Adrift in Manhattan (2007) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
24 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
Truth In Labeling
thrak6129 May 2012
Warning: Spoilers
If I were to boil this movie down into one sentence: lonely people trapped within jail cells they either create or accept. Character One: Simon, a severely socially-maladapted 20-year-old living in an apartment with his mentally ill mother who uses him for her emotional gratification. Character Two: Tommaso, an elderly mail clerk who has lived alone his whole life so as not to have to share his time or attention with others, and who learns at the outset that he's going blind. Character Three: Rose Phipps, a young professional who, when we see her, we sense a mute sadness. Character Four: Mark Phipps, her estranged husband, who has only two notes - anger and frustration. And Isabel, a family matriarch in Tommaso's office who lives vicariously through her grandchildren. With the exception of Rose, who is the emotional center of this movie, these really aren't people I'd want to spend much time with.

Rose, an optometrist, gives the diagnosis to Tommaso, and suggests that he tell his family and his friends of his condition so as to help his transition into long-term disability. She later becomes a de-facto therapist for him as he works through his denial and anger over the predicament, and later, as he tentatively pursues a romance with Isabel, in his office. Isabel, for her part, develops an attachment to him but it really seems unmotivated; there's no real chemistry between them and their interaction up until the time he asks her on a date is full of un-charming awkwardness. Nor does he doesn't do much to endear himself to her or her family as the romance, such as it is, progresses. He just seems like a grumpy old man who can only talk about himself. I could understand her motivation if it were mere sympathy, but the script wanted it to be more, and it just wasn't earned.

Simon works in a camera shop and as such has access to long-range lenses; since he doesn't have any social outlets, skills, or interests, he already lives rather voyeuristically, so walking around photographing strangers comes quite naturally to him. But he has a problem: he's attracted to pretty women. OK that might not be a problem in itself, but what he decides to do as a result seems questionable. He stalks them. He follows them to their residences. He sits in the dark across from their building and lurks, and shoots photos through open windows. He follows them when they go with their ex-spouses to public events and sits nearby watching them. These scenes are interspersed with scenes of his home life with his crackpot mother, in which there's an unhealthy lack of intimacy boundaries, and this is all meant to show him as pathetic and helpless, but I wasn't buying it. He seemed simply creepy. And that's what makes the next thing so implausible; when Rose catches him out, she doesn't have a restraining order put in place on him, which anyone in her position in real life would do. Instead, she eventually starts to encourage his behavior.

Rose is afflicted by grief, and I do have to say that Graham hits this note-perfect. She has the stricken aura that anyone who has lost someone near can identify. Her emotional world has been slammed sideways; only her work continues, which she continues, joylessly if competently. Of course, it's telegraphed from the first scenes what her affliction is, which makes the explication later more or less gratuitous. Her estranged husband attempts to maintain contact with her but he's oblivious to all but his own needs, and this makes him oafish and repellent.

Tommaso eventually treasures his isolation more than any intimacy Isabel hoped for and was willing to offer, and he asks her to meet him at the park and then stands her up. We saw this coming, didn't we? He watches from a distance in order to cradle his loneliness. Rose lures her stalker into her brownstone and seduces him. Within the confines of her story, this is believable - she wants to feel anything different that what she's been feeling for the last 8 months - but then, the movie itself takes you out of that believability by reminding us just what damaged goods Simon is, so that even while her motivations make sense, the scene is implausible. Not even the sight of Heather Graham's finely-shaped rear is enough to take this scene seriously. And then, with even greater implausibility, the movie wraps up these dangling threads with succinct neatness: Simon stands up to his abusive mother, leaves her to her own twisted devices, and suddenly walks with confidence, soon bumping into and befriending Tommaso, who's finally accepted the need of the help of others. Rose returns as a surprise to her estranged husband.

