glances and every other schmaltzy film technique ever invented.

The prep/townie rivalry escalates into a love triangle with all the foreseeable showdowns and confrontations. Just when everyone is working themselves into a good lather it is discovered that Samantha is seriously ill. Pass the Kleenex.

The film has some very sweet moments but the story is far too formulaic and predictable. It has the feel of a TV movie, which is not surprising since director Mark Piznarski has mostly TV projects on his resume. To his credit, the cinematography was beautiful and his choice of locations was superb. The overlook scenes were particularly lovely.

Chris Klein gave an adequate performance, but was not very dynamic and a little stiff. I felt that he was much better in `American Pie' playing a more sincere character. He seems like too nice a guy to play this spoiled and arrogant rich kid. Leelee Sobieski was a good choice for Samantha. She comes across as very vulnerable and sweet. She was adept at capturing the delicate teenage balance between tentativeness and determination. I actually liked Josh Hartnett better than I did Klein. Perhaps he was better suited for his character, but he seemed a lot more believable as Jasper.

This is a great chick flick. It is sentimental, romantic, endearing and sad. Guys are likely to spend most of the movie writhing in their seats. Unfortunately, it wasn't very original and suffered from too many clichés. I rated it a 6/10. Add one or two points if you like sentimental romances and another if you like a movie that makes you cry. A good film for girls' night out.

*MILD SPOILERS* - Hey, you know how there's always that one guy in every Nicolas Sparks movie (usually rich and spoiled) who makes a crude remark about the hero's girlfriend and then gets punched out in a public place (usually a wedding reception or a party)? Well, if you've ever wanted to see HIS story, this is the movie for you! Even though this came out 2 years BEFORE A Walk to Remember, it came out a year after the book - I don't know if someone at 20th Century Fox ordered some writers "hey - make a movie kinda like this book NOW!", but what I do know is this movie sticks closer to the Sparks formula even moreso than AWTR! Besides Sparks standards like a small town, disapproving parents, class issues, disease, and death, this one throws in future Sparks tropes that were missing - love scene in the rain, multiple montages of people building or renovating something (usually a boat, tractor or a house; here a diner), a love triangle with a "nice guy", and a PG-13, shot from the shoulders-up sex scene - they're all here. All we're missing is handwritten letters in a box and a North Carolina coastal setting and this would actually be the ultimate Sparks movie. I wonder if he consciously or subconsciously borrowed a bunch from this movie - a true Who Made Who? situation.

But is it any good? It's entertaining and watchable, but it's also head-scratchingly wrongheaded in concept or execution. The main character is arrogant, he's sleazy, he's ungrateful, he makes fun of poor people - it seems like they're setting up some kind of redemption story, but then they forgot to film the redemption parts! He's just as big an a-hole at the end as he was at the beginning, and we're supposed to root for him for some reason as he steals another guy's girlfriend, then treats her like crap, then leaves and disses the entire town, then comes back like nothing happened. It might make some sense if Chris Klein showed any of his aw-shucks, goofy persona (from Election and American Pie, etc...) but he's simultaneously unlikable and uninteresting here, not to mention he bears a striking resemblance to mass murderer Elliot Rodger. I mean, look at his smug look on the cover, you're about to get a whole movie of that. This is the first Chris Klein movie where I don't want to hang out with his character (and yes this includes Street Fighter).

Why are we supposed to cheer on Leelee Sobieski as she cheats on her boyfriend with this guy? They have zero chemistry and they never portray her boyfriend as anything less than a good guy, and I'd argue more women would choose Josh Hartnett over Chris Klein- it's mind-boggling that we're supposed to sympathize with her as she makes out with Klein RIGHT IN FRONT OF HER BOYFRIEND'S BEST FRIEND and he's supposed to be the bad guy for ratting them out? As a Paul Verhoeven-esque satire of the tragic romance genre, this kinda works, but viewed straight it's kind of unbelievable that they released this movie without major reshoots or re-writes.

Films like this are one of the many things that give Hollywood its bad reputation among independent creative artists. Being at the advanced age of twenty-four and already having had two girlfriends (okay, one girlfriend and one exceptionally good female friend) die on me, I turned the DVD off feeling insulted. Mr. Cranky's review of the film says it all, but I thought I would offer some of my own personal commentary just to embellish the point.

Ever heard the saying "convert ****holes who, having accepted Jesus into their hearts, remain ****holes"? Well, this film is a living example of it. I had as much sympathy for the characters in this film as I would have for a baked potato, and that did not change one iota by the end. The dead mother plot device might have done it for me - quite frankly, I would be very indifferent if my mother died, especially if she had done so when I was about ten years younger. Plot points follow this paragraph, by the way, but you might save yourself a lot of boredom if you just read them.

The manner in which we are supposed to feel sympathy for Leelee Cantactworthadamn's character is simple. The writers and director decide to give her cancer. Apparently, she has broken her knee playing sports before, and the doctors tell her crying family that the possibility of a tumour growing in her leg as a result was "always a possibility". What the f***? Having had a cancer dug out of my face myself, resulting in similar disfigurement to what Cybill Shepherd is reputedly going through at the moment, I find this plot device even more insulting now than I did when I saw the film. I will not feel sympathy for a cardboard cut-out if she dies of cancer, and I will want to kill her myself if she is afflicted with cancer via such a lousy, insulting, and just plain inconsistent with the facts setup as this. Hell, her family must belong to the HMO from Hades if cancer as the result of a knee injury was "always a possibility", and yet it spreads throughout her body so far it cannot be rectified before anyone even notices!

Of course, another source of eternal amusement is the contribution of music by Tori Amos, a woman who still apparently wishes she was more unusual than the chew-toys in breakfast cereals. I'd love to see the look on her face after being played some of the record collection I've put together after years of living in circumstances that would make the writers of this film shudder in terror. Which brings me to another point - when the hell is Hollywood going to stop insulting us with these pseudo-alternative films and present us with something truly exceptional again? One could could the current Lord Of The Rings trilogy, but that is only exceptional because of good source material and a quirky director. Hell On Earth, by comparison, seems geared to prove that Hollywood is only geared towards a very narrow, rigid demographic.

In case I haven't impressed upon you how bad this trash is, let me close by just saying that this film's entire plot was done a billion times better in about twenty minutes of Groundhog Day.

This film's setup is OK: rich kid's probation is helping rebuild the restaurant his irresponsible behavior burns down. And I liked the female lead, Lee Sobieski. At various points, she reminded me of Helen Hunt, of Laura Linney, and even of Jodie Foster. But somebody in the small town would have told the rich kid that she was a cancer patient, so the big revelation scene never would have happened. Too bad, but the whole film turned out to be a Love Story knock-off.