This movie is not for the Katherine Heigl, Jennifer Aniston or Kate Hudson camp. You can add Matthew McConaughey to that list, because this isn’t your standard romantic comedy. In fact, it’s not even a love story, according to the narrator, “It’s a story about love” – a witty, fresh, funny and insightful look into something most of us can actually relate to.

The film triumphs on many levels, the first of which is casting, specifically, Joseph Gordon Levitt. I’m kind of shocked. After all, I’ve only really known him as that guy in “Third Rock From the Sun”. And despite being somewhat of an indie-king, he’s remained under the radar for quite some time. Well, not anymore. Thanks to the success of the sensitive, nice-guy role, he’s going to be fighting off hoardes of hormonal females. (Note to my male readers: girls DO like nice guys!)

He plays Tom, an insanely likeable would-be architect who spends his work days in an office writing greeting cards. Zooey Deschanel is Summer, the charming free spirit who tests his faith in love and fate after getting a job in the same workplace. This character-driven film centers on the formation and progression of a 500 day love affair that finds them dipping in and out of a tangy, bittersweet love jar, replete with Beatles banter, Ikea-escapades and rainy-night apologies. Gordon-Levitt keeps it all together with a puppy-dog sincerity and bashful insecurity, as he attempts to eke out a real relationship from their romance; Summer doesn’t believe in true love, nor does she like the idea of being “anybody’s anything.”

Why does the movie succeed? Because it takes viewers away from the usual chick-flick angle that assumes love is easy once the attraction is formed – that all anyone really needs is the right song and the right moment of breathless desperation to realize they are “meant to be”.

500 Days has nothing of that nature. It’s smart and it’s real. It’s a straight-shooter without any excess sugar (although it is sweet), taking traditional gender roles and spinning it like a vinyl record. It’s the boy who experiences the falling in love, the chasing, the waiting and the heartbreak. And it finds the girl, with her hipster sensibilities approaching the relationship with an airy detachment and a cool nonchalance that insists on being happily uncommitted.

But why does this feel like a revelation? Is regular Hollywood unaware that not every female is a clinging vine? Don’t they know that sensitive new-age guys are increasing in numbers and dudes can be hopeless romantics too? I happen to know a handful of such men and it’s nice to finally see a movie reflect this not-so-uncommon reality.

And it doesn’t get any realer than the pursuit of a love that inherently holds no guarantees. How can anyone be sure?

Soul-stirring songs scaffold the pivotal moments where truth obscures love and hope becomes heartbreak, turning doubt into confusion and anger into tears. A song that’s sure to win the iTunes sales game and multiple Youtube views is “Us” by Regina Spektor, (the one you hear in the trailer) for it will forcefully feed you scenes from the movie long after you’ve seen it. That’s a good thing. This is the power of a film that strikes out in defiance of aged customs and used clichés. It takes us by the waist and waltzes us into split screen “reality vs. ideal” scenarios, non-linear time-lines, a hilarious, celebratory dance number and drunken karaoke (ok, so some clichés remain).

I didn’t really like the ending (as clever as it was) because here’s where it dives into standard Hollywood “destiny” fare, pretty much losing the credibility it built up until that point. It’s charming yes, but it’s all too convenient. I suppose it serves as a reminder that this is just a movie after all – albeit one that, like life itself, is funny, sweet and utterly unpredictable.

Overall, it’s one of the best films I’ve seen in the last 60 days of summer.

Earlier this summer I attended the Montreal premiere of Paper Heart, starring Charlyne Yi (who incidentally was on hand to present the film – more on that later) and if you’ve seen the trailer, then the movie is pretty much everything you expect it to be: cute, clever, quirky, funny and original.

The topic itself wasn’t anything novel (it’s about “true love”), but the approach used to broach the subject was pretty unique – the combination of real life interviews with real people and the fictitious storyline of her own blossoming romance with the uber-swoonworthy Michael Cera (armored with his usual awkward charm). “Is Michael like that in real life?” an audience member asked after the screening. According to Charlyne he’s not – he’s actually much more confident and likes to sing Barenaked Ladies songs – good to know!

