I'm currently watching this film and honestly, it's so bizarre. These are all incredible actors but in this film... I just don't know what is happening. However, I cannot stop watching it. I just need to understand what the hell is going on and what the aim is. The dialogue between characters are all over the place, not sure if it's supposed to be humourous or not either way I'm not laughing but then again... I am because it's such a ridiculous film lol. Even this review sounds so scrambled because of what this film is doing lol.
365 Reviews
A baffling waste of talent
cardsrock30 July 2020
This film has an all-star cast... and not much else. The story meanders around and never really goes anywhere interesting. This was particularly disappointing coming from the writer/director behind As Good as It Gets, one of the best romantic comedies of the past few decades. This film cost a shocking $120 million and made very little at the box office, hence becoming one of the biggest bombs of all time. I only checked it out because it was getting popular on Netflix, I somewhat regret my decision. Just as Jack Nicholson likely regrets having this, as of 2020, be his final film.
Why isn't this good??
ctinsureme-9694014 July 2020
i'm sorry but it's really bad
melinetto16 August 2020
It has great cast but unfortunately, there's one very weak script. It's an example for having such a great cast as this one but unfortunately, it was misused.
By the way, that's a fine work by Janusz Kaminski the cinematographer.
By the way, that's a fine work by Janusz Kaminski the cinematographer.
Very good and not appreciated enough
Johnny-1133 May 2011
I was expecting to be very disappointed with this film because I'd heard that most people disliked it. I really really liked it. I think that audiences these days have to have a joke every 30 seconds to be entertained. Maybe audiences feel short changed if there isn't a huge obvious wrap up off the plot at the end of the film. I liked that everything wasn't black and white in the film. There are many unanswered questions. The characters' intentions and feelings weren't absolutely clear. That's what I loved about it.
It's sad that so many people disliked this film, but I think it's very courageous of James l. Brooks to write a film that pleased him and not have to pace it like most other "successful" Hollywood crap movies. This film makes you think unlike many other huge hit comedies these days.
It's sad that so many people disliked this film, but I think it's very courageous of James l. Brooks to write a film that pleased him and not have to pace it like most other "successful" Hollywood crap movies. This film makes you think unlike many other huge hit comedies these days.
How do you know this should not have been made?
ferguson-619 December 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Greetings again from the darkness. How about a little effort, folks? Writer/Director James L Brooks and Jack Nicholson have teamed up for three far superior films prior to this. Terms of Endearment, Broadcast News, and As Good As it Gets are all insightful dramadies that bring real life into relationships. This is billed as a Rom-Com, but the romance is distant and lame, and the comedy is all but non-existent.
The very talented Paul Rudd plays George, son of Charles (Nicholson) who is the target of a federal investigation after his father sets him up by falsifying corporate financial documents. The problem is George is a really nice, honest guy and Charles is a lying scumbag who would throw his son to the federal wolves.
In a seemingly unrelated story, Reece Witherspoon plays Lisa, a very talented softball player with an incredible track record and evidently serious skills. She gets cut from the Olympic team because of her advancing age (she will be 31 at the next Olympics). Lisa is dating Matty, played by Owen Wilson. Matty is a $14 million per year major league baseball player, who is also a player off the field.
Everyone in this story is so very nice, but screwed up in their own way. That's actually a hopeful start. So one thing leads to another and George falls for Lisa. Lisa moves in with Matty, who lives in the Charles' building. Lisa then moves out. George is always there for Lisa while her life is in shambles. George's life is in shambles too, but all he cares about is Lisa. Any guess how this ends up? Of course you know. This script is not built for surprises. Or romance. Or comedy.
The bulk of the comedy comes from a very pregnant Kathryn Hahn as Anne, whose life is also a bit of a mess. She is an unmarried, pregnant assistant to George, who worries about him, her and everything ... but she has such a big heart that she bakes and labels multiple dinners for George.
Anyway ... the best part of the film is that we never get subjected to Owen Wilson throwing a pitch or Reese Witherspoon actually playing softball. There is so much talent associated with this film, but it definitely proves the point that the heart of a film is not in the direction or the acting, but in the script. For a similar story line, but far superior film, go re-watch When Harry Met Sally for the eighteenth time. It has comedy and romance and a worthy script.
The very talented Paul Rudd plays George, son of Charles (Nicholson) who is the target of a federal investigation after his father sets him up by falsifying corporate financial documents. The problem is George is a really nice, honest guy and Charles is a lying scumbag who would throw his son to the federal wolves.
In a seemingly unrelated story, Reece Witherspoon plays Lisa, a very talented softball player with an incredible track record and evidently serious skills. She gets cut from the Olympic team because of her advancing age (she will be 31 at the next Olympics). Lisa is dating Matty, played by Owen Wilson. Matty is a $14 million per year major league baseball player, who is also a player off the field.
Everyone in this story is so very nice, but screwed up in their own way. That's actually a hopeful start. So one thing leads to another and George falls for Lisa. Lisa moves in with Matty, who lives in the Charles' building. Lisa then moves out. George is always there for Lisa while her life is in shambles. George's life is in shambles too, but all he cares about is Lisa. Any guess how this ends up? Of course you know. This script is not built for surprises. Or romance. Or comedy.
The bulk of the comedy comes from a very pregnant Kathryn Hahn as Anne, whose life is also a bit of a mess. She is an unmarried, pregnant assistant to George, who worries about him, her and everything ... but she has such a big heart that she bakes and labels multiple dinners for George.
Anyway ... the best part of the film is that we never get subjected to Owen Wilson throwing a pitch or Reese Witherspoon actually playing softball. There is so much talent associated with this film, but it definitely proves the point that the heart of a film is not in the direction or the acting, but in the script. For a similar story line, but far superior film, go re-watch When Harry Met Sally for the eighteenth time. It has comedy and romance and a worthy script.
Don't allow the ratings fool You. It's a Good Vibe Movie.
sunam0073 January 2019
It was winter and i was alone home. I was anticipating there will be no wifi for a couple of days so i had some movies downloaded on my Netflix. Seeing Owen wilson and Paul Rudd on the cast, i thought this movie would be Rom Com. But as i start watching, i found out it's a Romantic Drama with lots of life lessons. I am lucky there was no Internet connection on that afternoon. It's a movie i am gonna suggest to everyone who is having a bad day. I am gonna watch it again.
