Filho do Nobel

Greetings again from the darkness. "Bottle Shock" director Randall Miller is back ... only "Nobel Son" was filmed first (you really have to love the Hollywood system). While "Bottle Shock" was a pretty straight forward re-telling of a wine industry break through, this film takes us on a dark ride with blazingly quick turns. It can be taken as a entertaining thriller/who-dunnit to who, or even as a psychological study on egotistical, domineering parents.

Much of the "Bottle Shock" crew is back ... Alan Rickman, Bill Pullman and Eliza Dushka. Add Mary Steenburgen, Shawn Hatosy (Outside Providence, The Cooler), Danny Devito and Ted Dansen, and you have an odd, but talented cast to deliver your odd, but entertaining film.

Alan Rickman plays the role he seems born to play ... arrogant self-diagnosed genius. His family and co-workers somehow tolerate him despite his blindness to their own talents. This is especially problematic once Rickman becomes a Nobel Prize winner. Without giving anything away, his son, played by Bryan Greenberg (Prime) is kidnapped and held for the $2 million Nobel prize money ... by a guy with ties to Rickman's character. That is the simple part. After that, the script flies through its twists and turns creating quite a mess of fun! Bill Pullman is the detective on the case and he draws from his voice pattern as the odd realtor in "You Kill Me", all while pining for Steenburgen ... who is a brilliant forensic expert in her own right. Danny Devito takes an odd turn as the Reformed OCD gardener who has a couple of memorable scenes. Eliza Duska (the bar owner in Bottle Shock) is quite memorable as the stunningly dark poet who captures Nobel Son's heart the evening before he is nabbed. Coincidence??? What I find most interesting about the script is that it could have focused on any number of story lines. Steenburgen, Rickman and Dushka all have characters that could be developed further. But it really works here to have the division and balance.

My only warning here is to be prepared for a Guy Ritchie-type experience. There are times of rapid-fire edits and crazy techno-mod music that will challenge your ability to follow along and keep up. I believe it just adds to the fun in this case.

I just came across this on Amazon streaming. In all I can't say it isn't a really good movie but it is done in such a quirky style, and even has a female character named City Hall, that it remains interesting. As the story unfolds it is easy to follow and by half-way we pretty well understand what all is going on.

But then we don't. Most of what we believe during the first half is mutated in the second half until the story changes completely. There is no great message here, it is just a mostly entertaining fluff of a movie.

Alan Rickman is good as the morally bankrupt professor and Nobel winner. Bill Pullman almost reprises his role from "Zero Effect" where he is a sharp eyed detective able to piece together arcane clues.

First off, I was sucked into the movie. I mention this, because so few movies grab my attention.

I think the acting was pretty good. Ever since Die Hard, I always liked the actor who played the father. The son was perfectly fine as well. I really liked City Hall, but the plot called for little of her. I think the mom could have shown a little more emotion, but otherwise solid. Really, I can't criticize the acting here.

The plot was not particularly innovative, but had a few interesting tweaks.

The camera work seemed pretty standard. I think the modern technique calls for a lot more camera movement, which I don't always care for.

Parts of the movie were a bit disturbing. That's a personal thing, and what I found disturbing, others may have found amusing.

My main complaint was that the movie seemed to shift a bit late in the movie. It felt like they ran out of time and had to cram a ton of stuff into the last 30 minutes. It wasn't that I was lost. I followed the story. But it was a bit unsatisfying. Had the final 30 minutes of the film been more solid, I think maybe I would have given it a 6 out of 10.

I was really looking forward to "Nobel Son". I was thinking, finally, an intelligent thriller that is going to focus on the characteristics of those found in the academic sciences. But I'm afraid that all I got was a jumbled mess that never really accomplished anything.

The son of a Nobel Prize-winning chemist is kidnapped for ransom. There are a lot of interesting ways to take this story. The main problem is, they take all of them. We have an opportunity to investigate what's really going on in the mind of the son, how has his father affected his life, why does the father live his life the way he does, who is really responsible for the kidnapping and why... . The ways to explore this story are endless, and instead of delving in whole-heartedly, all that came out was a jumbled mess that left me feeling frustrated with no invested knowledge in any part of the story. Another review said the problem was too many cooks. I second that, and will adapt the phrase from "too many cooks spoil the broth" to "too many writers spoil the story". Only two screenwriters were credited, but I'm willing to bet there were more with their hands in it.

The actors were all quite good, I'm sure. It's the characters that I'm more confused about. Whenever they presented a scene which echoed my experiences in the ivory tower of science, they usually followed that up with a scene that didn't make sense based on what we knew about the characters. Perhaps I was focusing too much on specifics, but I was continuously confused and frustrated by their characterization and story ideas. Too many writers, ideas, and lack of focus spoiled "Nobel Son".

The great movie reviewer, Gene Siskel, once said that the only way to evaluate a movie is to start by asking yourself what the creators of the movie intended ... what they intended here, and delivered, is a weird black comedy, filled with fine performances by exceptional actors, that never ever goes where you think it is going. Just when you expected something the movie goes another way. Is it perfect, of course not. Will you have a lot of fun if you just let it take you on its journey ... maybe not, but in that case you have no sense of humor at all, ... these actors clearly enjoyed playing these roles and delivering these lines ... they had fun too.