द लॉन्गेस्ट वीक

"Sometimes you're your own worst enemy." Conrad (Bateman) is forty and still living off his parents. He has no ambition in life and is content living in a hotel that he doesn't have to pay for. When his friend introduces him to his newest girlfriend, Beatrice (Wilde), Conrad falls in love. When his parents decide to separate Conrad is cut off and now he has no job, no place to live and is in love with his best friends girl. I am a huge Jason Bateman fan so I was excited to watch this. While I can't say this is a bad movie I can say it was a little slow and somewhat generic. It may be because I watch so many movies but about 15 minutes in I predicted what would happen, and I was right. That said, the movie isn't terrible but I was hoping for something a little better. Overall, not terrible but pretty predictable, generic and slow moving. I expected something better with Jason Bateman and Olivia Wilde. I give this a B-.

I adore Jason Bateman and when I see he's in something, I watch him. I just love his no-nonsense delivery. He never tries to be funny; he reacts to the situation at hand.

He stars in "The Longest Week" from 2014, and like another reviewer here, I'm wondering why Jenny Slate is top-billed. I didn't know who she was until I looked it up.

Bateman plays 40-year-old Conrad Valmont who lives, as he has always lived, in the Valmont Hotel, owned by his parents. One morning the phone wakes him up, informing him that security will be up shortly to escort him and his dog Napoleon out of the hotel. The reason: his parents are divorcing and aren't paying any of his bills any longer.

He is able to get his chauffeur (Barry Primus) to care for Napoleon, but as far as caring for him, he really doesn't know where to go. He does something he never does - takes the subway. On the train he makes eye contact with a beautiful young woman (Olivia Wilde), who gives him her number. Dylan moves in on his friend and rival, a successful artist, Dylan Tate.

Dylan has recently dropped his girlfriend Jocelyn and has met a fabulous woman he thinks that he's in love with. When he attends Dylan's art show, the subway woman is there, and she's the same woman with whom Dylan is in love. He promises Dylan that he will not make a play for her, but he does, and they fall in love.

Beautifully photographed, this is a pleasant film, somewhat humorous, until it nears the end. I don't now if the filmmaker ran out of money, script, or what, but the film has a constant narration for a good ten minutes as scenes are being shown with no dialogue.

Kind of left me flat, despite all of the good acting.

Tony Roberts plays Conrad's therapist, who gives him a low-cost loan. As his chauffeur, Primus plays a man who knows Conrad better than anyone and has real affection for him.

Billy Crudup, whom I saw on stage in Arcadia and who was so marvelous in Stage Beauty, is wonderful, as a friend resigned to the fact that Conrad is a woman-stealing jerk who has been in the research phase of his great novel for years. House's Olivia Wilde (that's how I know her) looks fantastic and is believable as the object of both Conrad's and Dylan's affections.

This should have been better.

The Longest Week (2014)

What a strangely almost good movie. It has lots of compelling elements, including Jason Bateman as the nice guy leading man (though here he plays a spoiled rich boy). It's a complex enough story, and a love story, and it's set in lovely Brooklyn (an almost Manhattan). It should work. And second leading man Billy Crudup is terrific—better than Bateman.

So enjoy it for what it is? Sure. But it will kludge along at times, and will get a bit obvious at other times. The women (girlfriends, mainly) are weakly cast (or weakly directed), which doesn't help. But mostly it's a matter of originality—which is missing.

In fact, the whole thing is alike a Woody Allen mashup wannabe. The voice-over will make you think too much of "Vicky Christina Barcelona" and some of the photography of "Manhattan" but in color. (They even cast Allen regular Tony Roberts in a role as, yes, a shrink.) But mostly it's "Annie Hall" redux. In fact, it's almost a remake—girl meets unlikely boy, they have a romance, it goes south, and then boy re-evaluates (with direct stealing of ideas like having the plot reappear as a play, or in this case as a novel). And even if you don't like "Annie Hall" (which I do), you have to admit it came first, and is wonderfully original.

To add insult to injury, the whole set design and shooting style is straight out of Wed Anderson, though toned down to the point of being dull. (Anderson is never dull, at least visually.)

So what is left? Lots of little moments—quaint remarks (skipping over the brazenly sexist stuff that is meant to be funny and is mostly embarrassing, like the soccer practice) and a generally nice flow of events. It's easy to watch even if you aren't enthralled.

Director and writer Peter Glanz is fairly new to the scene, and this movie is a seven day expansion of an earlier indie success, "A Relationship in Four Days." No wonder this one feels about three days too long. See it? Maybe, if you already know you like the cast or the genre. Or maybe just give the Allen films a second try. Worlds apart.

This film tells the story of a man with ultra rich parents, who is suddenly broke after his parents cut off his allowance. He puts on a cover up and wins a woman's heart, yet he discovers there is something more to life.

The interaction between Conrad and Dylan is realistic, thigh they both live in a world beyond most people's reach. Their intense competition between each other and yet almost accomplishing nothing is ironic, but I like the joke about the Volvo going back and forth. The romance subplot is very sweet and convincing, I enjoyed watching it.

This is a romantic comedy with a journey of self discovery. It's a pity that the main characters Conrad and Dylan are portrayed to be rather unlikable and arrogant characters who have no clue about the real world. That's because the film is actually enjoyable and rather warm, and if the characters are a bit more likable, people would probably like it more.

Don't get me wrong. This isn't a terrible movie. It's beautifully filmed and well acted, but it's just ultimately unsatisfying. I didn't mind passing an evening watching on Amazon Prime, but I wouldn't have been happy if I'd spent money for it in a theater.

The movie starts out with Bateman, as Conrad, laying out his privileged upper class problems to his therapist - played by Tony Roberts! And if that wasn't enough, the soundtrack launches into some New Orleans Jazz to remove any doubt who they're playing homage to here.

Of course, Jason Bateman's handsome and well spoken character would certainly be the *villain* in any Manhattan-era Woody Allen films, but that's just one of this movie's many problems.

Stylistically, the movie is unabashedly influenced by Wes Anderson. Roberts becomes the narrator, and the movie is divided into storybook style chapters, with occasional amusing cutaways.

On the other hand, the plot is lifted from another movie; namely, "A New Leaf" (1971), written and directed by Elaine May, and starring Walter Mathau. Mathau plays a spoiled rich playboy who has burned through his entire inheritance, and now must find a way to.get through life broke, which is basically the same plot as this movie. May's version is a classic. This, not so much.

Both Allen and Anderson have a real genius for portraying deeply flawed characters in a sympathetic way, and that's where this movie falls short. Jason Bateman is inherently likable, but at some point, you realize you're giving him credit for other characters he's played. As Conrad, he's shallow, self-centered, whiny, and just basically annoying.

Without giving away any spoilers, if you're expecting any great self-realization or epiphany, you'll be disappointed. The movie just meanders its way to one of the absolute laziest endings I've ever scene. Indeed, a critical plot point comes and goes so quickly that I initially missed it, and had to go back because I was totally confused.