| Harvard Man | | Cast : | Adrian Grenier, Sarah Michelle Gellar | | Director : | James Toback | | Studio : | Lions Gate Home Entertainment | | Format : | Color, Widescreen | | Released Date : | January 01, 2001 | | DVD Released Date : | October 29, 2002 | | Language : | English (Dubbed), English (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled) | | Audience Rating : | R (Restricted) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON |
Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | August 20, 2005 | | Summary | Unexpected appraisal for this film's intelligence ! | Content
 | Like most viewers -I suppose- I initially felt curious about the film because of Sarah Michelle Gellar; yet how much more I got, than just SMG- for this film wasn't, first and foremost, all about sexy good looks...
The film's casting is extremely well thought out: both Adrian Grenier (as green "Harvard Boy") and Joey Lauren Adams (as cool, sophisticated philosophy teacher) carry off their respective roles with tremendous talent. What's more, I couldn't find in it one single actor or actress who wasn't EXACTLY what the film needed.
So- superb casting. Adrian Grenier is good precisely for he's such 'your ordinary young Harvard guy'- and Adams, for she's the typecast epitome of sexy, hot and -at first sight- glib coolness. Yet as the film evolves, Adams, especially, turns out to be much more than that- her glibness hiding wisdom far beyond her years (it may well be that Adams' performance was the best among all these -here, very talented- actors/actresses).
Gellar's part, surprisingly, is not a central one. Yet she carries off her Daddy's girl bitchiness, and callous sex appeal, with flying colours (this is probably the film where, to this day, her acting's by far the best- nothing to do with her poor performances in the two "Scooby Doo"-es, or even in the record- breaking [??] "The Grudge"). Rebecca Gayheart and Eric Stoltz (as the two FBI agents, and pretty unhealthy sex-seekers) are perfectly chosen, their acting both cool and convincing, their persona tortuously screwed-up. One special mention I'd give to Giani Russo, as Gellar's maffioso Daddy (strangely enough, Russo's not even credited on the DVD's cover, nor its back- a shame!).
The plot is good; is clever; is full of unexpected twists and turns; and yet, is not at all your average 'crime-thriller', bland all-American product (as easy to watch as it is to forget...).
I shan't go here into the storyline. I'll just say it's sharp; intellectually challengng; affording us plenty of food for thought. Toback's depicting of the developing of a drug addiction is blunt and factual- all the more effective in all that it hints at, rather than it would have, if it'd explicitly and darkly "accused".
So- after such high praise, why do I give this movie ONLY 3 STARS???
For two reasons (two important factors, when one's watching a film):
- first, a very disorganised (and often annoying) soundtrack: practically all of the pop sound's good, but... the Bach, good heavens! What's it meant to say- express- CONVEY? Sophistication? Some sort of 'Classicist' seriousness? One can't even seek 'period piece' echoing, since J.S. Bach's German 18th Century stern beauty can be no counterpoint whatsoever to Soeren Kierkegaard's tortured Danish 19th pre-Existentialism; nor to Ludwig Wittgenstein's maverick approach, in his search for meaning in language.
So- the music IS a misfire.
- second, and also extremely difficult to digest: COLOUR!!! Who on earth may have thought up that drab, dirty brown photography? Did the film, when shown at the movies, show the same tasteless colours? Or -more prosaically- did something go wrong in the developing process??? One couldn't think of much worse than this brownish, teal-ish Technicolor mess.
However, attempting to tie up all strings: on the whole, this is a VERY satisfying, sharp, intelligent film, with superb acting, close-to-perfect script and dialogue, and no maudlin soppiness- in fact, definitely a film I'd recommend to all viewers who -in spite of the annoying Bach soundtrack, and the close-to-nauseating colour scheme, at least in its DVD form- like to THINK OVER a film, after seeing it; REFLECTING on what they've seen, as they run the movie in their heads again. And, yes, this is a film I'd suggest that 'intellectually curious and active' people have at home, so they can view it again when they feel like it. For this film, I think, grows on you; and requires much thought, and 'finesse'. |
| Rating | | | Date | August 16, 2005 | | Summary | I CAN'T LET YOU GO... | Content
| So if you're reading this then you're digging
deep enough to deserve a short cut to finding
the first song at the opening of this ambitious
James Toback Overture. The band is called "LOVE CANDY"
And the tune is "I can't let you go".
If you mix in some J.S. Bach CD's you'll be able to
mimic the protagonist neophyte's reality. Just assume
you can have someone that resembles Sarah Michelle Gellar
with you at the time.
To Quote Chesney: "Fear is a managable emotion...Dread, by
contrast is the feeling of terror without any concrete cause"
Enjoy the VOID.... |
| Rating | | | Date | August 08, 2005 | | Summary | call me crazy | Content
| I actually liked this movie. Initially, the cheesy DVD cover and the creepy-looking leading man grabbed my attention. Honestly, I only decided to watch this movie for the enjoyment of a good laugh. Yes, I do admit to being a Buffy the Vampire Slayer fan, but not an obsessed fan of Sarah Michelle Gellar. (Xander is more my style.) All of Sarah's movie choices seem to be hit and miss outside the realm of Joss Whedon. However, I've never attempted to pursue any kind of acting career, so who am I to judge?