Honestly, I can’t really trust online resources anymore, because I’ve read everywhere that they were actually dating in real life. See, in the movie she unwittingly ensnares Michael’s interest and they embark on a bond. Then, in the trails of true cinematic fashion they encounter a conflict, which is foreshadowed by Charlyne’s visit to a psychic. I won’t spoil the ending, but after the movie a curious audience member asked “Are you guys still dating?” to which Charlyne replied “No, because we were never dating (in real life).” Huh? But Wikipedia said…  Well, there goes my faith in the Almighty Wiki.

Anyways, onscreen there was some really fun chemistry between the two of them with Michael easily setting hearts aflutter everywhere. He doesn’t induce a Robert Pattinson-type mania, but his appeal seems rooted in something more real – he’s perfected that guy-next-door schtick to a tee and that familiarity does indeed breed liking, if not all-out obssessing.

Airy and uninundated by heavy concepts, this light docu-comedy looks at love through question-marked glasses, inviting both humourous and absurd answers.  Charlyne’s query leads her to several states, from Oklahoma, to Georgia where she talks to highschool seniors about to tie the knot, bikers, divorcees, young kids on a playground, and some of her own friends, like Seth Rogen who ends his sentence with that contagious trademark teddy-bear laugh, which scores points from the crowd.

What I appreciated most about the movie was the genuine humour that arose out of subtle incidents – facial expressions, reactions, Charlyne’s personal oddities – the comedic moments don’t rely on the Sasha Baron Cohen brand of overly-outrageous gags, instead, they are crisp, clever and a tad self-conscious – which is very fitting for someone like Charlyne. Her presence at the screening really illuminated the human side of film stars; she was nervous the whole time but funny all the same, she’s also a bit strange which makes her cool in her own way. This personality quirk smoothly permeates the entire film, creating a charmingly offbeat experience for everyone involved, viewers included.

Below are some pics of my film buddy Jeff with Charlene. She admitted to being nervous about the film’s reception, unsure if anyone would like it. Jeff assured her it was awesome. Good job Jeff!

Special thanks to my pal Walter for the following post on his meeting with the surprisingly hot, Eli Roth.

Is it wrong to liken a Jewish guy to the first pope?
by W.J. Lyng

The first time I saw Reservoir Dogs was a major moment in my life. The film not only introduced me to Quentin Tarantino, it also opened the door to the myriad of pop culture which had inspired the auteur, exposing me to a world of awesome I’m not quite sure would have been otherwise as easily accessible. Obviously, since then, I’ve been an insane QT devotee, taking as gospel not only his own directorial efforts, but the films of his well known entourage as well. If Quentin liked Robert Rodriguez so much, then I probably would too. This turned out to be absolutely true. Later, when his non-sexual man crush turned towards the young cocky horror director / geek Eli Roth, I followed along and have come to develop an admiration for him too. Of course, it helped that I’m kind of a big horror guy and that Roth had seemingly chosen to devote the entirety of his career to bringing us fantastically executed splatter fests.

Try then, just try for the briefest of moments, to imagine my excitement as I sat in Concordia university’s hall theatre at a quarter to ten on the closing night of the Fantasia film festival, awaiting not only a three week early preview screening of Quentin Tarantino’s latest oeuvre Inglorious Basterds, but also an appearance by none other than Eli Roth himself, one of the film’s stars.

At the risk of sounding sacrilegious, it was like getting an audience with the apostle Peter instead of seeing J.C. himself. This right here was THE MAN’S right hand man. My head was gonna pop.

I sat as close as possible to the screen without my eyes getting wet. As they went through the boring motions of naming the winners of the various categories from the festival, I could see Roth standing a few rows behind me against the wall, flanked by some studio heavies. Finally, Roth was called to the stage. I’m pretty sure I came close to restraining-order levels of cheering. At the very least, I’m relatively confident that I was the first to stand up and give the guy a standing O.