Nice and unusual for big Hollywood movie
tapavko9 March 2011
I can't believe the low rating of this movie. I guess it's because it does not give you usual polished Hollywood story of romance: boy meets girl, girl has a boyfriend/fiancé who at first seems perfect but then turns out to be douche bag and/or evil and there steps in this new perfect guy, they kiss and live happily ever after, the end.
Here, both guys trying to get the girl are screwed up in some way or another. Boyfriend (Owen Wilson) is not a bad guy. He is not too sensitive, he sleeps around, but the point is he doesn't try to hide it. He is honest about himself. And throughout the relationship he tries to better himself and the relationship with his girlfriend (Reese Witherspoon). On the other hand the "new guy" (Paul Rudd) is depressed, has no job or money and is facing prison time. And at the beginning the girl he's chasing considers him weird. His slime-ball/businessman father (Jack Nicholson) I think just adds likability to Rudds character.
Also, what I like is there is no perfect ending. There is sort of a feel-good ending but it's not perfect. Although, for that you'll have to see the movie.
Here, both guys trying to get the girl are screwed up in some way or another. Boyfriend (Owen Wilson) is not a bad guy. He is not too sensitive, he sleeps around, but the point is he doesn't try to hide it. He is honest about himself. And throughout the relationship he tries to better himself and the relationship with his girlfriend (Reese Witherspoon). On the other hand the "new guy" (Paul Rudd) is depressed, has no job or money and is facing prison time. And at the beginning the girl he's chasing considers him weird. His slime-ball/businessman father (Jack Nicholson) I think just adds likability to Rudds character.
Also, what I like is there is no perfect ending. There is sort of a feel-good ending but it's not perfect. Although, for that you'll have to see the movie.
One of the Most Deceptive Romantic Comedies I Have Recently Seen
claudio_carvalho30 April 2011
In Arlington, Virginia, the supportive softball player Lisa (Reese Witherspoon) is cut from the national team by the coach since she is thirty-one years old and has lost her speed. She is upset and her friend Riva schedules a blind date for her with the Chief Executive Officer George Madison (Paul Rudd). However, George is committed to his girlfriend and he calls off their date. Out of blue, George receives a subpoena and finds that he is facing a process of security fraud and the company will not give legal support to him. Further, his girlfriend and friends abandon him. Meanwhile Lisa is upset and she dates the successful and womanizer baseball star Matty Reynolds (Owen Wilson) and sooner she moves to his apartment.
When Lisa stumbles with George in the elevator, they have a long conversation and Lisa feels divided between Matty and George. The bachelor Matty decides to change his behavior and promises a monogamous relationship with Lisa. George learns that his father Charles (Jack Nicholson) is the responsible for the fraud and he requests his son to assume the responsibility and spends three years in prison to save him. George tells his father that he is in love with Lisa and he will propose her; if she accepts, he will not accept to take the blame for the fraud.
"How Do You Know" is one of the most deceptive romantic comedies that I have recently seen, considering the cast with the names of Jack Nicholson, Reese Witherspoon, Paul Rudd and Owen Wilson that are wasted in a poor screenplay. The pointless story is illogical and uninteresting, with Paul Rudd performing a naive executive with the behavior of an intern or student; Reese Witherspoon performing a softball player with an erratic behavior that does not justify the profile of her character; and Owen Wilson completely lost in a dull character. The worst, there is no chemistry among these characters. The talented Jack Nicholson performs maybe the most ridiculous role of his successful career. My vote is three.
Title (Brazil): "Como Você Sabe" ("How Do You Know")
When Lisa stumbles with George in the elevator, they have a long conversation and Lisa feels divided between Matty and George. The bachelor Matty decides to change his behavior and promises a monogamous relationship with Lisa. George learns that his father Charles (Jack Nicholson) is the responsible for the fraud and he requests his son to assume the responsibility and spends three years in prison to save him. George tells his father that he is in love with Lisa and he will propose her; if she accepts, he will not accept to take the blame for the fraud.
"How Do You Know" is one of the most deceptive romantic comedies that I have recently seen, considering the cast with the names of Jack Nicholson, Reese Witherspoon, Paul Rudd and Owen Wilson that are wasted in a poor screenplay. The pointless story is illogical and uninteresting, with Paul Rudd performing a naive executive with the behavior of an intern or student; Reese Witherspoon performing a softball player with an erratic behavior that does not justify the profile of her character; and Owen Wilson completely lost in a dull character. The worst, there is no chemistry among these characters. The talented Jack Nicholson performs maybe the most ridiculous role of his successful career. My vote is three.
Title (Brazil): "Como Você Sabe" ("How Do You Know")
Underrated
xcharxcharx26 March 2011
From looking at the casting, you would immediately think this to be a romantic comedy, and I guess that's where it starts going wrong.. from people going in to see this movie, expecting a chick flick and being disappointed.
I believe the reason for the poor reviews of this movie are due to the fact that is has been advertised and delivered as a romantic comedy.
True, it is fit for the romance genre, comedy.. not so much. But as far as romantic drama's go, this is an excellent picture for the modernized crowd.
That's because it is so much more. It is ideal for viewing of a well- intended inspiring somewhat-romantic movie. Humour is few and far between for a comedy-seeking crowd, however for those who connect to the characters, the humour is purely intended for those devised from caring for the characters.
Reese Witherspoon has perfected the role of Lisa, this is the movie that I would beg girlfriends to watch, due to her total delivery of the character throughout the entire picture, which is something most girls and women can relate to (whether they've reached that hurdle yet or not).
Which is where I feel the script originated from, life lessons. The script of the movie is all relatable in one aspect or other. It's moving to view a capture of these 'life lessons' within a movie, and I think if a movie can deliver that, then they have succeeded in making a good movie. Although the writing could have been sharper, better presented and wittier, it was decent enough for one to be indulged in the plot.
