It has an existential quality, the suggestion of the impending death sentence helping him reclaim the connection to his youthful passions and irreverence for society’s order that he abandoned when the order and drudgery of his career life overtook his soul.
The intertextual plot of a writer’s work influencing the characters within the story until human passion intervenes is intellectually compelling and entertaining as the main character’s path crosses with a creative and beautiful tax dodger who teaches how to face his fears and live in the moment.
Several well-thought-out, poetic literary details reveal the literary origins of the screenplay.
A beautiful and eccentric neighbor who inspires him with her vulnerability and passionate engagement with life.
However, since the role has traditionally gone to actors who previously did not have much face recognition, it seems unlikely that Dame Helen will be cast in the show.
The writer in the film is a tortured screenplay writer and his less intellectual and glib twin brother takes a mass marketed screenplay writing class and makes it look easy, and draws Kaufman’s character out of his depressed writer’s block.
The intertextual element again in this movie forms a mentally stimulating plot that engages and entertains with its seamless delivery by Director Spike Jonze.
His depressed wine drinking and the immoral debauchery of his best friend on the eve of his wedding are classic renderings for a fiction writer driven from emotion far more than logic.
The film expertly navigates the single-mindedness and complexity of obsession in the captor victim relationship of Bates’ and Caan’s characters and the tension between a writer’s public role and distance from the audience who reads it.
The suspense and emotional struggle captivate the viewer until the satisfying and meaningful ending.
He is a theater professor and playwright and she is a temp agency employee and unsuccessful dramatic writer.
Both have experienced personal life disappointments, presumably due to a dysfunctional childhood.
The writers are competitive and experience angst. One as successful academic with a failed relationship track record, and the other a struggling writer who lies about winning a Guggenheim fellowship to compete with her brother.
The external conflict of finding for their father an affordable, dignified elder care facility, conflicts with the internal conflict of extinguishing their childhood neuroses and marks the pace of the film.
The critic side of her personality is leading her life, until on a whim, she abandons a tour of Italy to buy a house in Tuscany, where a new life unfolds.
While it does not follow the plan for herself she had carefully crafted in her mind, it instead resembles the warm and eclectic family that she always unconsciously desired.
The memoir style narration opens her mind to a more creative ending to her adventure.
The writers played by Hamilton and d’Abo have dated in a tightly knit group of college friends, and the plot revolves around graduation, and her acceptance of a fellowship that leads her to Prague.
He remains in the college town searching for a post-graduation path, experiencing flashbacks of their literary encounters where they discuss words, characters, writing and the nuances of life, as exposition of the backstory.
The disruption of the characters’ routines as working adults comprises most of the film’s wry comedy and intellectual banter scenes, along with the tension of wondering whether the lovelorn man will reunite with his fellow writer and muse.