I guess the takeaway is: all a young guy needs is to get laid by an older woman. And all she needs to return to her husband is to get laid by someone who's violated her privacy. Eh, what? 4/10 only because the acting is mostly good, especially by Graham and Pena.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A meandering film which is ultimately going nowhere
hall89510 July 2009
Ah, look at all the lonely people. Adrift in Manhattan focuses on three very lonely New Yorkers whose lives are destined to intersect. Heather Graham has the role which is meant to tie the plot together. She plays optometrist Rose Phipps, a woman who has suffered a great loss and who now lives alone while trying to piece her life back together. Dominic Chianese plays our second main character, Tommaso, an elderly painter, classical music enthusiast and mailroom worker. As we meet him he is being informed by Rose that he is going blind. And then there is young photo shop worker Simon, played by Victor Rasuk. One day Simon sees Rose sitting on a bench in the park and decides to more or less become a stalker, following her around the city taking her picture. He even follows her all the way home, taking pictures of her through the windows. Creepy? You bet.

As the film progresses we learn more about each of these characters. We learn why it is that Rose is seemingly alone in the world. We learn that Simon is extremely shy and withdrawn, apparently having very little idea of how to relate to people. This may have something to do with his mother with whom he has one of the most uncomfortably, bizarrely affectionate parent/child relationships ever seen. The focus of the story really is Rose and Simon. Which is a shame because Tommaso is far and away the most interesting character in the film. We see his frustrations as he deals with his failing sight, blindness akin to a death sentence for this simple but proud man who so loves to paint. And we see him fall in love with a much younger woman from his office, Isabel, played by Elizabeth Peña. Their relationship tugs at the heartstrings, their interactions always compelling. And Chianese and Peña easily give the best performances in the film. Rather unfortunately it seems the movie is always rushing through Tommaso's scenes so the focus can get back to Rose.

The film meanders about, cutting back and forth between our three main protagonists. But the story never really pays itself off. Tommaso is compelling, Rose somewhat less so, and Simon, barely even communicative, hard to identify with. Eventually Rose does something which makes absolutely no sense, something you would never believe anyone in her position would even conceive of doing, and from there the movie really falls apart. For a film which seemed to have some genuine promise, especially in Tommaso's story, in the end it just kind of limply fizzles out. Chianese did excellent work and created a great character and he and Peña work together wonderfully. But the story which surrounds them ultimately falls flat.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Meh
grantss15 April 2020
Had potential, but falls short of being profound, emotional or interesting. Some nice moments but that's about it.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
parts of this are interesting
SnoopyStyle27 March 2016
Simon Colon works in a photo shop and lives with his manic alcoholic mother. He takes photos on the street and starts stalking Rose Phipps (Heather Graham). Rose is an optometrist struggling with the death of her baby son. She tells her painter patient Tommaso Pensara (Dominic Chianese) that he's going blind. These are three lonely suffering people in the crowded city of New York. Tommaso starts dating the younger Isabel Parades (Elizabeth Peña). Rose is estranged from her husband Mark (William Baldwin).

These interconnected characters are not all compelling. I like the weird relationship between Rose and young Simon. It has good potential. I would have expected Mark to stay connected to Rose and interacted with this strange pairing. Instead, Mark simply drifted off on his own course. I'm not as committed to Tommaso and his relationship to Isabel. Overall, this is a slow mover and only parts of it is compelling.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Interconnecting lives
sol-kay16 October 2008
**SPOILERS*** Originally called "1/9" or the NYC Seventh Avenue subway line that runs the length of Manhattan Island and ends at the tip of The Battery "Adrift in Manhattan" connects three lonely people who live along its route.

20 year old camera store worker Simon Colon, Victor Rasuk, is obsessed in photographing people on the streets, as well as subways, of New York. One day Simon comes across this lady sitting in the park and becomes infatuated with her multi-colored, or rainbow, scarf.The lady in question Rose Phipps, Heather Graham, becomes very agitated, and even frightened, when Simon mails a number of photos he took of her at her brownstone.

We never quite get what Simon's reasons for mailing his secretly taken photos of Rose were but it almost gets him fired from his job. Instead Rose soon becomes almost as infatuated with Simon as he's with her to the point of inviting him into her home and, to Simon's utter surprise and delight, forces him, a virgin, to make love to her!

