Yar, you be here: Life or Something Like It > Customer Reviews

Life or Something Like It Customer Reviews (10 - 12 of 21 Reviews)

Something for "Angelina" Fans to Revel In
An interesting concept, though more conducive to late night coffee house musings and discussions than a feature length film treatment, provides a pleasant, if less than insightful vehicle for it's star, in "Life or Something Like It," directed by Stephen Herek, wherein the oft reflected upon question, "What would you do if you found out you had only a week to live?" becomes a showcase for the beautiful and talented Angelina Jolie, albeit a rather vapid and shallow one. Still, it gets the job done, inasmuch as it is entertaining (to a point), has one interesting (though underused) character and will give die-hard Jolie fans, especially, something to revel in. The problem is that the late night ruminations the filmmakers begin about the meaning of life end long before the store closes, and anything "meaningful" that may have come of it is left on the table for another time and another movie. Suffice to say, this isn't Bergman; but then again, it wasn't meant to be.

Lanie Kerigan (Jolie) is a field reporter for a local television station in Seattle, a "personality" of the affiliate's news team, covering human interest stories and events in and around the Emerald City. She's engaged to Cal Cooper (Christian Kane), who plays ball for the Seattle Mariners, and all in all her life is nearly perfect. And it will be "absolutely" perfect if she lands the job she's just learned she's up for: A spot on the network's prestigious morning show, which originates from New York and is broadcast nationally. Yes, for Lanie, except for being teamed with an incorrigible (in her estimation) cameraman, Pete (Edward Burns), life is good. With her very next assignment, however, all of that is going to change.

His name is Jack (Tony Shalhoub); he's a homeless, self-professed "prophet" who lives in a makeshift cardboard box and is given to "visions" which enable him to predict such things as the score of the next Sea Hawks game, or if it is, in fact, going to hail in the morning, regardless of the weatherman's forecast. He's a colorful character, just right for a "Lanie" segment; but even before the actual interview begins, Jack tells Lanie two things: 1.) She's not going to get that job she so desperately wants, and 2.) come next Thursday (one week away) she is going to die. And just like that Lanie's life isn't so perfect anymore. She's about to take that long walk on a short pier...

To whip up this repast for his audience, director Herek manages to crack the egg and get it in the skillet, but he forgot to turn on the burner, so it never cooks; it just kind of lays there in the pan. It looks good, but how many people enjoy raw eggs? The screenplay (by John Scott Shepherd and Dana Stevens) lacks originality to begin with, and Herek shows little imagination in his handling of the story and the characters, so it never really comes to life, despite the efforts of Jolie. And from the information we're given, or even from what is implied about the relationship (past and present) between Lanie and Pete, the "romance"-- such as it is-- just doesn't fly, even within the parameters of "romantic comedy" (Is THAT what this is?). The biggest problem with the film, though, is that it fails to connect you emotionally with any of the characters; these just aren't people you care enough about to make it involving or maintain interest. Add to that the fact that, even though this is light fare, it simply lacks the credibility necessary to make it work. In the end, the audience would have been better served had Herek thrown in a couple more "yokes."

The film suffers something of an identity crisis, and gets caught up in a dilemma of it's own making; just what is it trying to be? A romantic comedy? If so, it fails. Or is it striving to be a satirical exploration of a question perhaps too profound for the genre in which Herek is apparently working? In which case it also fails. It would have been much better for all concerned had the focus been on the relationship between Lanie and Jack the prophet, as THIS is where the real interest of the story lies. The myriad possibilities this afforded remained untapped, however, as the filmmakers opted for another route which, unfortunately, never made it to the Promised Land.

As far as showcasing Jolie, it does; but that is not to say that it presents her in the best possible light, the fault of which lies entirely with the inherent nature of the character. Lanie is just too career minded and self-absorbed to be a thoroughly engaging "personality," and it dulls the sparkle of what could have been. Even her "epiphany" is not enough to make her star shine in this role. As Lanie, Jolie looks the part; she's beautiful, even alluring. But with this particular character, she seems to lose that edge, that intensity, that sparks her usual charismatic screen presence, which is absent here, as well. So even though this film is essentially a "showcase" for Jolie, it simply does not do her justice.

As for Edward Burns, can he dance? Because if they ever make "The Gene Kelly Story," this is the guy. It's the timbre of his voice, so reminiscent of Kelly's (but it CAN be grating after awhile). Burns is a good actor, and he gives a solid performance here, but his character, Pete, even after his "personal" story comes to light, just isn't that interesting.

