Amor sem Fim

Watching the first scene of this movie really made me predict that, I think it's gonna be another "The Perks of Being A Wallflower" but Charlie acts as Jade here. Or maybe it's even a new version of Romeo and Juliet, which in my opinion is pretty similar.

I kinda tired watching movie with a similar conflict. That's why I tried to figure out something different by guessing that the boy Jade is talking to is her late brother. Yeah, who knows he is her imaginary friend because she can't take the death of his beloved brother? But then I realize that this is the remake of the same title in 1981. So, he's not a ghost. He's her other brother.

For the cast itself,I like them all. Gabriella Wilde is so pretty and hot. But unfortunately this is the reason why I can't accept that she doesn't have any friend during her high school year. I know that she acts as a shy girl, but I know boys. They can't keep their mouth shut having a hot blonde like Jade around them. They're dying for her, trust me. But through the narration of David, Jade is a forgotten girl. However, I am convinced by Gabriella's expression that she's a shy girl. In the end of the movie, I remembered that she is the girl from Carrie, Sue Snell.

One more thing that really bugs me. When David visits psychiatrist to talk about the problem of his love life. It's so weird. A boy like David will even consider that??? That type of guy will just be quiet, or at least talk to his father or his friend when he is asked.

I love all the soundtracks, which, once again, reminds me of The Perks of Being A Wallflower. You know, it has cool soundtracks, too. Somehow, they're sound similar.

To my surprise I actually really enjoyed this movie.

I wasn't sure with all the P-G 13 romantic movies, I figured nothing would make this stand out and it would be another typical teenage romance.

I was pleasantly surprised with the film and though it may be a bit clichéd, I was captivated by the tender acting of Gabrielle Wilde.

The character of the tough, stubborn father of Gabrielle brings to perspective the reality of needing to let go of the past in order to allow in good of the present.

There's really not much more to say. This film isn't very deep, or original, but it was nice to watch.

Many reviews criticise this title for being a cliché or being unoriginal or being too normal. And that is exactly what gave this movie it's magic.

Sometimes being human and being in love is much less that finding some deeper insight and more about just struggling though circumstances as best we can. There is a movie for everyone and not all stories needs to be grossly intense and over engineered. The production value was of a good quality and I fail to see why so many reviews would give this movie such low scores – maybe because they were not able to appreciate the simplicity of this film?

It is in its lightness and simplicity that its ability to reach an audience lies. It is true to itself and though yes, it can be too soft at times, I suspect that is exactly what the viewer wants when (s)he takes a title like "endless love" off the DVD shelf. The story moves at a very good pace, the acting is placed just right and all the elements works together to make a very engaging experience. It is not quite a chick flick, neither is it a film that is going to race at the Tribeca Film Festival. But I think it was written with gentleness and care. It was directed and acted with a sense of maturity and the viewer do get the feeling that the film maker understood the subject very deeply and if merely by that he reached an audience and gave them a deeper insight into the issues they are dealing with in their own lives, it is a successful piece of work.

There is absolutely NOTHING offensive about this movie and though I was not moved to tears, it did not fail to touch me none the less. I can say this many times – not every time I watch a film, do I want to step away with the heavy emotional content of Schindler's List and neither do I want to start awarding Oscars for best performances. Some days all I want it to walk away and feel that I have seen a story worth watching, that was done with respect and that understands life.

And that Endless Love surely does.

Hollywood has been running out of ideas for years – remakes, sequels, prequels and reboots now seem to be the order of the day. What's hard to imagine is why anyone thought a remake of Endless Love was necessary in the first place. The 1981 film of the same name – based on a pulpy, albeit well-regarded, novel by Scott Spencer – wasn't even that good to begin with. At least that version of the story had the distinction of starring a young, nubile Brooke Shields, not to mention a title song that became more famous than the movie itself. This remake manages to be both extremely bland and painfully melodramatic, bled of almost any hint of controversy or genuine complexity and darkness.

Jade Butterfield (Gabriella Wilde) is the quintessential poor little rich girl: a beautiful, blonde ice princess who has shut herself in with her parents, Hugh (Bruce Greenwood) and Anne (Joely Richardson), after the untimely death of her brother Chris. David (Alex Pettyfer) is a kid from the poorer side of town who has nursed a crush on her throughout high school. She's college-bound, he just wants to work in his dad's (Robert Patrick) workshop. When they finally connect, sparks fly and Jade starts to re-think the safe, perfect future she's planned with Hugh.

It's all very cookie-cutter high-school romantic melodrama. Nothing about this film feels particularly fresh or smart, although it does start out a little better than you'd expect. But, after the initial meet-cute between Jade and a thoroughly smitten David, Endless Love quickly descends into trashy predictability: Hugh does everything within his power to get rid of David, but the spark of love and lust between the star-crossed couple burns so hot and bright that nothing will stand in their way.

What's frustrating is that the film has almost completely excised anything even remotely complex about its plot and characters. The 1981 movie may have been faintly terrible and soapy, but it at least made a stab at psychological darkness, suggesting that the 'endless love' of the title bordered more on creepy, damaging obsession than sweet, romantic love. There's no such suggestion here: David is troubled but ultimately noble; Jade is purely, truly in love; and it's the curmudgeonly Hugh who must realise the errors of his ways.

The cast is watchable but not really memorable. Pettyfer broods as if he knows he's meant for better things. Wilde is effortlessly, often stunningly beautiful, but doesn't have much to offer beyond that. Greenwood has the most scenery to chew – he practically twirls an invisible moustache and cackles at some points – but it's Richardson who walks away with the film's few affecting moments (even though her character loses much of its shock value in morphing into the archetypal loyal, loving housewife).

You would imagine that, in a cinematic landscape overrun by remakes, these films would – at the minimum – have something interesting to say about the times in which we live now. They can make a case for their existence, perhaps, by being a little edgier than the original films: explaining why there's a need to tell this old story again. Endless Love doesn't really manage that. Instead, by forgoing depth and darkness for schmaltz and sentiment, it ends up being even safer and sweeter than a movie shot over thirty years ago.

There are plenty of reasons to remake a movie. Even the movies which were good in the first place. Would we say that no one can revive a Broadway play because it was so good the first time? Should a Beethoven symphony never be replayed because we have Bernstein's magnificent recording? We remake originals because we feel we have a new take on them. (Shakespeare thrives on that.) If the original was forgettable (or even forgotten), a remake will probably be easy (although not necessarily any better). But if the original was very good - or at least very memorable - a remake will be quite a challenge. The original Endless Love was controversial - either good or bad, depending on who is describing it - but it certainly was memorable. It was melodramatic and very much a soap opera - but it made the most of what it was. This remake fails the challenge. It remodels the guts of the narrative without retaining its bite. The original was dark, even risky. This is just sort of vanilla, if a bit anxious. I like Alex Pettyfer's work a lot, but he shouldn't have been cast as David, not because he couldn't act the role (he did well with it) but because he was too old. David is supposed to be just graduating high school and too shy to approach fellow senior Jade. Alex was coming off his very buff role in Magic Mike. He looks tall, dark and handsome. No way he wouldn't have had girls - and boys, too - all over him. Jade would hardly not have noticed him. The original - with David being 17 and Jade 15 - didn't face that problem. When producers secure the remake rights to a film, they pretty much can do whatever they want. But that doesn't mean it will work. This remake doesn't make it as a feature film. As TV movie which wasn't titled Endless Love, it might have fared better.