Like Simon we soon find out that Rose is not all there, emotionally, in that she's estranged from his husband high school teacher Mark, William Baldwin, and is suffering from a deep depression in the tragic loss of her and Mark's two year-old son Casey, Leim De Villa. Rose's sexual relationship with Simon soon starts to effect her work as an eye doctor in her treating a patient of her's the refined elderly and cultured gentleman Tommaso Pensara, Dominic Chianese.

Tommaso is slowly losing his sight and in him loving to paint that's as well has him receiving a slow and painful death sentence. Tommaso is also in danger of losing his job in the mail room in that he can't see the letters and packages in order to correctly distribute them. It's Tommaso's co-worker Isabel Parades, Elizabeth Pena, who not only takes the time to help him out at his job but cover up all his mistakes. Isabel also falls in love with the some 75 year old bachelor who for the first time in years feel that he's wanted for himself not his talents; in his music and his art.

All three main characters, Rose Simon and Tommaso, in the movie interconnect with each other due to their proximity to the 1/9 subway line. And it's that very reason that makes their lonely and desperate lives, who are aimlessly adrift in Manhattan, that much more worth living!
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Very Slow and Offensive
Greatornot31 May 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I know what this movie wanted to be. It wanted to be an ensemble movie of people facing traumatic cornerstones in their lives and overcoming, with the usual connection of characters such as movies likes Crash, 20 Bucks or Short Cuts. A noble gesture and not exactly original but OK. However , the fact of the matter is that besides being slow , this movie did what so many other movies seem they feel they have to do... Go right to seediness. A movie that is supposed to be inspirational, challenging , interacting and about making new friends turns into a flick about glorifying mentally warped individuals. By that I mean the glorification of a stalker. Not only was the stalker glorified but rewarded by cheap role sex as well. From an Oedipus complex stricken young man to an eye specialist , beautiful lady that just lost a toddler to an older, underachieving mail clerk losing his eye sight we have the proponents of a could be good movie. With a supporting cast of a vastly younger coworker, in love with older man and the separated husband of the eye specialist, trying to work things out after tragedy. I rambled enough, just thought the movie had great potential but it failed to deliver.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Enjoyable movie
freitagfan8 December 2007
I enjoyed the movie. Didn't expect a lot and was pleasantly surprised by the storyline, the characters and the development. It is one of the movies that doesn't give enough information about the characters (on purpose) so that it leaves you with questions and wanting more. The inter relation between the characters is extremely light so that normally annoying feature actually added to this film.

Some of the features of the movie are a little disturbing but I wouldn't consider them weird enough to prevent most people from enjoying the movie.

For me a 7 means I enjoyed it and would definitely watch it again. I just wouldn't be thrilled to have paid $10 to see it.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Muffled Manhattan
maryszd25 July 2009
Adrift in Manhattan is a small, lovingly made, melancholy film about the intersecting lives of various emotionally wounded people in Manhattan. As I watched the film though, I felt something was "off." Then I realized it, the Manhattan in this movie is much too quiet. I lived in Manhattan for years and one of my overriding memories of it is the constant noise; sirens, garbage trucks, horns honking, boom boxes, crazy people yelling, etc. Yet, in this film Manhattan is a quiet, dignified place. If only! I wonder what the film would have been like if it actually had the background noise that's so much a part of the city. I think it would have improved the film and made the characters' loneliness all the more poignant.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Fragments of Coicidence and Connection
gradyharp5 February 2008
Though there have been many films of late that address the issues of the isolation of the individual in a society increasingly settling for homogeneity, few have the honesty and simplicity of presentation as Alfredo De Villa's ADRIFT IN MANHATTAN. Perhaps the reason this film works so well is that instead of dealing with the usual tropes, De Villa restricts his story to three individuals who are suffering isolation in the noise and autonomy of New York City and are thus 'adrift' in a life that seems flat and without a beacon of hope. The story De Villa weaves is one of interaction of these characters by almost serendipitous incidents, moments that change their lives - at least for a while.