Paul Rudd, I thought, was a fantastic casting. Again, writing could of been better for a few of his lines where comedy was intended and some of his reactions.. but still I found him to be excellent and I enjoyed watching him.
Nice to see Jack Nicholson again, (huge fan of One flew over the cuckoo's nest!), his part was suitable if not a little long winded. I felt (again) wittier writing would have improved his character and performance hugely, however he delivered his part.
And Luke Wilson.. okay so we all know what kind of movie's he's known for now, and fair enough, he was a good casting for the part. My only itch is I'd like to see him doing more roles similar to Hutch, ala Starsky&, dry detective types.
Moving on, as said above, this is not a movie to make you lol or rofl, merely a movie to be enjoyed from watching these character's journey of self-revelation's throughout.
I believe the reason for the poor reviews of this movie are due to the fact that is has been advertised and delivered as a romantic comedy.
True, it is fit for the romance genre, comedy.. not so much. But as far as romantic drama's go, this is an excellent picture for the modernized crowd.
That's because it is so much more. It is ideal for viewing of a well- intended inspiring somewhat-romantic movie. Humour is few and far between for a comedy-seeking crowd, however for those who connect to the characters, the humour is purely intended for those devised from caring for the characters.
Reese Witherspoon has perfected the role of Lisa, this is the movie that I would beg girlfriends to watch, due to her total delivery of the character throughout the entire picture, which is something most girls and women can relate to (whether they've reached that hurdle yet or not).
Which is where I feel the script originated from, life lessons. The script of the movie is all relatable in one aspect or other. It's moving to view a capture of these 'life lessons' within a movie, and I think if a movie can deliver that, then they have succeeded in making a good movie. Although the writing could have been sharper, better presented and wittier, it was decent enough for one to be indulged in the plot.
Paul Rudd, I thought, was a fantastic casting. Again, writing could of been better for a few of his lines where comedy was intended and some of his reactions.. but still I found him to be excellent and I enjoyed watching him.
Nice to see Jack Nicholson again, (huge fan of One flew over the cuckoo's nest!), his part was suitable if not a little long winded. I felt (again) wittier writing would have improved his character and performance hugely, however he delivered his part.
And Luke Wilson.. okay so we all know what kind of movie's he's known for now, and fair enough, he was a good casting for the part. My only itch is I'd like to see him doing more roles similar to Hutch, ala Starsky&, dry detective types.
Moving on, as said above, this is not a movie to make you lol or rofl, merely a movie to be enjoyed from watching these character's journey of self-revelation's throughout.
Is this movie sarcastic?
somethingonceforgotten24 July 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Weirdly this is my first imdb review. I've thought about writing a few for movies that I've loved and hated; but in the end I get bored or distracted and don't bother. Then this mess came along.
I sat through it hoping there'd be some silver lining at the end. But nothing.
The writing is appalling, with dialog that is non-sensical, non-realistic and falls into ridiculous stereotypical tropes.
At the start I thought it was going to be a movie about a female athlete dealing with the end of her career. This would have explained the moments where her more financially successful male counterpart is praised while she's ignored. But that whole story arch is forgotten by the second act and she even starts telling people that every female athlete wants to end their career, find a man and have babies.
It could equally have been an intense story about a father betraying his son. But the relationship between the two is in no way fleshed out. We only have brief scenes where the dad is a jerk who can't control his aggressive impulses. So ultimately, we don't care about the choice the son has to make. Why would be even consider going to jail for the guy?
Or, out could have been a rom com about a girl trying to decide between two guys. But that entire story was so predictable and cliche that by the end of the first 15 minutes or so you know exactly how it plays out.
It felt more like three vague ideas for movies that instead of fleshing out and giving depth, were all smashed together to make a, whatever this was.
The acting (or maybe the given direction?) was awful from actors I love. Nicholson has the only real moment I laughed at when he claims he doesn't know whether he's manipulating Rudd, but other than that it was entirely lacking depth. Wilson was trying to be his usual charming naive blend, but it was too confused confused as to who he was supposed to be. Rudd was a creepy stalker. Witherspoon was just, flat.
And editing. Oh my. There are two scenes in particular that were so jarring that I had to go back and watch them again to check what I thought I'd scene. First: Rudd is running down the stairs in the apartment building, and they reuse the same 2-3 second shot twice. Back to back. Second: Witherspoon gets on a bus, Rudd walks away from the bus from the front to the back and keeps walking. Witherspoon stops the bus and gets of after about 5-10 seconds of driving. Only to immediately start talking to Rudd who is now inexplicable walking towards her. They walk for another half a second and are back at the bus stop, but it's magically on the wrong side of the road. There must have been a cut where the bus turned around? Who knows, but it was awful.
Also, people. If someone calls you to tell you they can't go out with you because their current relationship has moved to the next level, then calls you a couple days later asking you out... Say no. If you do go out with them, and they're so awful and aggressive that you need to tell them to eat the rest of their dinner in silence, don't see them again. And if someone suggests you watch this film, run.
I sat through it hoping there'd be some silver lining at the end. But nothing.
The writing is appalling, with dialog that is non-sensical, non-realistic and falls into ridiculous stereotypical tropes.
At the start I thought it was going to be a movie about a female athlete dealing with the end of her career. This would have explained the moments where her more financially successful male counterpart is praised while she's ignored. But that whole story arch is forgotten by the second act and she even starts telling people that every female athlete wants to end their career, find a man and have babies.
It could equally have been an intense story about a father betraying his son. But the relationship between the two is in no way fleshed out. We only have brief scenes where the dad is a jerk who can't control his aggressive impulses. So ultimately, we don't care about the choice the son has to make. Why would be even consider going to jail for the guy?
Or, out could have been a rom com about a girl trying to decide between two guys. But that entire story was so predictable and cliche that by the end of the first 15 minutes or so you know exactly how it plays out.
It felt more like three vague ideas for movies that instead of fleshing out and giving depth, were all smashed together to make a, whatever this was.
