"Life was given to us a billion years ago. What have we done with it?"

Year: 2014

Director & Writer: Luc Besson

A woman is supposed to deliver a mysterious suitcase to a certain Mr. Jang, but everything goes wrong. She accidentally gets a large amount of new drug into her system, and this has unexpected consequences - she can now use much more of her brain capacity compared to an average human being.

I saw the trailer for this movie when it came out. A lot of people were excited about it, but then people started to notice some really problematic things (like Lucy shooting a man just because he didn't speak english - in his home country. More about racism in this movie later). Even if most of these "problematic" things were noticed from just the trailer - well all know how trailers are never truthful - I sort of thought I would never watch it. But here I am, I just finished this movie.

To be honest I was expecting some kind of superhero movie. Actually that's what the trailer made me - and probably many other people - think. Maybe not typical superhero, saving the world and all that, but still something. Well, as it turns out, I was wrong. Apparently "superpowers" don't always equal superheroes in cinema. That's actually very good.

I read that many scenes mirrored 2001 A Space Odyssey and Inception. Well, I haven't seen either of those yet. Anyway, the cinematography was great. I loved those little quick almost metaphorical shots in the beginning. They gave this movie some depth right in the beginning, and I wasn't expecting that. In every way the effects, colours and everything was very nice. Most of the scenes were clear and easy to follow, which is good in action. Like during some of the Marvel movies it's really hard to keep track on what's happening, where and between who. (I'm looking at you Avengers)

Also Lucy is an interesting character... slightly. We don't know much about her before all this shit starts to go down, so there's a mystery. We know she's American and what she looks like and she's about to take an exam apparently, and she has a mom and a dad, But the slight mystery around her is the only thing that's interesting, because after she starts using much more of her brain, she becomes emotionless, and this really typical, expressionless godlike character. I mean a character who is somehow superior to others, and just knows everything, knows how to do everything, and then just sits there and explains things we don't know about our word so blankly it's almost painful. Could've they made her somehow human? I know, she didn't feel pain or fear or anything, but you know what she could've felt? Awe. It would've been much more effective, if Lucy would've been in awe of all the knowledge she had instead of just accepting everything. (And before someone who's seen the movie says how she was in awe, yes, I know, but only for a little while. Mostly she was just emotionless machine.) I just wanted more feelings from Lucy. I don't know if the fault is in the character or actress.

The story focuses on mostly the urban legend of how people only use small percentage of their brain. I kind of like and don't like that trope. You know who had the best use for that trope? Douglas Adams. In this one book a woman was unconscious and she saw ten boxes, metaphorical for how people would use only 10 % of their brain. So one box was in use, what about the others? Full of penguins.

So, the racism in this movie. First of all I have to say, since I am white I'm not an expert on this. I'm just hanging on to what I've read some Asians write about this. Like I mentioned, there was this scene were Lucy shot a man in Taiwan (correct me if I'm wrong) because she asked if he spoke English and he said no. That was sort of... really disturbing. And also some really stereotypical tropes were used a lot, and in the beginning this movie was a lot like "White woman killing scary Asian men". All of this doesn't make any sense, because they could've used so many different approaches, but they used the racist one. You can read more here, if you want to, that's the post I read now and after the trailer was released.

So this wasn't a superhero movie like I was expecting. I have to say: good. I'm glad it was sort of deeper science fiction than just simple Marvel or DC style. I mean this isn't on the same level with Moon or any other astonishing science fiction movie, but still better than just mindless action and ray guns and all that.

So Lucy is a racist movie, that's a fact and there's no going around it. It was slightly heavier than I was expecting. But if you don't think about the racist parts for a while - and I know a lot of people won't - this movie is pretty good. Don't get me wrong, I've seen better, but this was better than I expected. I don't think I'm going to see it again for a while, I think it loses its magic after the first time, and you probably can't watch this every weekend. But still, it's worth seeing.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

8 / 10

"She's your other granddaughter." "I know, I thought she was dead."

Year: 2003

Director & Writer: Peter Hedges

April Burns invites her estranged family to New York for thanksgiving, and encounters a series of unfortunate chances while she's trying to find a working oven, meanwhile her family - including their dying mother - is travelling and thinking if they should come at all. 