The saving grace of the entire film is Tony Shalhoub's portrayal of Jack, a character that will capture your imagination. The trouble is, you don't see enough of him, and it's a dreadful waste of a potentially great character and storyline; a dreadful waste of the magic that could have made "Life or Something Like It" a film to remember.

This movie is well worth your time
As you probably know, this movie has not always been well-received. But, speaking as a die-hard fan of romantic comedies, I think those of you who love this genre should definitely watch this movie.

Most people who enjoy romantic comedies will probably admit that, though we love them, many of these movies have plot holes here and there, or at least admit that the likelihood of such things happening to real people is questionable. So, with that already in mind, a viewer often falls in love with one of these movies because: a.) they love the actors, actresses, or director involved, and/or b.) the certainty that everything will probably turn out okay in the end (even if sometimes the movie's resolution is not what you'd expect). If you fall into one/both of those categories, you should see LIFE OR SOMETHING LIKE IT.

One of the reasons I think this movie is great is because Angelina Jolie and Edward Burns (as well as Tony Shalhoub, as the street prophet) are such great actors, and their banter and chemistry are highly watchable. The supporting actors & actresses also add to each scene they're in, especially the guy playing the sound technician who works with Jolie's and Burns's characters when they are out on assignment.

I'm not someone who can tell when a movie is badly directed or superbly directed; I just know when I leave a movie happy for having seen it, or when I've felt the loopholes left in the finished product are way, way too big to ignore. So, having warned you of my novice critical skill, I think the director did a great job. (In his commentary on the DVD, he explains that this is one of the movies whose production was a bit rushed because of the expected actor's strike that the industry feared at the time. So, I think he may wish he could have tweaked things here and there, if he'd had more time.)

Nonetheless, you should see this movie because it will still grab your heart and make you think about what is important in your own life, while still giving you that romantic comedy "buzz" that will put a smile on your face and joy in your heart.

A must for Angelina Jolie fans, Worth seeing if you're not.
The best way that I feel I can describe this movie is this: I liked it, but I'm not exactly sure how much. There are several reasons why I liked the movie but not a lot of reasons to make me think it's one of the best ever made. First off, any fan of Angelina Jolie shouldn't think twice about seeing this movie. She continues to prove time and again what a versatile actress she is. And if anyone else had played her role, this movie would have come across extremely boring. The rest of the cast was well chosen but they definitely weren't enough to carry the movie by themselves. The addition of Stockard Channing was a very fitting one as she did an excellent job of playing the network news equivalent of Jenny Jones meets Barbara Walters. And Edward Burns does an adequate job of playing Jolie's cameraman and part time love interest.

The story itself had a lot of interesting elements to it. Angelina Jolie plays Lannie Kerrigan, a Seattle Reporter who is living the perfect life, or at least what she thinks is the perfect life. She has the perfect body, the perfect hair, a major league baseball player as her fiance, and is one step away from her perfect network news anchor job in New York City. Everything is running according to plan, when one day, while on assignment she is given some life altering news. A street prophet tells her that in one week she will die. At first she dismisses his prophecy as nothing to be taken seriously, but as his other predictions come true, her perfect world starts to unravel. She is forced to look at every aspect of her life and realizes that everything she thought was so important doesn't really matter. What follows is a mixture of sometimes funny and at times depressing series of events that teach her the true meaning of what a perfect life really is.

All in all a solid movie to go and see. The performances were all done very well, with Angelina Jolie being the bright spot in the whole movie. There were several memorable scenes, including the impromptu singing of "Satisfaction" during a bus driver strike. This movie was definitely a feel good comedy from start to finish, with a few sad parts that were necessary to bring the viewer back up. And my personal favorite scene was Jolie and her fiance taking batting practice. It just really cracked me up. This isn't a movie you have to see in theatre's by any means, but would be well worth the rental price sometime for a date night at home.

The Breakdown:
1. Plot-8 (neat structure for a romantic comedy)
2. Characters-8 (very detailed and well developed)
3. Flow-9 (moved along quite nicely)
4. Atmosphere-9 (you can tell a lot of thought went into the setup)
5. Cinematography-8 (not a lot of creativity but didn't look low budget either)
6. Entertainment value-9 (surprisingly attention grabbing for such a simple plot)
7. Replay Value-7 (not a movie I could watch all the time but not necessarily one I would turn off either)
8. Casting/character depth-9 (Great casting for the most part and excellent detail to characters)
9. Relevance to genre-8 (hard to categorize but a good all around movie)
10. X-factors-8 (Angelina Jolie alone makes this movie worth seeing)

83/100

Previous Page

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Next Page