The acting (or maybe the given direction?) was awful from actors I love. Nicholson has the only real moment I laughed at when he claims he doesn't know whether he's manipulating Rudd, but other than that it was entirely lacking depth. Wilson was trying to be his usual charming naive blend, but it was too confused confused as to who he was supposed to be. Rudd was a creepy stalker. Witherspoon was just, flat.
And editing. Oh my. There are two scenes in particular that were so jarring that I had to go back and watch them again to check what I thought I'd scene. First: Rudd is running down the stairs in the apartment building, and they reuse the same 2-3 second shot twice. Back to back. Second: Witherspoon gets on a bus, Rudd walks away from the bus from the front to the back and keeps walking. Witherspoon stops the bus and gets of after about 5-10 seconds of driving. Only to immediately start talking to Rudd who is now inexplicable walking towards her. They walk for another half a second and are back at the bus stop, but it's magically on the wrong side of the road. There must have been a cut where the bus turned around? Who knows, but it was awful.
Also, people. If someone calls you to tell you they can't go out with you because their current relationship has moved to the next level, then calls you a couple days later asking you out... Say no. If you do go out with them, and they're so awful and aggressive that you need to tell them to eat the rest of their dinner in silence, don't see them again. And if someone suggests you watch this film, run.
Like in our real life there are no real villains or a perfectly good person - and making the right decision is just not that obvious
delightful-life11 April 2011
This is what is happening in the movie. It doesn't sensationalize things. Just like in real life.
This is my first every review for any movie and I am doing it because of the pathetic 5.3 rating this movie has. 5.3!!!!!!!!! Unbelievable. Normally less than 6 rated movies will be just plain horrible/terrible/irritating.
This movie I watched only because of a mature review by a user called billyweeds - thank you - else I would have missed it.
This movie shows the life of 2 people in detail and the subtle confusions that we have in life. There might be bigger problems going on around us/with us, but its always some sub-part of that which might look totally irrelevant to an outside person that is actually more important to us.
Good for a Sunday morning, when we are rested and our brain is alive.
Won't work if its a kick you want on a Saturday or Friday evening, then action movies are perfect, or if you are in the mood for a romcom, again this movie will disappoint.
Its a simple but thoughtful movie.
I would rate this movie an 8/10.
This is my first every review for any movie and I am doing it because of the pathetic 5.3 rating this movie has. 5.3!!!!!!!!! Unbelievable. Normally less than 6 rated movies will be just plain horrible/terrible/irritating.
This movie I watched only because of a mature review by a user called billyweeds - thank you - else I would have missed it.
This movie shows the life of 2 people in detail and the subtle confusions that we have in life. There might be bigger problems going on around us/with us, but its always some sub-part of that which might look totally irrelevant to an outside person that is actually more important to us.
Good for a Sunday morning, when we are rested and our brain is alive.
Won't work if its a kick you want on a Saturday or Friday evening, then action movies are perfect, or if you are in the mood for a romcom, again this movie will disappoint.
Its a simple but thoughtful movie.
I would rate this movie an 8/10.
How Does Nicholson Know.
anaconda-4065815 March 2016
Warning: Spoilers
How Do You Know (2010): Dir: James L. Brooks / Cast: Reese Witherspoon, Paul Rudd, Owen Wilson, Jack Nicholson, Kathryn Hahn: Here is a two part film about fate that involves Reese Witherspoon and two men in her life. She was just let go as a soft ball coach and struggles to maintain her composure. Paul Rudd plays a date whom she learns is up on legal charges within his business although he claims innocence. Owen Wilson plays her athletic boyfriend who is so use to picking up women that he fails to grasp the concept of a real relationship. Directed by James L. Brooks who helmed such classics as Terms of Endearment and Broadcast News. His films often study the struggle of relationships verses profession. The subplots are divided within either male Witherspoon happens to be in sequence with. She is weighing her options and despite both males having good points, only one can win her over. Rudd comes off as stressed yet finds relief in Witherspoon. His job is a pressure under circumstances he is unable to make clear, but she provides temporary release. Wilson brings the most humour in his constant screwing up. Witherspoon moves in with him but his emotional understanding is questionable at best. Jack Nicholson plays Rudd's father in a limited yet scene stealing role where Rudd is forced to make a crucial decision. Kathryn Hahn plays a pregnant secretary who gives inside information to Rudd that could save him from going to prison. Romantic fluff done with intelligence and with a theme of fate and our veering into the the unknown. Score: 7 / 10
Don't waste your money
maureenrosullivan26 December 2010
This was a total waste of money. With such great actors I expected much more. I was so disappointed. There was not much of a plot. There was no spark between the actors. The best part of the movie was the pregnant secretary, who, all in all, had a very minor role. Her role is the only reason I gave this move a 2 rather than a 1. I love Jack Nicholson. I have loved every movie I have ever seen him in. I did not like him in this movie. I am amazed that he agreed to take on such a weak character. Reese Witherspoon is as cute as ever and Paul Rudd is is still the wholesome boy next door but even with these three actors, the movie was a total waste of time and money.
Structure, Team Play
tedg2 February 2011
Some filmmakers you just fall into. The ones I hold most dear are those that are both expert cinematic storytellers and attempt to reshape me. These are rare, but there is a second tier of cinematic storytellers; although they do not work at deep levels, you just get captured by the mastery of the storytelling. Brooks is one of these. He is a master and even his disaster in 1994 was interesting.
This film did poorly in the US. I think it was not zany enough, short enough or abstracted from reality enough for the audience who is attracted to the form. Perhaps if it is judged as mere candy, it fails. But I found it well met the requirements on which the genre was founded: the alternating of charm in the nature of humans with humor about many of the same traits. This engagement-detachment by humor is perhaps the oldest storytelling device after the technique of omission, and Brooks is delicate if old-fashioned.
The story is that he is valued in the business for adding texture of these two qualities: humor and endearment. But he gets stuck in creating scenes that are no longer than a few minutes, because that is what the market pulls. He gets paid extremely well for guiding "The Simpsons," basically two jokes per show, and also as uncredited script doctor on a scene by scene basis. He hates this, he has said and when he can find the space for a long form project, he does it as if his soul is in the balance.