It was more than five years ago when I stumbled upon this movie in a store. It was cheap and I was really interested in it, but nobody wanted to buy it for me (and I was so young I never had any money on me, so it might've been like 8 or 9 years ago even). I've been thinking about this movie ever since, though, because somewhere along the way I forgot the name of the movie, and it was really hard to search for a movie. And then I found out about it somehow (I don't even remember even though it was only few days ago), so finally after five, six or even nine years, I had a chance to see this movie.

First thing that I noticed first was the cinematography. The movie was... sort of shaky, and it was probably filmed by hand. Usually that style makes me think of some kind of deep documentary, where the cameraman just followed the subject of the documentary silently, filming by hand. Usually special kind of cinematography is amazing, but in this case it just seemed sloppy. But the colour scheme of this movie was very nice, it really suited the movie.

Another kind of special thing was the lack of music. There was music only very rarely, and it kind of enhanced the idea of some sort of stealthily filmed documentary. It kind of felt like the movie was made as realistic as possible - not the story but the filming, music, all that. The music used was okay. It wasn't horrible but it wasn't too good either. Maybe they should've... not use music at all? That would've been more interesting, and it would've suited this movie better. Few songs here and there, it just made the songs feel weird. 

The story was almost ordinary, just spiced with many different things. But in the end the story made me sort of happy. It had a really nice ending, and even though this movie was kind of short, a lot happened. So that short time was used very efficiently, which is very good. Usually it's very annoying how movies are made 2,5 hours long, even though they could be shorter. I'm not saying all movies need to be 1,5 hours, but usually some longer movies just have a lot of useless scenes in them.

After all these years I feel like I was waiting for nothing. I don't know what I was expecting - I mean I was interested in this movie when I was 10 or 13 years old, so a lot can happen in that time. Maybe I would've liked this movie back then - however it's not likely. This movie was decent, but I feel disappointed. It's worth seeing if weird cinematography doesn't in any way scare you.

☆☆☆☆☆

5 / 10

"I need your help. I can't tell you what it is, you can never ask me about it later, and we're gonna hurt some people."

Year: 2010

Director: Ben Affleck

Writers: Peter Craig, Ben Affleck & Aaron Stockard, Chuck Hogan (novel Prince Of Thieves)

A criminal named Doug MacRay is planning to leave the crimes behind, while falling for a woman they once held a hostage during a bank robbery and trying to keep away from  an FBI agent hunting him and the rest of the group.

My friend Elli was once looking for this movie, which is why I actually remembered it. My friend eventually did find this, but she still hasn't seen it. I found this in the library, and I was already about to see it, because, well, it was directed by Ben Affleck, and I was sort of impressed by Gone Baby Gone, though I wanted to see his other works, meaning The Town or Argo. Like, what can you say after seeing one movie?

Actually the beginning of The Town reminded me very much of Gone Baby Gone. There are shots of people just walking in the streets, and you can hear the main characters (sort of) monologue. Very similar, though this time it wasn't simply like a passage from the novel, adapted somehow to fit the beginning. Because sometimes book beginnings work - long text, maybe about the main character's thoughts - but you can't start a movie just like that. Or you can, but most often it doesn't work at all. In The Town it worked, because the main character's speech wasn't just some inner thoughts, it was what he was saying to his... colleagues? Friends? I'm gonna go with partners in crime. 

There was one line in the middle of it all that really kind of stroke, even though it was sort of irrelevant to the plot. Anyway, this FBI agent says to the co-workers: "And we'll never get 24 hour surveillance unless one of these idiots converts to Islam." And I just thought, oh snap, that is way too true. And even though this movie didn't focus on any prejudice or judgement towards Muslims, it still was very true and a good point. 

The music in this movie was alright, just alright. It was typical. Actually it vaguely reminded me of something else, but I can't really say what.

But the plot, well, I wasn't expecting too much, so I wasn't disappointed. The plot, the story, is very typical and very predictable. After you get used to the movie and realise what it's going to be about, it's not going to surprise you at all. There is no one moment you won't see coming. So it was very typical, could've been a lot better.

Then again, this movie did make me feel something - mostly frustration. No, not in the way that I was frustrated with the movie, no. I was frustrated because the FBI was way too clever. I sort of wanted Doug and his pals to not become suspects so right away. If this movie was made from the point of view of the "good guys", FBI agents, they would've figured it out too soon, and it would've been a very short movie. But the point was for that to be frustrating.

This movie is alright. It's worth seeing if you are into thrillers, movies with guns, a glimpse of romance (not the "I love you more than life" kind of love just simple), Jeremy Renner, Ben Affleck, car chases... If you want something new and surprising, this movie won't give you that. 