Teenager Simon Colon (Victor Rasuk) lives with his overbearing mother Marta (Marlene Forte) and gets through his life almost without speaking, working in a camera shop, spending his idle hours photographing people in the park. Tommaso Pensara (Dominic Chianese) is an elderly painter and music lover who lives alone and supports himself by being the 'mail boy' in a large firm: his loneliness is heightened when he discovers he has macular degeneration and will go blind. The physician who makes his diagnosis is Dr. Rose Phipps (Heather Graham) who is grieving from the recent death of her 2-year old child and is unable to continue her marriage to literature professor Mark Phipps (William Baldwin).

The threads of coincidence begin to tie these people together when Simon begins to photograph Rose in a manner that resembles stalking, when Tommaso notices and desires and older lady at his workplace, Isabel Parades (Elizabeth Peña) and is encouraged by Dr Rose to share his potential blindness with this friend, and when Rose explores the attention Simon bestows on her, filling an emotional need for both parties. Naturally the development of these intersections is more complex but at the same time the manner in which they develop is very tender and gentle.

Some viewers may find the film meandering a bit too much: this is not linear storytelling but rather shifts in incidents and moods and gradual changes that occur among these simple but needy people, much like the coincidences and random kindnesses occur to the sensitive eye. The cast is very fine and the cinematography and musical score sustain the mood of the piece. This film requires involvement on the part of the viewer, and that involvement has its rewards. Grady Harp
23 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Fairly Good
M_Exchange15 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I admire the filmmaker's ability to squeeze so much out of a limited budget. When you actually make a film yourself-- with the occasional incompetent crew member, the snags in acquiring permits and licenses, etc.-- you realize that its mere completion is almost a minor miracle. I also admire the filmmaker's courage to tap into issues that mainstream films would never touch such as (spoiler) incest or in this case, near-incest. However, I believe that this film suffers because its protagonist is probably not relatable to most people. At times he seems as if he is a DANGEROUS stalker, and the idea that Heather Graham's character was attracted to a stalker-- even in her poor condition-- seemed improbable. The acting is mostly good except for the very weak performance that the girl who played Heather Graham's character's former sister-in-law turned in. Her performance is cringe-worthy, actually. Overall, I believe that this filmmaker might eventually strike gold with a future project, and I wish luck to him.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A dry movie, lacking entertainment or cinematic value
the_docteur_lessard29 August 2008
Although I usually find interest in interwoven character story lines from films such as Crash or Magnolia or Babel, I couldn't get my interests up for this one.

Now I'm not here to complain that the movie lacked explosions, action or a whole lot of plot twists - it doesn't attempt to be that kind of movie. The few plot driven elements are rather scarce and are mostly there to drive forward the characters rather then the story. The story itself is never the planned focus anyhow. It is my appreciation that some attention to have a more involving plot would have done the work a service.

In terms of execution (acting, directing) the effort is certainly solid although never really stellar : you won't find anything really worthy of seeing the movie on it's own. The problem therefore is the very blueprint on which the execution rests, and as I pointed earlier, the material given is too dry to make the movie a memorable one.

There just isn't enough happening here to make this one worth the look. Nothing much was achieved, and the journey alone wasn't exactly thought provoking nor entertaining. It isn't awful mind you, just very forgettable.
5 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
When they say "adrift," they weren't kidding!
charlytully29 December 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Skimming through the nine comments previous to mine, they mostly seem to be from New Yorkers or New Yorker wannabes. If one does a general survey of this IMDb comments site, they will notice that comments coming from a film's location shoots tend to be disproportionately positive. Since New York City is notorious for attracting and harboring a coterie of people best described as self-centered navel-gazers who don't give a rap about the rest of the world, maybe it's not surprising they smugly go ga-ga over ANYTHING New York: Andy Warhol proved they'll even wax poetic over a 48-hour flick just showing paint drying, as long as it's set in New York.

If this creepy movie had been shot here in Rosebush, with a mom flashing her bare tits at her 20-year-old socially crippled son, who then loses his innocence doing Rollergirl doggie-style while beating her butt and telling her she's a bad mom because her toddler fell out the window while she was on the phone, and next stumbles across Nasty Mom Number Two's blind patient lashing out angrily with his cane in a local transit hub, New York moviegoers would accuse our town of being an inbred backwoods hell-hole with nothing to offer the world culturally.