He doesn't start with characters weaving a story, or even a story proper. He is all about situations and how people react within them as they try to gain control. Our two main characters here, destined for love, are struggling less with the lives they are given than the techniques they had been using until that point to cope. The weapons in forming the new situations we desire then to get, are words. And such words in dialog that is so perfect we don't deserve the simply by paying 8 bucks.
Brooks is a writer, but it is clear that every line is written within a specific cinematic vision. Some of the shots here are quite unconventional, the composition and rhythm of shots is very personal and the flow of the words absolutely matches or is counterpointed to that rhythm. Watch the motions of the camera and the dialog when Lisa is first in George's apartment. This is effective and idiosyncratic to Brooks. It worked for me because these films are all about deferred gratification and he is serious about pushing it.
In little things, it works. Witherspoon's lack of sex appeal is handled by making her a tough jock. The formula demands — absolutely demands — that the guy profess his love at the end in front of an audience representing us. We know he is going to her birthday party to do just this, but he does not. Instead Brooks has placed a clever scene before this, a radically unconventional one that works when paired with what happens after the party, observed by no one but us and Nicholsen's character. In this scene — possibly the first written — has the two to-be lovers filming an awkward proposal, and then engaging in a re-enactment in a folded engagement. It satisfies the formula without following it.
There are several folds along these lines, highly structured and effective.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
This film did poorly in the US. I think it was not zany enough, short enough or abstracted from reality enough for the audience who is attracted to the form. Perhaps if it is judged as mere candy, it fails. But I found it well met the requirements on which the genre was founded: the alternating of charm in the nature of humans with humor about many of the same traits. This engagement-detachment by humor is perhaps the oldest storytelling device after the technique of omission, and Brooks is delicate if old-fashioned.
The story is that he is valued in the business for adding texture of these two qualities: humor and endearment. But he gets stuck in creating scenes that are no longer than a few minutes, because that is what the market pulls. He gets paid extremely well for guiding "The Simpsons," basically two jokes per show, and also as uncredited script doctor on a scene by scene basis. He hates this, he has said and when he can find the space for a long form project, he does it as if his soul is in the balance.
He doesn't start with characters weaving a story, or even a story proper. He is all about situations and how people react within them as they try to gain control. Our two main characters here, destined for love, are struggling less with the lives they are given than the techniques they had been using until that point to cope. The weapons in forming the new situations we desire then to get, are words. And such words in dialog that is so perfect we don't deserve the simply by paying 8 bucks.
Brooks is a writer, but it is clear that every line is written within a specific cinematic vision. Some of the shots here are quite unconventional, the composition and rhythm of shots is very personal and the flow of the words absolutely matches or is counterpointed to that rhythm. Watch the motions of the camera and the dialog when Lisa is first in George's apartment. This is effective and idiosyncratic to Brooks. It worked for me because these films are all about deferred gratification and he is serious about pushing it.
In little things, it works. Witherspoon's lack of sex appeal is handled by making her a tough jock. The formula demands — absolutely demands — that the guy profess his love at the end in front of an audience representing us. We know he is going to her birthday party to do just this, but he does not. Instead Brooks has placed a clever scene before this, a radically unconventional one that works when paired with what happens after the party, observed by no one but us and Nicholsen's character. In this scene — possibly the first written — has the two to-be lovers filming an awkward proposal, and then engaging in a re-enactment in a folded engagement. It satisfies the formula without following it.
There are several folds along these lines, highly structured and effective.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
Shame on you James L. Brooks, for shame!
ed_bardo13 March 2011
To prevent claims that I am negatively reviewing this film because I don't like this type of film, I start by saying I enjoyed many of James L. Brooks' earlier works such as As Good As It Gets or Terms of Endearment. Mr. Brooks has demonstrated his ability to put together a diverse and talented cast and bring them together focusing on the things that make all of us different. The writing brings everything together where the work stands on it's own and is as strong as the sum of it's parts. So what happened here??? This film is a painful and mind numbing experience in boredom, bad writing, bad chemistry and pure stupidity! I have watched many a film and rarely have trouble sitting through them. I found myself laughing and almost screaming at this movie to go somewhere! Is it deserving of one star? Maybe I am being too harsh? No, how can you take a movie with Reese Witherspoon, Paul Rudd, Owen Wilson and Jack Nicholson and basically throw away their talent by wrapping it around insanely boring and random dialog? The first few times the characters think they are saying something witty that makes no sense to where the movie isn't going, it is irritating. To sit through two hours of this torture is enough to drive one to drink! This movie had no exposure for a reason, avoid it! I am sure you have something better to do for two hours even if it is to watch episodes of I Love Lucy you have already seen.
Not as bad as they're saying.
bvallred20 December 2010
Okay, so call me crazy, but I would NEVER give a movie a one star rating unless it was absolutely miserable. Like if I would rather leave the theater and the $10 I spent on it than watch it. How Do You Know was not a one star movie. The only problems I saw with it were that it was a little long. I thought they could have cut some scenes out and not only gotten away with it, but made it a more enjoyable experience. Also, with actors like Paul Rudd and Owen Wilson (plus how it was advertised as a comedy) I was expecting to do a lot more laughing in the movie than I really did. Don't get me wrong, it was funny, but not as much as you'd expect. I think if you go to this movie knowing it's more of a romantic comedy than a typical Owen Wilson/Paul Rudd style comedy then you'll be pleasantly surprised. I really enjoyed the movie, I thought it was very clever and surprisingly uplifting and I thought it was definitely worth the money.
True torture...
tiago_ad_meira15 March 2011
Now I know what Alex DeLarge felt at the hands of the British Penal System and its experimental aversion therapy...
The dialogues are out of key, the characters don't connect, the music is just a punch in the stomach... Any expectation built for this movie is rapidly consumed by the expectation that it ends soon... but it doesn't... Two whole hours of movie which seem more like five and will let any who tries to watch it as tired as Coach Mo after running the marathon...
If you're hopping for something in the lines of "As Good As It Get" with smart dialogues like "The Simpsons" then you're in for a disappointment.
