"
system\nclassify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative
\n
user\nI went to see \"Evening\" because of the cast. I'd gone to see \"Norman's Room\" for that reason -- that movie offering Diane Keaton, Leonardo De Caprio and, also, Meryl Streep -- and had loved every minute of it. Same for \"The Notebook\" even though it was chick-flit lite. And my feeling was, anything offering performances by Vanessa Redgrave, Meryl Streep, Patrick Wilson and Glenn Close would be at least as good. Instead, I found sometimes even the greatest actors cannot overcome trite, simplistic and -- on one occasion -- truly offensive material.
Now I had no problem with the way the film was structured. I actually enjoy movies that cut back and forth in time to tell a story...so long as one era illuminates the other and vise verse. But while Vanessa's character being on her deathbed and recalling a past event she felt \"was a mistake\" was riveting, at times, the part actually showing what that \"past mistake\" was does nothing to clarify the matter. In fact, it makes it seem meaningless in the silliest \"girl meets boy, girl gets boy, girl loses boy\" fashion, and in the most unbelievable, clichéd, wrong-headed way possible.
And from here be spoilers, so bear that in mind should you continue reading.
First of all, Claire Danes was brutally miscast. Not only does she not even begin to resemble Vanessa Redgrave as a young woman, she has nowhere near the chops when it comes to acting. Don't get me wrong, she can be good in the right role -- just not this one. And Patrick Wilson was miscast, though he has the acting chops to almost pull it off. He'd have been better suited to the part Hugh Dancy played -- the rich confused WASP -- and not the object of sexual attraction to one and all; he's a bit too WASP-y for that. Hugh Dancy? One note -- \"I'm a tortured drunk and wait till you find out why.\" And the \"why\" (I'm a closet case in a sexually repressed world, so I have to drink to excess and make a fool of myself in front of everyone I know) was so offensive to me and the manner in which he died (as you knew he would because that's the only thing that can happen to a faggot in the Fifties) so ludicrous, wrong-headed and mishandled, I nearly threw my candy at the screen.
As for the modern part between Toni Collette and her sister, her fear of commitment, her jealousy of her sister's \"perfect life,\" her sister wondering if she's made the right choices, her pregnancy and her too-perfect boyfriend (which actually might have been more interesting and meaningful if played by Patrick Wilson, and Ebon Moss-Bachrach might have been a more interesting Harris, given his dreamy eyes) -- anyway, all this was hashed over in the 70's and 80's. And in much greater depth. Do we REALLY have to present it, again, and all as if it was fresh and momentous?
And to top it off, Meryl Streep doesn't even appear until the last ten minutes of the movie, all in old lady makeup that hides many of her facial expressions. She's still good, but only because she's Meryl, and Meryl can find a way to pull off even the silliest dialog under the heaviest of makeup.
So to put it simply, this movie has every cliché in the \"really meaningful message\" movie book, and it adds a few that really had no business being trotted out, again. At two hours long and laced with \"Lifetime Movie-of-the-week\" music that is guaranteed to rub you raw, it's a complete failure in both the \"meaningful\" and \"moviemaking\" aspects. I give it \"3\" only because of Meryl and Vanessa.
Now, if all you require from your films is twadd le, then please set my comments about \"Evening\" aside and have the time of your life. But if you want a truly meaningful experience being served up by great actors and filmmakers who know what to do with a simple story about life and death and all the nonsense it brings, rent \"Norman's Room\" and find out what truly great acting is.
\n
assistant\n0
\n"