For non-New Yorkers in search of something serious set in the Big Apple, go see DOUBT. For those wanting to see a well-done movie about intersecting lives, rent the Los Angeles-set SHORT CUTS. But if you want your skin to crawl watching a series of random amoral anti-erotic incidents happening to uniformly implausible characters, perhaps you also belong ADRIFT IN MANHATTAN.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
something's adrift for sure
jack-96431 May 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Watched it, enjoyed it, but...

Adrift in Manhattan follows the lives of 3 main characters for a very brief period, each having a problem. They connect at some point in the movie, but it isn't clear why they connect or why it results in something, if it does at all. I really don't need to have everything layed out for me, but some clue as to what is happening would be nice.

Spoiler: I only read here that their lives seem to connect cause of some subway line, or it is supposed to revolve around that. I never would have guessed that, so there is something pretty wrong with the movie. Actually i was wondering if some of them were living in the same building, or if it was all just coïncidental. Characters don't have a lot of lines so you get no information from there; no interesting dialogues.

The acting is OK. Camera-work is OK, its all pretty OK and i didn't fall asleep, but I'm pretty sure a few weeks from now i won't remember what this movie was about at all. I don't even think i know what it's about now. (?!) If the object was to show coïncidence on peoples lives, Magnolia is by far superior to this one. If the object was to depict people dealing with huge personal problems i know a lot of movies that pass this one left and right. So i guess i don't get what this is about, what the object was, or they messed up.

Something's adrift in Manhatten for sure, but what that is remains the question.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Beautiful and worth more acclaim than it's gained
joe38_19985 January 2010
I loved this movie. The feeling and pace was graceful, the cinematography and music wonderful. There's loneliness and loss here, but it's covered in a way that makes you just fall in love with the characters and care for them, hope they come through. For those that can identify with the vib of New York, the film is likely to be appreciated even more, as elements of the subway and streets come through realistically.

This movie visits the lives of three different people, and how they coincidentally intermingle within the movie time line. The other characters in the movie add some color and background, and do well also.

I've watched this movie multiple times and every time I come away satisfied, and more so: inspired. You can use this movie to better your life, to better your art. Strongly recommend watching it on a quiet, relaxing night.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Very touching, very disturbing, very adult
inkblot115 July 2017
In Manhattan, where 11 million folks live, one can still feel very alone. Dr. Rose Phipps (Heather Graham) certainly does. She has recently suffered the death of her toddler son and it has caused her marriage to fall apart. Ex-husband Mark (William Baldwin) lives elsewhere and has tried a new romance, with mixed results. Meanwhile, Tomas, a mail clerk by day and a painter by night, is startled to learn he is going blind. This news was delivered by Dr. Rose, who urges him to call his family for support. He has none. However, Isabel (Elizabeth Pena) is a co-worker who has his best interests at heart. Finally, Simon (Victor Rasuk) is a twenty- something who works in a photo shop and takes artistic photographs on the side. Unfortunately, his mother is a troubled lady who drinks too much, never having got over her husband leaving her. She has made incestuous gestures to her son, which has left him shy and a virgin. Spying Rose on the street, as these folk all live and work near each other, Simon begins to take photos of Rose, beautiful ones. Is he interested in Rose as a woman? How will all of these troubled lives go on? This stunning film is very touching, very disturbing in parts, and very adult. Though not overly described, the topics of masturbation, incest, and voyeurism are present. This will tell some viewers to "stay away". Yet, the stories are touching as these flawed folks have sad and lonely lives but might, finally, establish connections with others. All of the cast members, Graham, Baldwin, Rasuk, Pena and the rest are quite wonderful. This term also applies to the scenery, script and thoughtful direction. If you can get past a touch of objectionable material, Adrift in M is a piercing examination of the human experience.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Wonderful movie
Bubbosh-paul29 May 2007
I really enjoyed this movie. The film has this touching relationship between Heather Graham's character and the young man obsessed with capturing her in photos. At first, I was afraid it was borderline stalking, and I kept on waiting for something bad to happen to the young man. Gradually, the boy's photos reveals something deep and personal about Heather Graham's character. When they do finally meet, the outcome is surprising. All the actors put in good performances, especially Heather Graham. If you like character driven movies, then this movie will appeal to you. I also like the pacing of the film. It's slow and methodical. Often films rush through their stories, but this one takes its time.
28 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Utterly Amazing!
classic836321 August 2007
I recently had the distinct pleasure of seeing Adrift in Manhattan at the HBO Latino Film Festival in New York. The film made me laugh, almost brought me to tears and definitely kept me on the edge of my seat. The character development is unbelievable in this film. Heather Graham, William Baldwin, Dominic Chianese and Victor Rasuk (who I have loved ever since Raising Victor Vargas) all give multi-dimensional performances. Victor's character drew me in; Heather's character kept me guessing. You could tell there was something wrong by the distant/ unhappy look in her eyes. William Baldwin was extremely convincing as a husband trying to reclaim his life. Most impressive of all was Dominic's performance. It truly almost brought me to tears. Oh, this movie also has a VERY STEAMY SEX SCENE!
17 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
American movie with European soul
przgzr7 November 2009
This movie is a pleasant surprise that returns faith in American movie, the faith that has been suffering for a long while, recovering just rarely by Tim Burton's work or movies like "Eternal Sunshine..."