This movie is fragmented yet well constructed. It definitely moves fast and keeps your mind active. The LSD trip does completely remove you from the plot and you can't help but giggle at the distorted faces. Then the non-stop voices do become extremely annoying. When the voices disappear the plot reappears yet now seems unimportant. I found this fascinating.
So, I immediately watched it again.
The second time through, I got it. The ride the movie takes us on is extremely artistic in nature. All the scenes going on at once completely reflects "life". Even the editing jumps in the film reflect the scenes of life as we see it. When our eyes move from one place to another, the space in between DOES jump! Think about it. It completely makes sense to me! The key to understanding focuses upon the dialogue of that cheesy-grinning character, the Philosophy Professor. Pay attention. Through her lectures, she describes "insanity" and the curiousity surrounding it and crossing over into it. She is the one who explains what the entire movie is about. Not Sarah. Not the creepy-looking guy. The professor.
Although the movie requires much deep thinking and reflection, it's really genius because of that. The viewer is innocently lead into a scary situation more powerful than being chased by the FBI or organized crime. The one thing that surpasses fear: insanity.
So all you artistic/philosophical thinkers out there, definitely watch this movie. But remember, you must watch it more than once and listen to the professor. |
| Rating | | | Date | April 10, 2005 | | Summary | Made me so nostalgic | Content
| This fine film made me feel so nostalgic for my own days as a Harvard undergraduate. Yes, it's true. Smith T. Aames graduated from Harvard University. Given my big heart and love for both dogs and intercourse, many people do not believe this to be possible. "But," they sputter, "Harvardians hate all living creatures and therefore cannot physically reproduce!" I defy your expectations by breaking from this stereotype.
That said, Harvard Man hit too close to home for me. For I too was immediately involved in a sexual affair with a philosophy professor at Harvard. See, many of the faculty at Harvard are young and nubile women eager for a piece of the brilliant male undergraduates. It makes perfect sense. In order to be a professor, you need a PhD, a degree which takes upwards of four years to earn. Many people also take a break between college and graduate school to gain career experience, although philosophers probably don't do this very often. So what this means is that your new faculty members are often 27, 28, 29 years old, and probably haven't gotten any undergraduate *ss in about six years. And we all know that older, more educated women love nothing so much as younger, less educated men who may or may not be completely sexually inexperienced. Harvard has so many young beautiful female professors sleeping with students, it's practically an epidemic.
Also an epidemic? Obsession with the Harvard Dartmouth basketball game. When I was an undergraduate, it was all we could do to stop talking even briefly about this incredible match between the two ultimate Ivy talents. You may be saying, "Wait. I thought Harvard's big rivalry was with Yale, and that is mostly in football, and that people at Harvard don't care about basketball too much? Except women's basketball because that team is actually very excellent?" And I would reply, "You are wrong. Watch Harvard Man." I think the truth is that Harvard kids are jealous of people from Dartmouth. We had to live in close proximity to a big city with lots of cultural opportunities while they got to get smashed every weekend in the woods whilst participating in homoerotic fraternity rituals. Poor us.
The final thing that of course brought my Harvard experience back home to me was the Sarah Michelle Gellar character. I was so impressed by her wealth! I remember feeling poor and inadequate at Harvard because all of my classmates would literally eat with silver spoons, except for the ones wealthy enough to eat with platinum. They would bring little carrying cases to meals and use their own personal precious spoons to eat. The case also contained personal coke spoons, but that is neither here nor there. Also, it is well known that most Harvard students live off campus because they are so wealthy and it's not like Harvard has nice dormitory accomodations or anything. I mean, the people who wrote and produced Harvard Man definitely did their homework on this one and weren't fooled into thinking that 98% of Harvard students live on campus for the entire duration of their undergraduate careers. Kudos to Harvard Man for using the Sarah Michelle Gellar character to epitomize what it means to be from Harvard. The protagonist also reminded me very much of me, with his abject poverty. He came from Kansas--KANSAS!!--where a tornado destroyed his home, forcing his family to live in a high school gym. This is so much like the plight of the Aames family that it's totally ridiculous. It also reminds me about how Harvard students are incredibly heartless. I know that if a Harvard student were actually struck by that kind of hardship, that no one would take up a campus wide collection for the family, nor would anyone organize a food and clothing drive for the affected people. Harvard students are many things, but activists they are not.
I would have given this movie more than two stars except the heavy nostalgia of watching other Harvard students made me weep with sadness for bygone days. I'm off to take some posh prescription narcotics given to me by a wealthy fellow alum, whose goals include keeping me high and happy. |
| Rating | | | Date | January 13, 2005 | | Summary | great | Content
| Sarah michelle gellar was great in the movie! but dont see it if u dont like smg |
|
|
|
|
