Leaves of Grass

"Leaves of Grass" at its core is a coming home movie like many others. Typically, coming home movies are about city folks coming back home to the country. Initially, they experience all the things that made them flee to begin with, then they are reminded of all the things they love.

In this film Billy Kincaid (Edward Norton) was a philosophy professor in Boston while his twin brother Brady was a marijuana grower in Little Dixie, Oklahoma. Brady was in hot water with Pug Rothbaum (Richard Dreyfuss), a Jewish loan shark. Brady had a plan to get out of his predicament, but it involved his brother Billy.

"Leaves of Grass" had plenty of known names and faces. Besides the two actors I already mentioned there was Susan Sarandon, Tim Blake Nelson (who wrote, acted, and directed), Pruitt Taylor Vince (known for "Identity"), and Josh Pais. The movie was humorous and a little surprising--in a good way. It wasn't as predictable as I thought it would be and that's probably one of the highest compliments you can give to a movie.

There's some movies that deserve better performances. The script is there, but the casting is wrong, and the film suffers because of it. "Leaves of Grass" suffers the opposite problem. Edward Norton delivers one of the best performances of his career (which says a lot), but the film doesn't deliver on the same level of his performance leading to a less than mediocre movie that would be hard to recommend regardless of how good that acting really is.

Leaves of Grass is a pretty simple stoner film. It's about two identical twin brothers (both played by Norton) who live completely different lives. One decided to study classics and teach out of Brown University. The other decided to study marijuana and build his empire in the heart of Oklahoma. When the marijuana business goes south, the cultured classics professor is forced to head the the small town swamps to help his brother. What ensues is both equally interesting and entertaining, but quite frankly doesn't deliver on the comedy that the premise is clearly built upon.

Edward Norton really steals the show here. Personally he's been one of my favorite actors ever since American History X, and films like 25th Hour have done nothing but increase my appreciation. Here he plays a straight laced cultured character and a hillbilly hick town drug lord and he plays them both extremely well. Couple this with the fact that the characters appear on screen together fighting, consoling, shooting, and conversing, and you can't help but be amazed at the range one man could show in a single movie.

Despite the performance and the interesting intertwining story of brother helping brother, I still don't think I can recommend this film. It delivers some heartfelt moments, ends on sweet spot, and entertains on somewhat of an emotional level (lot of talk about god, our existence, good vs. bad, and the importance of family) but has such an inconsistent tone that tries to do too many things at once (comedy, action, inspiration, and emotion).

A lot of critics claimed this to be a hidden gem, one of the year's best. I for one wouldn't 100% agree. It's a small-budget film that tries to have a big heart. For me, it just didn't quite get there.

For more reviews, please visit http://www.popcornjury.com

Michael Buffa- Editor, Popcorn Jury

It is fascinating to see certain movies that achieve a specific balance between the familiar and the unique, a particular dynamic perfectly representative of writer/director/actor Tim Blake Nelson's Leaves of Grass. On the surface, the film's prevailing themes of family, reconciliation with one's roots and the tensions between educated/"upper" class and working/"lower" class are identifiable as those articulated in countless films and other cultural texts, suggesting just one more re-tread of the same material. At the same time, in an elusive sense, the particular angle the material is addressed feels somehow fresh and unique, making Leaves of Grass particularly vibrant, dynamic and compelling, both as a narrative and individual character study.

In its most distilled essence, the film charts a rampantly successful Ivy League philosophy professor (Norton) forced to return to and come to terms with his less than glamorous family ties in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Of course the narrative covers significantly more ground than that, particularly the professor being sucked into an ill-advised and hardly legal scheme by his madcap, drug dealer twin brother (also Norton), but Nelson returns so continuously to the aforementioned central themes that the increasingly complex plot surrounding them runs the risk of feeling somewhat besides the point, as enjoyable as it is. However, it is through evolving such a complex web of narrative that Nelson's film feels all the more unique, allowing him to tackle often covered themes with not only a more fresh and indirect approach, but also a great deal more authenticity. Each of the film's characters, as colourful and occasionally larger than life as they may be, feels strikingly real, making their actions and interactions within such a convoluted story alternatively more resonant and hilarious, as if each are playing the 'straight man' against an increasingly madcap story unfolding around them.