By the way, is it just me or did Ben Affleck talk really weirdly like once in a while? Not all the time but suddenly it felt like he had a really weird accent or some problems with speech, I wasn't even sure. (If it was an accent, maybe he did it badly, I don't know.)

☆☆☆☆☆

5 / 10

Eurovision Song Contest 2015

I think last year I made a list of many, many songs that I liked during Eurovision Song Contest 2014. I didn't have a clear favourite, but this time I liked very few songs.

BELGIUM: Loïc Nottet: Rhythm Inside

ESTONIA: Elina Born & Stig Rästa: Goodbye to Yesterday

GEORGIA: Nina Sublatti: Warrior

NORWAY:  Mørland & Debrah Scarlett: A Monster Like Me

And did I have a favourite? Yes, Loïc Nottet's song was catching and fun, and the performance was simple yet so elegant. Also, Nottet is one attractive young man. Usually during ESC I look at the women, but this time Nottet was one of the most attractive people there. He kinda reminded me of Iwan Rheon, though he had similar voice to someone like Amy Winehouse. It was really great. I recommend anyone to go listen to Rhythm Inside right now, it's a great song.

But mostly the songs were the same, I mean similar to the songs we hear every year. Actually the only thing that kind of didn't sound like Eurovision Song was the winner, Måns Zelmerlöw from Sweden, with his song Heroes. Like usually the songs here are... well, you can almost hear the eurovision from there. But Heroes sounds like something you could hear from the radio, it was almost weird. I didn't exactly like the winning song, though. As a Finn I feel obligated to be kind of pissed about the winner. (We gave them 12 points! Why do we do that, they never give us points!)

"I always believed it was the things you don't choose that makes you who you are."

Year: 2007

Director: Ben Affleck

Writers: Ben Affleck, Aaron Stockard and Dennis Lehane (Novel)

"When 4 year old Amanda McCready disappears from her home and the police make little headway in solving the case, the girl's aunt Beatrice McCready hires two private detectives Patrick Kenzie and Angie Gennaro. The detectives freely admit that they have little experience with this type of case, but the family wants them for two reasons - they're not cops and they know the tough Boston neighborhood in which they all live. As the case progresses, Kenzie and Gennaro face drug dealers, gangs and pedophiles. When they are about to solve their case, they are faced with a moral dilemma that could tear them apart."

- Summary written by garykmcd

I mostly watched this movie, because it was directed by Ben Affleck. I'm not really a big fan of Ben Affleck, I used to hate him without any good reason, I just did. But I started liking him after Gone Girl, he did a magnificent acting job in that one. I'm always interested in what kind of directing actors do (I checked out Liberal Arts directed by Josh Radnor simply because of Radnor, same goes for Slipstream directed by Sir Anthony Hopkins and Keeping The Faith, directed by Edward Norton), so I got interested in Gone Baby Gone. Also, I wanted to watch a thriller - which this wasn't - because of my current writing project. 

The beginning of the movie made it seem like this movie could be really boring. The beginning was just shots of the neighbourhood and the main character Patrick Kenzie's inner monologue. It seemed like the beginning was trying too hard to convince the audience, that this movie is going to be smart and deep and artistic. It was kind of the moment where I thought this is not going to be a good movie. So, very weak beginning.

The cinematography was very nice. It was clear, when it needed to be clear, and it was messy when it needed to be messy (certain "action" scenes, nervous running, etc). It was definitely better than the average flavourless cinematography.

Apart from the cinematography, this movie felt like an episode of a crime TV show. The story was so simple, But where TV show episodes usually end, this just kept going and going, which kind of felt like it was prolonged, even though it definitely wasn't. I haven't read the novel, but I think the writing might work better there.

So I don't exactly like the writing in this movie. It was decent, but just decent. But I have to just judge the dialogue, like how do I know what Dennis Lehane really do, dialogue is only one little piece when you're writing prose. Anyway, even though the writing was just decent, the story was interesting. Well, then again the plot wasn't too intriguing, because it reminded me of a TV show, and I like to keep my movies and TV apart (films are a hobby, TV is just something to watch when there's nothing else to do). But the story actually made you think what was right and what was wrong. There was a lot of ethical dilemmas there, which is almost always great. And the issues we're dealing with in Gone Baby Gone are not at all simple. Of course it's another thing to throw an easy ethical dilemma into the audience's face and basically solve it during the movie. This movie, well, even though decisions were made, the audience still doesn't get told what was right. I think that was really great.