The dialogues are out of key, the characters don't connect, the music is just a punch in the stomach... Any expectation built for this movie is rapidly consumed by the expectation that it ends soon... but it doesn't... Two whole hours of movie which seem more like five and will let any who tries to watch it as tired as Coach Mo after running the marathon...
If you're hopping for something in the lines of "As Good As It Get" with smart dialogues like "The Simpsons" then you're in for a disappointment.
Strange but Fun
macieshirley5 August 2022
Glad I went in completely blind. This was a fun watch. Rather than the perfect loves we so often see in film, this one shows the imperfections. Loved the unique female lead character. She isn't the stereotypical leading lady, she is a gritty athlete going through a huge life change. In fact, all of the characters were unique yet felt real. Had plenty of moments where I laughed out loud. All performers did excellent as well. This is a movie I will rewatch for sure.
These pieces don't come together
aharmas3 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
James Brooks has given us some spectacular work before. There was real magic in the writing of both "As Good As It Gets" and "Terms of Endearment", with their respective relationships ringing true and heartfelt. Each character shining individually and in their interactions. Not of it happens in this film. It is as if everyone was working alone and never talked to each other, much worse, Brooks seems to have no control over them or generating something that has any coherence. Each of the parts here is very good, with Witherspoon and Rudd doing some fine work, and Nicholson trying to salvage whatever part he has been given, but overall the results are very disappointing.
What could have a sweet and intelligent story of second chances and lucky breaks turns out to be a long, verbose, and not very entertaining film, as each of the main actors struggle to keep the narrative going. The problem is not the complexity of the material but the unnecessary amount of dialog that Brooks has come up with to explain some rather simple dilemma. The best moments in the film, and there aren't many involve the limited verbal exchanges between two secondary characters when their baby is born, but watching Rudd and Witherspoon handle their strained conversation is at times painful and challenging for both them and us.
The problem with the dialog is that it doesn't ring true. People struggle with relationships and initial meetings, but eventually the rhythm changes and a more natural flow occurs. Here, everyone's pattern is the same. We can't tell one person from the other, and in the end, the film suffers.
One last thought: It could have been much better.
What could have a sweet and intelligent story of second chances and lucky breaks turns out to be a long, verbose, and not very entertaining film, as each of the main actors struggle to keep the narrative going. The problem is not the complexity of the material but the unnecessary amount of dialog that Brooks has come up with to explain some rather simple dilemma. The best moments in the film, and there aren't many involve the limited verbal exchanges between two secondary characters when their baby is born, but watching Rudd and Witherspoon handle their strained conversation is at times painful and challenging for both them and us.
The problem with the dialog is that it doesn't ring true. People struggle with relationships and initial meetings, but eventually the rhythm changes and a more natural flow occurs. Here, everyone's pattern is the same. We can't tell one person from the other, and in the end, the film suffers.
One last thought: It could have been much better.
A warm, enjoyable story
bjones18 December 2010
Tonight it was a rain-soaked, bone-chilling, blustery night and I wanted to find a warm comforting place to spend some enjoyable time. So, I took myself to the local theater. Of the week's new offerings I chose this film to see, I'll admit, based almost solely on my past experiences seeing films with the principal actors we see here. As it turned out, the film warmed me far more than the stingy heat in the theater. It was a very comforting presentation to enjoy on a holiday season night.
One can't say a great deal about the staging of a contemporary film. After all, it's not much of a challenge to capture the mundane surroundings we see every day. The film, then, needs something a lot more interesting injected into it to make it successful and this one succeeds marvelously. The plot concerning a down-on-his-luck businessman falling head-over-heels for a femjock who's just received the biggest disappointment in her life is just different enough to not be boring and interesting and fun enough to hold our attention. The director, James L. Brooks (who also scripted and co-produced), has an incredible track record for excellence as writer, producer, and director so it creates high expectations in a movie goer. He really delivers here with just the right nuance of sentimental warmth and comedy. Of course, he didn't do it alone, having some tremendous acting talent to lend a most competent hand.
Being me, I couldn't help but first notice the very talented, captivatingly beautiful Reese Witherspoon as Lisa, the athlete. Yes, I can even buy her as an athlete, something not every actress could carry off. She most ably, and with seeming ease, injected not only an unmistakable air of beautiful professional competence but a degree of class, physical grace and presence that is riveting to watch. It's hard to take your eyes off of her while she's on screen, and she doesn't disappoint for a single moment. Whether she's wearing a baseball uniform or elegant evening wear, she's convincing as whoever she attempts. You just naturally want to like her, to root for her to succeed and find that most elusive of dreams; happiness. Of course, as completely captivating as she is, she's not on screen alone, but surrounded by a lot of other great talents.
Everyone seems to like Paul Rudd; here as George. He's a likable everyman in the same sort of mold as Jimmy Stewart and his presence improves whatever he touches. He creates a character here that just makes you want to like him and hope he succeeds. Here, he's the down-on-his-luck businessman who is set up for a blind date with the effervescent Ms. Witherspoon. I love them as a couple. On screen, they're what a lot of people hope to be; good people who find a way through life with someone else. Of course, as films always do, there are stumbling blocks.
The first stumble is that Ms. Reese is first hooked up with a real character played by the wonderfully talented Owen Wilson as Matty, the professional baseball player. He is a happy and likable guy with a simple mind and simpler morals who just can't grasp how to treat a lady - or that he really has an incredible lady right there in front of him to lose. Fun ensues and these three, Witherspoon, Rudd and Wilson really do have fun on screen and carry us along for the ride. (NOTE: One can't help but notice the quite accurate depiction of the immense difference in the way the world treats highly successful athletes of both genders. While the males are showered with obscene amounts of cash and attention, the equally great, or even perhaps better, female athletes have to settle for little more than faint praise and a pat on the back.) I was also highly entertained by a wonderful supporting cast, led by none other than the legendary Jack Nicholson as Charlie, Rudd's father and playing as fine a slime-ball as ever graced the silver screen. Thank you, Jack, for giving me a villain worthy of disliking.