We – especially us who live outside USA – have been exposed to so much Hollywood vain, shallow, plastic movies in range from superhero action violence and funless teen comedies to the worst movie blasphemies - remakes, that we use to forget that there are small movies untouched by Hollywood lethal sauce. Even masterpieces like Big Fish, Edward Scissorhand, Chocolate, Green Mile (or already mentioned Eternal Sunshine of Spotless Mind) have a clear Hollywood sign, and after all those Rambos and American Pies, comics based blockbusters and remakes of French movies (what is additionally ironic because average American movie consumer would rather see a rattlesnake on the floor than French movie on the screen) this touch of Hollywood became odious, what is a tragic decline for this old temple of movies... just few decades ago the touch of Hollywood style was the best praise a movie could be given.

Adrift in Manhattan is more European style than any American movie I've seen for a long while; even more, it is more European style than many European movies made in last two decades. Too many European movie makers make movies to fit into Hollywood standards, hoping it will sell better; now, American authors teach Europe a lesson how good a movie can exist without Hollywood sugar, false glamour and forced tears.

The basic thing that connects main characters in the movie is loneliness. Though set on Manhattan we don't get the feeling that the big city is the prime suspect for their loneliness, they would probably be lonely everywhere on Earth. Not only that, but somehow New York eases their pain and helps them find each other, find them the way to tomorrow. And this is one of those things that are so often in Europe, a kind of love stories between director and his city, an ode and praise to it, something that American authors so rarely give us.

The second feeling mutual to the characters (besides loneliness) is guilt. They all carry a burden of old mistakes on their conscience – even if they aren't really guilty (from our point of view). And their loneliness grows not only because this burden presses them too hard, not only because they are ashamed, but mostly because they are afraid to share it with anybody. And only learning to open their souls to another person – whoever it may be, the more unknown stranger the easier it can be done – can give them hope, a chance for redemption and leaving this guilt behind them. Sharing a burden reduces the pressure. And as we follow these people, we will see how some relations terminate because of total loss of communication, while others appear and develop once the shell softens.

There are no breathtaking performances in the movie, but all the actors made a good job. Personally, I find Dominic Chianese a bit above the others, but it was a most interesting character so the role offered more chances, more challenges. The unobtrusive music was well aligned to beautiful photography, camera loved both the actors and the city.

