Leaves of Grass

I really enjoyed this film and think that it will only get better with multiple viewings. The story is not as some reviewers stated dull and boring(if you expect a typical stoner film maybe you would find it slow & unfunny) the film moves at a sedate pace but never feels like it drags, the humour is often gentle or subtle. Ed Norton delivers a stunning performance as the twin brothers, within minutes of watching you forget they're played by one person(this is helped by the fact that there are no scenes that look fake or CGI'd)

The film uses philosophy quotes a lot to explain character motives or personalities and it could have seemed contrived but the director/writer has made it such an integral part of the film that without the quotes and passages the film would be hollow and not have the depth or be as touching and thought provoking as it is.

If you get a chance to see this film, do so, you won't be disappointed(but go into it with an open mind and don't expect slap stick fart gags)

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.

"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.

Edward Norton stars as Bill Kincaid a sensible ivy league philosophy professor who makes a trip home to Oklahoma, and Edward Norton stars as Brady Kincaid, twin brother, a rash hillbilly drug dealer who gets himself mixed up in bad drug deals and murders. "Leaves of Grass" is a dark comedy, crime drama and ultimately character study.

It starts out with a fair amount of comedy. Both brothers are pretty funny in their own way. There are a number of pot jokes which even seem original. The film slows down as it introduces us to all the different characters. Too slow, in my opinion, as we are all anxious to see what crimes the brothers get themselves into. And then those crimes play out with a lot of violence.

The interesting thing about this film as that it really is just a character study at its heart. Norton and writer Tim Blake Nelson do a great job with Bill as he examines who he is and what he really wants out of life. I recommend "Leaves of Grass" to people who like the idea of a philosophical character study played out as a violent, comedic, crime drama.

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