Now, add to this already fine mix the talent of Kathryn Hahn as Annie, Rudd's very pregnant assistant. She adds a real element of class to what otherwise may have been a mundane role. She really hits her stride in a scene with the great character actor Lenny Venito, as Al, her baby's co-producer. This pair have one of those screen moments that is so terrific it comes very close to overshadowing the main plot.
Other memorable performances came from Molly Price as Coach Sally (even though her part was small she shone) and a humorous John Tormey as the doorman and, last-but-not-least the always great Tony Shalhoub as a psychiatrist Ms. Reese almost visits. The short exchange between them is very fun to watch.
All-in-all it's a great film to take someone you love to during this holiday season.
By Bruce L. Jones http://webpages.charter.net/bruce.jones1/
One can't say a great deal about the staging of a contemporary film. After all, it's not much of a challenge to capture the mundane surroundings we see every day. The film, then, needs something a lot more interesting injected into it to make it successful and this one succeeds marvelously. The plot concerning a down-on-his-luck businessman falling head-over-heels for a femjock who's just received the biggest disappointment in her life is just different enough to not be boring and interesting and fun enough to hold our attention. The director, James L. Brooks (who also scripted and co-produced), has an incredible track record for excellence as writer, producer, and director so it creates high expectations in a movie goer. He really delivers here with just the right nuance of sentimental warmth and comedy. Of course, he didn't do it alone, having some tremendous acting talent to lend a most competent hand.
Being me, I couldn't help but first notice the very talented, captivatingly beautiful Reese Witherspoon as Lisa, the athlete. Yes, I can even buy her as an athlete, something not every actress could carry off. She most ably, and with seeming ease, injected not only an unmistakable air of beautiful professional competence but a degree of class, physical grace and presence that is riveting to watch. It's hard to take your eyes off of her while she's on screen, and she doesn't disappoint for a single moment. Whether she's wearing a baseball uniform or elegant evening wear, she's convincing as whoever she attempts. You just naturally want to like her, to root for her to succeed and find that most elusive of dreams; happiness. Of course, as completely captivating as she is, she's not on screen alone, but surrounded by a lot of other great talents.
Everyone seems to like Paul Rudd; here as George. He's a likable everyman in the same sort of mold as Jimmy Stewart and his presence improves whatever he touches. He creates a character here that just makes you want to like him and hope he succeeds. Here, he's the down-on-his-luck businessman who is set up for a blind date with the effervescent Ms. Witherspoon. I love them as a couple. On screen, they're what a lot of people hope to be; good people who find a way through life with someone else. Of course, as films always do, there are stumbling blocks.
The first stumble is that Ms. Reese is first hooked up with a real character played by the wonderfully talented Owen Wilson as Matty, the professional baseball player. He is a happy and likable guy with a simple mind and simpler morals who just can't grasp how to treat a lady - or that he really has an incredible lady right there in front of him to lose. Fun ensues and these three, Witherspoon, Rudd and Wilson really do have fun on screen and carry us along for the ride. (NOTE: One can't help but notice the quite accurate depiction of the immense difference in the way the world treats highly successful athletes of both genders. While the males are showered with obscene amounts of cash and attention, the equally great, or even perhaps better, female athletes have to settle for little more than faint praise and a pat on the back.) I was also highly entertained by a wonderful supporting cast, led by none other than the legendary Jack Nicholson as Charlie, Rudd's father and playing as fine a slime-ball as ever graced the silver screen. Thank you, Jack, for giving me a villain worthy of disliking.
Now, add to this already fine mix the talent of Kathryn Hahn as Annie, Rudd's very pregnant assistant. She adds a real element of class to what otherwise may have been a mundane role. She really hits her stride in a scene with the great character actor Lenny Venito, as Al, her baby's co-producer. This pair have one of those screen moments that is so terrific it comes very close to overshadowing the main plot.
Other memorable performances came from Molly Price as Coach Sally (even though her part was small she shone) and a humorous John Tormey as the doorman and, last-but-not-least the always great Tony Shalhoub as a psychiatrist Ms. Reese almost visits. The short exchange between them is very fun to watch.
All-in-all it's a great film to take someone you love to during this holiday season.
By Bruce L. Jones http://webpages.charter.net/bruce.jones1/
An A-list cast struggle with a Z-list script...
HarryTrident16 February 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I haven't walked out of a movie since the abomination that was 'The Next Best Thing' ten years ago. That was the first and only time a movie has been so appalling that I've had no other option than to flee. Tonight I came as close as I have ever been to walk out No. 2.
I'll give any movie a chance. Even if it's been mauled to death by the press, I like to make up my own mind. It is this open-minded attitude that has caused me to spend the last 2 hours watching 'How Do You Know.' A brief plot summary: Lisa (Reese Witherspoon) is in a bit of an emotional state after being dropped from the national women's softball team. She's having a bit of no-strings fun with Matty (Owen Wilson), a major league baseball star and all-round playboy. Lisa is also set up on a blind date with George (Paul Rudd), a businessman who is being investigated by the FBI over some kind of fraud. George's father and boss, Charles (Jack Nicholson) is tied into the same investigation and coincidentally lives in the same building as Matty. The inevitable love triangle follows. There's also a sub-plot involving George's pregnant assistant Annie (Kathryn Hahn).
I have nothing but admiration for the four main actors in this film. Reese Witherspoon is one of my favourite actresses and before today I hadn't seen her in a bad movie. Paul Rudd and Owen Wilson have both proved to be fantastic comedic actors over the past few years and Jack Nicholson is, well, a legend. So where did it all go wrong? There is no doubting the acting credentials of the cast, so in my opinion the blame has to rest with the shockingly bad script. Though saying that, the writer-director of this mess, James L. Brooks, has more than proved his worth in both film and television over the years. Perhaps he was just having an off day? The problem lies in the implausibility of pretty much everything that happens in this movie. The way the characters relate to each other, the way they talk - it's all so fake and completely unbelievable. I felt embarrassed for the four A-list stars who clearly struggled with the Z-list script.