This movie gave us a picture of some other New York than we usually see, and a completely different picture of American movies than we are used to watch.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A wonderful film that stays with you
theyounglion26 January 2007
Warning: Spoilers
"Adrift in Manhattan" tells three intertwining tales of life along Manhattan's 1 subway line. (The film was originally called "1/9," but was probably changed due to the 9 recently being discontinued.) The first concerns an optometrist (Heather Graham) haunted by the death of her child and no longer able to make a connection to anyone, including her estranged husband (William Baldwin). The second deals with a teenager (Victor Rasuk) with a disturbing home life who can only relate to the world through a camera lens. The third deals with an elderly painter (Dominic Chianese, best known for playing Uncle Junior on "The Sopranos") rapidly losing his eyesight as he discovers love with a younger woman (Elizabeth Pena).

I don't give this film a 10 rating lightly...I don't gratuitously hand out the highest ratings to films. But I loved this movie, and I love movies like this: character-driven dramas with solid plots in which the featured players take interesting, unexpected paths. "Adrift in Manhattan" is filled with great characters who could each be the single focus of a film. It's to the credit of director Alfredo de Villa that he manages to fit them all within the confines of this roughly 90 minute movie in such a satisfying manner.

The acting is excellent. Heather Graham gives a carefully nuanced performance that should serve to remind people she can be a great actress when working with solid material and a skilled director. William Baldwin is a revelation. Here you realize the magnitude of his potential, and how he is not "just one of the Baldwin brothers." Victor Rasuk manages to be both creepy and sympathetic, and it's a credit to his talent that you wind up rooting for him more than anyone else. Dominic Chianese gives a heartbreaking performance, and proves to be an actor of great depth. Anyone expecting to see traces of Uncle Junior will be surprised. It makes one hope he stays with us a long, long time so that we can see the full realization of his talents now that the spotlight is on him and he's better able to get good roles like this. I could go on and on about the stand-out performance by Elizabeth Pena, but time is limited.

There's a raw, leave-nothing-to-the-imagination sex scene between Graham and a certain character (trying not to divulge any serious spoilers here) that is not only surprising (given how, when Graham shot it, there were very high hopes for her ABC sitcom and for her becoming a network prime time queen), but cathartic and wholly satisfying in terms of character arc. It is shocking and unexpected when it comes, but makes perfect sense when you realize the film has been building up to it.

Best of all about "Adrift in Manhattan," de Villa effortlessly presents a New York City vibrant in all of its diverse glory, not only in terms of race, but age, class, mental stability, aspirations, and broken dreams...the way the city truly is. This isn't the fake, lifeless, Midwest fantasy New York you find in "Friends," "Sex and the City," "The Devil Wears Prada," and most sitcoms and movies of the last several years. This is the real New York as presented through the gaze of narrative film.

Travel along the 1 train in Manhattan and you'll find a million stories, with each one leading to a million others. (A real life, non-virtual MySpace network.) De Villa and co-writer Nat Moss take three interconnecting ones, and the result is an amazing film that not only provides an ideal showcase for the actors involved, but also serves notice to the film-making community that a talented director has arrived. Let's hope some studio or mini-major pays attention.
20 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Great movie
vzeov44 February 2007
I often get annoyed at movies like this, where you get too many character threads interweaving. These types of films tend to spend too little time on the characters, and thus have to rely on superficial plot twists and clichéd conflicts. I put Crash and Babel in these categories. Both enjoyable enough films, but they fail at their core because they focus too much on the events that the characters face, rather than their response to them.

Enter "Adrift in Manhattan." The ambition here is less than a Crash or Babel -- it's not trying to explain the modern angst of society or draw global interconnectedness links -- but rather to simply explore the lives of a small group of characters in a one city whose lives happen to intersect. As a result, we get to really know them, see what's driving them (shockingly, through their acting and the filming, and not uninteresting plot twists -- most of the intense events that drive them all took place prior to the film), and then watch how it unfolds. There are no neat plot resolutions. Rather, the characters are left with their lives, but hopefully with a more evolved sense of where they fit in it, and how to take control of it. For me, this is great storytelling and a perfect kind of character-based film.