Actually I think I wasn't positively surprised by Affleck's directing. I was positively surprised by the movie. It started weakly, but it was very interesting. Affleck showed some skill, I think I need to watch something else he has directed so I can be sure. Gone Baby Gone is definitely worth a watch.

☆☆☆☆☆☆

6 / 10

Populärmusik från Vittula

Year: 2004

Director: Reza Bagher

Writers: Erik Norberg, Reza Bagher, Mikael Niemi (novel)

A story of two boys, united by rock'n'roll, growing up together in Pajala in the 60's. 

This is one of those movies that my parents have tried to make me watch, and had seen several clips before, in music class almost six years ago, and in Swedish class few weeks ago. I wasn't too interested, until we had to decide what movie we'd watch on Swedish class, which is about culture. We had a lot of different choices and my teacher didn't even mention this first, because our school didn't have this as a DVD only on VHS. So I saved the situation and said I could bring the DVD. And we voted from all the possible choices and this one won - not that everyone was happy with it, at least I heard some quiet complaints today.

Actually we watched the whole thing with Swedish subtitles. That's why I don't really have anything to say about the dialogue, because 1) I don't really know what kind of dialogue in Swedish is natural and what's not, and 2) I don't even know if I understood everything said in this movie. (Usually the dialogue in Finnish movies is very... clumsy though, depending on the movie.)

First thing I noticed was the cinematography. It had some really nice effects like really quick zooming for instance. Even though that was used a lot, it didn't feel like an overused technique 

The story isn't too spectacular. It's almost boringly ordinary, but that might be the beauty of it. Also the story  was spiced up with some scenes that were metaphorical and therefore very nice and gave a nice artistic touch to the movie, or otherwise just "not literally happening" scenes, dream sequences. Even if the story was almost humdrum, those scenes added something more to the story, something more... unreal. 

This movie was actually partially very... disgusting. There were very graphic scenes that make the viewer feel either disgusted or uncomfortable and both. There were several scenes during which I had to actually look away because it was so gross. So if I learnt one really important thing, it's this: never bring this movie to school and watch it with class. Really. You will be so embarrassed and so will your teacher. 

The music was fun in this movie, especially rock'n'roll, but I was actually expecting more of it. Also the score was nice. We watched this movie in two parts, and today when that one melody started playing, I felt like I had heard it ages ago. It was very beautiful.

This movie was decent, but didn't quite meet my expectations. This movie has been praised more than it deserves. But still, this was an interesting movie, and very nice, apart from all the... disgusting parts.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

7 / 10

"Why, did you think I sounded desperate?" "Listen to you. Desperately asking me if you sounded desperate?"

Year: 2009

Director: Robert Luketic

Writers: Nicole Eastman, Karen McCullah, Kirsten Smith

A romantically challenged morning show producer is reluctantly embroiled in a series of outrageous tests by her chauvinistic correspondent to prove his theories on relationships and help her find love. His clever ploys, however, lead to an unexpected result.

- Written by anonymous

I've seen clips of this movie on TV so many times, because it's one of those movies that is shown on TV almost regularly. I think I saw several scenes at least three times by accident. I actually didn't think I'd see this movie voluntarily, but here I am. This movie did meet my expectations, which weren't too high to start with.

Abby is a very typical character in a romantic comedy, you know. She's really focused on her job, but she still dreams of romance, stuff like that. That character has been used so many times. Mike, however, is somehow different, he brings something different. True, it's mostly because he acts like a misogynistic asshat. But oh wait, he has another side, wow - and suddenly he's not so original anymore. Kind of shame, even though it would've been a horrible movie, if Mike had been truly as horrible all the time.

So, the story? Well yeah, I've seen those movies before: man / woman helps a woman / man to get the man / woman of her / his dreams, but then, unexpectedly, they fall for each other! Wow, nobody ever saw that coming! But yeah, I have to admit it, nobody watches romantic movies for the surprising plot twists. 

But this movie definitely met so many tropes, so many clichés it was almost ridiculous. Almost every detail - except maybe some things that didn't matter and the first impression of Mike - has been seen already. 

There's nothing surprising to this movie, and there's absolutely nothing new. True, it's funny at times, but I've seen funnier movies. Do yourself a favour and don't watch this one, The Ugly Truth is definitely not worth it.