In the first half of the movie, Lisa becomes very good friends with George. They first meet on a blind date, which does not go very well. They next have a chance encounter in the elevator of the building Manny shares with George's father. Next thing you know, they're best mates. For the rest of the movie, Manny goes from playboy sports star to emotional softie and Lisa spends her time running between him and George, suitcase in tow, fretting about what to do with her life. George ends up deciding to declare his love for Lisa, a woman he has met on approximately three separate occasions, but it comes at a price: If she loves him back, his Dad will have to go to prison for 25 years and if she doesn't, George will get 3 years himself (no, really, that actually is the plot). There's a baby and a marriage proposal involving the supporting character of Annie which should be applauded for doing nothing other than distracting from the abysmal main plot.
I'll remain a fan of Witherspoon, Rudd, Wilson and Nicholson - they're amongst the finest talent in Hollywood, but should all have strong words with their agents after this travesty. As for Brooks, let's hope his next work is more reminiscent of his 1997 masterpiece 'As Good As It Gets' than this garbage.
I've absolutely nothing positive to say about this movie, but am going to give it 1 out of 10 purely because I find Reese Witherspoon pleasing to the eye.
I'll give any movie a chance. Even if it's been mauled to death by the press, I like to make up my own mind. It is this open-minded attitude that has caused me to spend the last 2 hours watching 'How Do You Know.' A brief plot summary: Lisa (Reese Witherspoon) is in a bit of an emotional state after being dropped from the national women's softball team. She's having a bit of no-strings fun with Matty (Owen Wilson), a major league baseball star and all-round playboy. Lisa is also set up on a blind date with George (Paul Rudd), a businessman who is being investigated by the FBI over some kind of fraud. George's father and boss, Charles (Jack Nicholson) is tied into the same investigation and coincidentally lives in the same building as Matty. The inevitable love triangle follows. There's also a sub-plot involving George's pregnant assistant Annie (Kathryn Hahn).
I have nothing but admiration for the four main actors in this film. Reese Witherspoon is one of my favourite actresses and before today I hadn't seen her in a bad movie. Paul Rudd and Owen Wilson have both proved to be fantastic comedic actors over the past few years and Jack Nicholson is, well, a legend. So where did it all go wrong? There is no doubting the acting credentials of the cast, so in my opinion the blame has to rest with the shockingly bad script. Though saying that, the writer-director of this mess, James L. Brooks, has more than proved his worth in both film and television over the years. Perhaps he was just having an off day? The problem lies in the implausibility of pretty much everything that happens in this movie. The way the characters relate to each other, the way they talk - it's all so fake and completely unbelievable. I felt embarrassed for the four A-list stars who clearly struggled with the Z-list script.
In the first half of the movie, Lisa becomes very good friends with George. They first meet on a blind date, which does not go very well. They next have a chance encounter in the elevator of the building Manny shares with George's father. Next thing you know, they're best mates. For the rest of the movie, Manny goes from playboy sports star to emotional softie and Lisa spends her time running between him and George, suitcase in tow, fretting about what to do with her life. George ends up deciding to declare his love for Lisa, a woman he has met on approximately three separate occasions, but it comes at a price: If she loves him back, his Dad will have to go to prison for 25 years and if she doesn't, George will get 3 years himself (no, really, that actually is the plot). There's a baby and a marriage proposal involving the supporting character of Annie which should be applauded for doing nothing other than distracting from the abysmal main plot.
I'll remain a fan of Witherspoon, Rudd, Wilson and Nicholson - they're amongst the finest talent in Hollywood, but should all have strong words with their agents after this travesty. As for Brooks, let's hope his next work is more reminiscent of his 1997 masterpiece 'As Good As It Gets' than this garbage.
I've absolutely nothing positive to say about this movie, but am going to give it 1 out of 10 purely because I find Reese Witherspoon pleasing to the eye.
Doing My Part to Save a Good Film
adltswimguy20 August 2012
When I first saw the trailer for "How Do You Know" I thought it looked like a promising rom com, but then I saw the initial reviews for it and steered clear away. It wasn't until my Uncle pushed it on me, "Didn't that tank?" "Yeah, but it's actually good!" I think the reason why this movie got such bad reviews is people expected the typical rom com (I did). What it is, is a REAL movie, with depth, great characters, smart dialogue, and the complexity of reality, with some jokes and a love story thrown in. Great writing, superb acting. Don't know what else to say. Found it intriguing that on further review, my "go to" critics didn't review this one. One of the better films I've seen this year. Would give it an 8, but to right a wrong, giving it a 10.
Better Than The Ratings
nemysinger15 December 2017
Ok, so I went into this thinking- The ratings are pretty bad, but then again how bad can a movie with Paul Rudd and Reese Witherspoon be? Oh, and Owen Wilson.
And i was right. Granted, it was no Notting Hill, but then again most romantic comedies aren't. I would even go as far as to say that this movie has been wrongly characterized and is more of a romantic movie with a couple of chuckles.
While the plot and character development could've used just a little fixing up, I'm glad this movie was made, and I'm glad I had the chance to see it.
A veritable disaster
toldiboldi4 February 2013
An exorbitant lineup wasted on a truly horrible script. I think Jack Nicholson should regret accepting the supporting role of a ridiculous father.
I was desperate for some comic relief - not from tragedy but from tragic boredom this time.
This is the worst side of American film-making yet. Hollywood platitudes with tens of minutes of nothing happening.
The music is as cheesy as it will ever get. So blatantly affected that it is a pain to watch as much as to listen to.
Had Oscar Wilde written the screenplay, there might be a flicker of humor in this totally wretched and unfunny plot, but the way it is, this movie is no more and no less than a veritable disaster. And it's long too so unless you want to waste two hours of your life, never watch it.
I was desperate for some comic relief - not from tragedy but from tragic boredom this time.
This is the worst side of American film-making yet. Hollywood platitudes with tens of minutes of nothing happening.
The music is as cheesy as it will ever get. So blatantly affected that it is a pain to watch as much as to listen to.
Had Oscar Wilde written the screenplay, there might be a flicker of humor in this totally wretched and unfunny plot, but the way it is, this movie is no more and no less than a veritable disaster. And it's long too so unless you want to waste two hours of your life, never watch it.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