In addition, nearly all of the performances are exceptional. Heather Graham seems to have pushed herself in a completely different direction from her typical fare. Anyone who thought she was just fit for light-hearted role (and I include myself in that group) is in for a remarkable surprise. Her character is grieving heavily, but Graham never overdoes it. Instead, she lets the grief speak for itself, and the result is undeniably moving. Ditto for a handful of moments that are truly hysterical. It's a revelation to see her play a comedic moment in a drama without laying it on. Similarly Victor Rasuk is exceptional, particularly given the dearth of actual lines he has. His eyes, his posture, and his hesitancy give his character the depth that it needs. He's a completely different character from the one we saw in Raising Victor Vargas. Withdrawn, shy, insecure... and yet, his camera convincingly and effectively draws him out of that. And perhaps the sweetest storyline is that of Dominic Chianese and Elizabeth Pena, whose tentative romance is one of the most tender I've ever seen on film.

This movie is an honest 10. Everything in it is earned. The script is very strong, and not overpowering or contrived at any point. The cinematography is beautiful, and really catches the flavor of a real and gritty Manhattan. And finally the direction is superb. Given the tightness of the script, the movie has to rely on shooting to really show us the characters and what they are feeling. And it does so exceptionally. I recommend it unequivocally to anyone who enjoys a very well crafted character-based drama.
27 out of 56 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
an unknown pleasure
cekadah28 April 2013
i had never heard of this movie so i usually go for the unknowns as it will be wonderful or just awful. i lucked out because this movie is delightful in every way!! and i cannot state that enough!

the director - Alfredo De Villa & the writers have brought to the screen a story that gets beneath the often hard shell we surround ourselves with on a daily basis. everybody has problems and issues and desires that can fog our daily lives. and this story brings three people (unknowingly) together that make a difference in each of their lives.

i will not get into the details of this movie because discovering them for yourself is part of the pleasure in watching these three discovering parts of their own life (does that make sense).

by all means make this flick a quest in your movie watching!!!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Covering your pant hole with a black pen for a night out at the opera...brilliant
estherchae3 March 2007
The director's deftness in quietus and deep story telling was truly moving in this movie. I believed and was heart felt by all the character's love connections and especially the beautiful love story between older couple Tommaso and Isabel really killed me... The Oeudipal relationship the son has wih his mother was totally believable as well.

It is a NY movie and thank god for it. That kind of intersecting of lives with a voyeurisitc view. In the Big City that never stops. To love, to die, to suffer, to think, to live. I am now totally obsessed with this Mexican American director Alfredo de Villa and look forward to this next movie. Just saw his other Sundnace movie Washington Heights and again the torn artist should was caputured beautifully and more importantly- wamrly. Vivre la indie film and excellent job!
14 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Great characters finding their way-- Warning spoiler
neebanne31 January 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Enjoyed the film very much. The three main characters each have issues to deal with and are a bit trapped in themselves. The young man is so inhibited, you can practically feel the pressure in him about to explode. The old man is facing new horizons and is afraid of what that will bring. And the doctor is consumed with grief. The way the movie threads the lives of these 3 ordinary characters is done beautifully. Without knowing each characters intentions we see how our actions, great or small, affect others. My only complaint is it took a while to figure out what problem the Doctor was having, and there was not much information provided as to how the child died. As to the old man, the scene where he is drawing is incredible. His story unfolds quickly and the woman he works with does a great job in reaching out to him. The young man is a more complicated story. There is little to go on in trying to figure him out. His mother is overbearing, and a little "too close" to him. Yet, that is about all we can tell, except that he likes to take pictures. His inability to communicate clearly with anyone creates an enormous amount of tension, and the sex scene with him and the Doctor finally breaks down his wall. Beautifully produced. Would recommend. On a purely technical note, I occasionally found the sound track not consistent, and would have to raise and lower the volume on the remote. ( This could be due to my TV or the actual copy that Hulu is transmitting).
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Hidden Gem
abvinson-9965816 September 2019
I found this DVD at my local library, going out of rotation. Never heard of it, but I'm a fan of the late Elizabeth Pena, so borrowed it. For some reason I assumed it was about drug dealers (?) so was delightfully surprised when I had a lovely, smiling feeling at the end. Well done study of 3 lonely NYC dwellers.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed