Thanks for the memories!

It's funny watching the elements come together in this complicated scam. On one hand, the set-up isn't quite as complex as it seems, but there's an easy sense of fun in every exchange.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

The posters for "A Walk on the Moon" show Diane Lane and Viggo Mortensen, two attractively talented people working in the movies today, lying in a grassy field, arms around each other, hinting at a deep romance and longing for each other. That is something we get next to nothing of in the movie. But false advertising and misleading setups are a common thing in Hollywood and the media today, and always have been. The largest problem of this picture is the level of its tedious schmaltz. It is trying to paint a story that talks about marital (and extra-marital) relationships and how they can affect the lives of others, but it nevertheless comes across as absolutely insincere. That is whenever it's not just simply boring.Lane is an unhappy mother of two. Unhappy because she essentially threw away her young adult life becoming pregnant at age seventeen, only three years older than her eldest daughter, and unhappy because her husband is seldom around to spend time with them. His excuse is that he has to work to pay for all of them, for their becoming pregnant early on ruined his chances at a better education and profession. So even when they visit a summer camp for families, he continually has to return home to fix TVs; there is a high demand for them because Neil Armstrong will soon walk on the moon. Lane is going through the motions of her up-down life, when she starts an affair with a local blouse salesman (Mortensen) and, as you would expect, things start to come crashing down.The movie has good intentions; to deny that would be foolish. For the picture tries to touch on how extra-martial relationships can cripple family dynamics. For instance, Lane's daughter (well-played by Anna Paquin) learns of her mother's affairs at the same time she is becoming intimately involved with one of the local boys. It's a little refreshing to see the teenage girl, not boy, be the lascivious one for a change. It's also nice to see the unmarried individual in the affair (the blouse man) not become a sexual predator, stalking and hunting down Lane and her family. We've seen "Fatal Attraction." What kills the picture is the screenplay by Pamela Gray. Her background lies in the realm of television, and unfortunately it does show. For "A Walk on the Moon" does not make any motions toward an emotional or dynamic climax; it just drones on and on like a really long pilot episode to a television series best not picked up by a network. Scenes that are meant to deliver an impact cut off before they can register any emotion. So a scene where Lane and Mortensen visit the 1969 Woodstock event, and go nuts, comes across as just disturbingly out-of-place, not disturbing in the context of what they are doing. And although Lane and Paquin pour their hearts and souls into their performances, a key moment where they have a mother-daughter discussion about sex seems forced, not passionate. Again, like a television movie.The same can be said of the directing by Tony Goldwyn, but only to an extent. Goldwyn has a good sense of montage. He's a good director. But before he can become a great director, he needs to learn to do two things: have the confidence to order a rewrite, and pull back on his camera lenses. Almost every shot in the picture is nauseating claustrophobic, like it was meant for a screen shaped like a square instead of a rectangle. The only time he uses his wide-angle lenses effectively is in a not-romantic scene where Lane and Mortensen go swimming in the nude (what else do movie-couples do these days?) and they jump off a cliff to get into the water. Lane and Mortensen have no special chemistry together; it also seems forced and insincere. And talented and good-looking as both of them are, they do fail to steam up the screen because the screenplay is so limp and the characters so dull. They have two sex scenes together, the second one more ludicrous than the first, and just as lacking in eroticism.The best performance in the movie is by the underrated Liev Schreiber, as Lane's husband. But he is given nothing to do but stand around and look morose. And as I was watching him act in this picture, I wasn't thinking about his character or what he must have been thinking during the inevitable discovery-of-betrayal scene (I don't think anybody walking in will not see this from a mile away) but instead of what a great actor like him was doing in a picture this limp. The rest of the cast is very good as well. Paquin, in particular, is also very good. But the story surrounding them, and the material they are given to work with, is so dull and contrived that it really boggles me how this picture managed to get placed on a big screen. It looks like something HBO would put on during a random weekend.

I was 16 years old in 1969. This movie caused a lot of memories to come rushing back. I want to thank the director Tony Goldwyn and writer Pamela Gray for recreating some of the vibrations of the time so beautifully. The movie is really about the cultural clash when a young couple trying to live out the 1950's ideal realize that time has passed and they adopt to the new world of personal growth, peace, Moon landings and Woodstock Festivals. Some people are complaining that the lead character, Pearl, was a bad role model, being unfaithful or indecisive, not knowing what to do; however, that was the way things were back then. To me the film was incredibly believable and faithful to the times and setting.My only complaint is the scene where Ross rejects Alison's request to "go all the way." Being 16 at the time, I had only one desire, to "go all the way" with every teenage girl who would let me. I spent nearly every moment I could trying to convince them and I did find three or four who said yes. If anyone who looked like Anna Paquin had said to me when I was 16, that she wanted to go all the way, I would have been out of my clothes in 10 seconds flat. The only other thing perhaps that the movie missed were all the crazy, repulsive, hateful, violent conservatives who were around then threatening and terrorizing progressive, loving, peaceful people. That actually hasn't changed much since 1969. They're still doing the same thing. This movie also has a terrific soundtrack and uses popular music from the time better than any movie since "Easy Rider." For those who grew up in the 60's, see it to remember, for those who grew up after the 60's, see it to learn.

Marty, in my opinion, is one of the cutest characters I've EVER seen ...and I create them for a living! Although Liev Schreiver is approximately eight years younger, to me, he hasn't changed a bit ! Liev's voice remains the same, with an accent that not only some can relate, but fall in love with. His voice is sexy regardless of the character he plays ! Well...excuse me, I haven't seem him play Chris the transvestite yet in Janek: The Silent Betrayal. Regardless, to me, he "makes" the entire movie! You go on a journey following this dedicated working television repairman, providing father, and loving husband. The film takes place in 1969, a time where many, including his character wife, Pearl, played by Diane Lane, had a child at a young age. She decides to have an affair with a loathly hippie creating devastating effects on their family. Upon admittance of the affair, Marty "goes through the motions" of any hurt and honest man. Leaving his home enraged, sitting alone with sadness shown through his eyes, and the irrational behavior of unsuccessfully trying to take his son. However, once his son becomes sick, he rushes home (over an hour away) to care for his "cowboy." That night was the fastest time that he had clocked, due to the fact that he traveled a long way in order to work each week. Despite Marty's wife's behavior, he also decides to forgive, forget, and "loosen up". No, Marty does not light a joint or play Jimmy Hendrix to appease Pearl ! He simply realizes that he needs to recognize his wife's needs. Rewind the final scene over and over again! He dances with her on their porch. So romantic.If I were Pearl, my needs would have fulfilled after the scene of the two lying in bed together !

I have to admit, I've seen much of this movie several times on digital cable but haven't quite made it to the end (for reasons explained later). Diane and family vacation at Catskills resort in the late 60's, Lane the satisfied wife and mother -- until she runs into free-spirit blouse salesman Mortensen. Schreiber is fine as the lovable but dufus husband, as is Feldshuh as his mom (in real life only 13 years older than Lane!), and Paquin as the blooming daughter. It's always fun to watch a beautiful Lane agonize over these life issues and a pre-Lords Viggo is a treat. The Airplane's "Today" gets as good a musical placement in this movie as you'll ever see. The set up is really superb (although a little more graphic than I needed). But But But But But. But the Woodstock sequence seems unnecessary and contrived, blowing a beautiful slice o' life movie to smithereens. Wrong turn. I can't bear to watch it after that, maybe I'll make it through sometime and things will be okay after all.