Roth proceeded to gush about his overwhelmingly positive relationship with Fantasia over the years, talking about the terrific sensation he felt when a then unknown Cabin Fever screened at the festival back in the day to an amazing crowd reaction. He explained, that Quentin himself had forced the studio’s hand to arrange this special screening, ensuring that Montreal’s fantasia crowd would be the first audience in Canada to see Inglorious Basterds. (Suck it Toronto).
It was almost like my whole life had been leading up this one moment …

The movie came and went in a Nazi-riddled frenzy of blood, guts and snappy dialogue. Just to talk a little about the film itself ( a novel concept), Basterds simultaneously delivers everything you expected out of the film based on the trailers, plus a whole hell of a lot more. It’s ‘guys on a mission’ combined with revenge combined with revisionist history. It’s also a movie about movies and not in the referential way that all of Tarantino’s movies are but in more of a tangible way that film, war and history buffs will likely appreciate. It’s over the top at moments and subdued by QT standards at other moments. It’s pretty freakin’s awesome, all in all.

Then the movie was over and it was Eli time again. He came back on, almost just as psyched as the audience. They opened it up to Q&A and you can bet your ass that I got a question in. Admittedly not a very original question, I got to ask if Eli was the only one considered for his role as the bat wielding “Bear Jew.” Although uninspired, the question drew good anecdotes from Roth about working with Tarantino and the revelation that both Adam Sandler and Seth Rogen had been considered for the role. I was in geek heaven … and then it got better.

The Q&A finished and Eli was quickly ushered out of the theatre. Damn, I thought. So much goes my chance for an autograph … of course I just happened to have copies of Hostel 1 and 2 on me … I exited the theatre and THERE HE WAS! Just standing around!!! I got the autographs first and then quickly went to retrieve my camera and cell phone from security, with whom we’d had to check the items for concerns of piracy.

I went back into the swarm of fans (ok, not THAT big a swarm) and asked Eli, whom I now considered to be a close personal friend, if a picture would be too much to ask for. Of course he obliged. And now I have Facebook profile picture that shall never be changed.

It was just the pinnacle of awesome.

I spent the better part of yesterday evening browsing movie trailers on Apple, and I’m quite excited about the fresh line-up of new films.

The first one is The Lovely Bones, based on the best-selling novel by Alice Sebold. Normally, I wouldn’t be too keen to see what unfolds onscreen because the book didn’t move me the way it did everyone else. But two simple words could take me to the ends of Middle Earth… yes, I’m talking Peter Jackson, the man with the magic director’s hand. Is there any doubt this movie will be somewhat extraordinary?

I’ll confess that I’m not the biggest Saoirse Ronan fan (pronounced “Seer-sha” and not “Swa-errs” or anything remotely close to how it’s spelled!) I still can’t get over her character in Atonement, especially for the stupid side-parted haircut (the same one she continued to wear sixty years later). But since she was nominated for an Oscar, I’m sure she’ll do fine here.

And Mark Wahlberg playing the father? That’s a shocker. But a good one! I’m excited.

Overall, the expectations are high. I predict tons of tears, magic, fantasy and life-altering revelations. Good stuffs.

When I first saw the trailer I thought “oh, another crappy, witless guy comedy.” Then a few months later, headlines started declaring Hangover “The surprise hit of the summer!” and everyone was praising its hilarity and overall awesomeness. Fans and critics alike kept raving and it seemed virtually everyone was urging me to go watch it.

And so I did.

And what the hell? Seriously, what exactly was the big deal? Where was all the rip-roaring fun people kept promising? What were the stand-out jokes? Where were the scene-stealing moments? Was it the tiger? Mike Tyson? The cute baby with the over-sized glasses? Zach Galifinakis?

Mind you, all those things were funny, but the movie itself doesn’t amount to anything more than buzz-driven mediocrity. It wasn’t great and it wasn’t terrible – it was just all right. I surveyed a few other people after I had seen the movie and they more or less expressed being similarly letdown - a consequence of misguided word of mouth.

Now, if you’re planning to see the movie because you’ve heard all the great things about it, be forewarned that it probably won’t live up to the expectations. But if you set the bar really low, to the level of absolute bull crap let’s say, then yes, you’re far more likely to be pleasantly entertained.

The bottom line: the hype is usually a lie.