☆☆

2 / 10

"Because a dream is the only way any of this make sense."

Year: 2015

Directors: Andy Wachowski, Lana Wachowski

Writers: Andy Wachowski, Lana Wachowski

Jupiter Jones was born under a night sky, with signs predicting that she was destined for great things. Now grown, Jupiter dreams of the stars but wakes up to the cold reality of a job cleaning other people's houses and an endless run of bad breaks. Only when Caine Wise, a genetically engineered ex-military hunter, arrives on Earth to track her down does Jupiter begin to glimpse the fate that has been waiting for her all along - her genetic signature marks her as next in line for an extraordinary inheritance that could alter the balance of the cosmos.
- Written by Production

I mostly read about this movie on Tumblr. At first all the comments seemed to be mocking, so I didn't pay too much attention. Then people started to actually praise this movie and the mocking tone was gone. That made the whole movie interesting.

The story doesn't give that much originality to the audience. It's very similar to typical fantasy and science fiction stories. I'm almost bored at pointing out clichés in fantasy or science fiction, because those genres alongside with romantic comedies seem to have some kind of rule about the amount of clichés. But clichés sometimes make movies easy to watch. Usually movies with clichés aren't too complex, like cliché science fiction isn't the kind of science fiction that would actually make you think about ethical questions, no, no, those kind of movies only deal with such obvious ethical questions and give the answers. And the audience hardly disagrees.

But what made this story surprisingly interesting was the world. I feel like the writers weren't too picky about all the details they added. Some of the elements were very imaginative. Like how bees recognised royalty. These kind of details were absolutely ridiculous, but they worked. They gave this science fiction world something you usually find only in fantasy. And in anyway the world was very interesting. I sort of hope I could find out more about it, it seemed complex, imaginative, somehow original, beautiful and fun.

Jupiter Jones seems like a typical Mary Sue character, but I wouldn't say that's a weakness or a fault. Sure, they are easy to write, it feels like the writers sometimes don't even try when they come up with Mary Sue characters. But Batman is a Mary Sue. He definitely is, and none of the geek boys are complaining about that. So let's not complain about Jupiter Jones. She was easily likeable character, even though she wasn't, well, original. But considering this complex interesting world, it was probably easier for the audience to get the same main character that is basically, well, everywhere.

Of course this movie has the same weaknesses most science fiction movies have. Firstly, quick introduction: suddenly you are in space and you wonder who the hell are these folks. Thankfully Jupiter was just as new to this world as us, so we got explanations when she got them. Also, even though special effects were really nice, many of the action scenes were still messy and hard to follow.

Visually this movie was absolutely stunning: the effects, the cinematography... And the costume department, holy hell, I'd wear so many of the space dresses if I could.

So even though the story and characters are pretty basic, the world of Jupiter Ascending is very interesting. Everyone interested in science fiction should see this movie, just to see how far you can go, how imaginative your writing and character and world building can be. But as a film... Jupiter Ascending is just decent. Visually beautiful, interesting, but it doesn't really astonish you the same way science fiction movies like Moon do.

☆☆☆☆☆
5 / 10

"Sir, I'm gonna have to ask you to exit the donut."

Year: 2010

Director: Jon Favreau 

Writers: Justin Theroux and Stan Lee, Don Heck, Larry Lieber adn Jack Kirby (Comic book)

After Tony Stark has publicly told he's Iron Man, he faces many challenges. He has an active competitor, he's told to give in the suits to the government, and he has a new enemy, a Russian physicist Ivan Vanko. Stark also is suffering from blood poisoning, caused by the machine that's supposed to keep him alive. 

Yes, I know, I know, I've watched this movie before, and I actually made a review for it before. Oh, it was 2013, the year I was very new at the whole thing, and my reviews basically sucked. The older review actually said "I certainly can watch it again some day. Just not... not soon." Well yeah, it took me two years. But why did I want to watch it again? First of all, I actually had no memory of the movie. I knew what happened, but... I didn't remember much. And the most important part, Sam Rockwell was in this movie. What? I didn't remember that! I don't think I even realised it was Sam Rockwell the first time I watched it. Weird.

Of all the Avengers characters, heroes, I think I hate Tony Stark the most. Like sure, Captain America is boring, but he's not as annoying as Stark. Stark is just an asshole, a character who is forced to be funny, but I don't even laugh at his jokes anymore. And then they mix tragic backstory, tragic shit there, and it's supposed to be good. And then people adore Stark, right? That's how it's supposed to go. But really, Tony Stark's character gets really boring really quick. 

The writing is not too good, but the worst part is how the dialogue is very... hard to follow. Everyone talks at the same time. Yes, it's an effective stylistic device, but in Iron Man 2 it's used over and over again. I had subtitles on, and it was still so hard to follow, it was very confusing. Sure, in real life people sometimes talk at the same time, but not that much, and even though it might be realistic, especially during the arguments, but still it's really annoying.

Why cast Mickey Rourke as a Russian guy? Why not use an actual Russian actor?

And while we're at it, Ivan Vanko. What was his motive? What was he trying to do? Avenge for his father? Because his actions didn't seem to have a proper reason, it just felt like he wanted to get to Stark by destroying the whole city. I don't understand that.

Then again Justin Hammer, played by the lovely Sam Rockwell... His motives were clear. He and Tony were competitors. I understand why he'd want to have armed robots. I'm not saying he did the right thing or that he was right, but he was easier to understand, As a person he was... ew. Just ew, he was so slick. He's the kind of villain that has a understandable motive, but he's still very easy to hate. There was this interesting thing how he clearly tried to be in charge with Ivan Vanko, but he wasn't. Hammer tried to be on top of the game. When Vanko starts to take a look at the Hammer Tech Iron Man copy prototypes, Hammer gives him a permission after Vanko starts doing it. It's interesting, says a lot about the character.

But really think about the idea of Iron Man. It's absolutely ridiculous, you know, guy in a robotic suit. It's weird. It's kind of the... transfromes stuff, the really B-class stuff that can't be taken seriously, Kind of like The Hulk. 

Iron Man 2 tries to be funny, but it just doesn't work. It's almost embarrassing. The action parts are easy to follow, but they are also easy to forget. And yes, I can say with proof, this movie is just too easy to forget. Like two years, and I didn't remember anything. That doesn't happen with good movies, so... Iron Man 2 isn't a good movie. They could've just not do it. 

☆☆

2 / 10

"How about we say what we want on three?" "I want a divorce." "Creme brulee."

Year: 2011

Directors: Glenn Ficarra, John Requa

Writer: Dan Fogelman

A middle-aged husband's life changes dramatically when his wife asks him for a divorce. He seeks to rediscover his manhood with the help of a newfound friend, Jacob, learning to pick up girls at bars.

- The Heretic018 

Well, there was other stuff happening at the same time in this movie, like this girl Hannah was going to take her bar exam and she thinks her boyfriend will propose to her, the babysitter was inlove with the middle-aged guy, etcetera, etcetera. There were a lot of different love things going on at the same time. 

And again I didn't know anything about the plot when I started watching. I just wanted to watch something quickly, so I chose this one without reading a summary or anything.

First of all, I think it was very realistic how people had crushes on someone somehow unexpected. Like the boy had a crush on the babysitter, who had a crush on the dad, who was in love with his wife, who wanted divorced, but still loved her husband very much. It was realistic in the way that there was not too much sudden chemistry where people love each other ,it was one-sided crushes. Of course there were characters who loved each other, who fell in love with each other. It was sort of realistic and it was fun.

But this movie wasn't as much fun as I was kind of hoping. Well, it's not a romantic comedy, it's a romantic comedy drama, and that drama there is a bad omen. Not really, but if something is a comedy drama, then it's not a simple comedy but has something more serious in the story too. So in short, this movie was kind of boring, and definitely predictable.

But I really loved that scene were Hannah and Jacob were in bed, that scene was very sweet. It wasn't as realistic as the sex scene in Friends With Benefits, since it wasn't even a sex scene, but it was just so sweet and fun, it was amazing. That was kind of scene I still keep watching romantic movies for.

The ending kind of let me down. At first I was hopeful, because it was so chaotically fun, but then it got serious, and there was this big deep speech in the end and blah blah blah. 

The soundtrack was good. Many of those songs were good, though they'd deserve to be in a better movie.

The casting was great though. Steve Carell is good, Julianne Moore and Emma Stone are marvellous... Ryan Gosling is so good looking it almost makes up for all the worse parts. Almost.

So, in short, this movie was decent. It's not even worth seeing, because basically this movie is like three different movie stories combined, and not even well combined. You can definitely find something better than this.

☆☆☆

3 / 10