With the same charming, powerful yet slightly kooky tone which pervades many of his acting performances, Nelson sets up his film in a wonderfully askew fashion, taking delight in veering right when the logical narrative progression would suggest left, and offering a fair share of surprise twists, including several jarring or downright uncomfortable bursts of serious intensity discordantly changing altering the generally breezy mood. However thematically familiar, the framework of Nelson's film does feel refreshingly unexpected, even if it does somewhat lose its momentum towards the end, trundling towards a denouement that feels somewhat under-thought or vaguely less than effective. Nonetheless, a lively musical score and crisp editing propel the film along at a generally steady pace, assuring that despite the rare stumbling, Nelson's film feels fundamentally alive, truthful and riotously enjoyable.

But, as is common with such character-focused material, it is the cast that ultimately drives the story home. Nelson himself has admitted that he wrote the lead twin characters for Edward Norton, and it is impossible to imagine any other performer offering two such superbly nuanced, powerful and entertaining, not to mention fundamentally different characterizations within a single film, managing the rarely seen trick of playing off himself to perfection. Norton infuses so much life, passion and charisma of such varied sorts into both roles that it is easy to forget they are played by the same actor - a masterclass of acting propelling the emotional centre of the film, and almost singlehandedly making it merit viewing. Keri Russell is similarly fantastic, channeling her trademark sweet, down to earth charm into her performance as a reflective poet and teacher – her riverside philosophical musings make for some of the most quietly thought-provoking and enjoyable cinematic asides of quite some time. Tim Blake Nelson himself manages several laughs and sturdy emotional support as a stoic fellow marijuana grower, and Susan Sarandon offers raw and frequently hilarious emotional vulnerability as both Nortons' ex-hippie mother, forced to reflect on a life of questionable choices. Finally, in a tragically but necessarily brief role, Richard Dreyfuss is hilarious as a respectable Tulsa philanthropist with several shady ties to the less respectable underbelly of the community, making his few scenes shine with shrewd hilarity.

Wacky yet poignantly credible, Nelson's film hits its stride through its melding of familiar content with unfamiliar approach, propelled by a careful, clever script and tremendously memorable characters. In an age filled with ambitious studio films making hefty grabs at easy emotion, it is a delight to witness cinema that manages something powerful, profound and incredibly enjoyable without obvious, clichéd emotional hooks of any sort, making Leaves of Grass without question worth a watch.

-8/10

I thought this was just another comedy, but decided to watch it regardless, as Edward Norton usually makes good movies. And this was no exception. This movie was really, really cool. It had a good combination of comedy, drama and action all blended into one mix. And it worked out quite well.

This is not just a movie about weeds and drugs, it is so much more than that. Sure the weeds are a core essential to the movie, but it is also about family values, friendships, embracing your heritage, and coming to terms with your past.

The cast was phenomenal, especially Edward Norton, who did a superb job in both his roles. And the supporting cast was really good as well. Some famous names in the bunch, and everyone delivered good performances.

"Leaves of Grass" never left me bored, as it was compelling from start till end. You should watch this movie, because it is somewhat of a gem in a vast market of endless movies.

Highly recommendable.

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer ... but never forget the closest thing of all: Family. Although it seems quite distant (beginning) it might be actually the closest (especially if you consider the mind set). But this movie is not about interpreting things or about good or bad.

And while Ed Norton (1) tries to make sense of things, Ed Norton (2) also is very free and does everything he wants to do (either you read the summary and know what I'm about or you are going to have to watch the movie to understand). Great actors in a very twisted little story, that has not easy answers or solutions. Which might be satisfying or not. Depending on your view of things. I liked that it dared to go the direction it took and that it switched gears between comedy and violence (though it didn't feel right mood-wise for the movie).