orson-13 Patrick Wilson seems born to these sensitive professional male roles that require a rethinking of the smooth path the character is on. Director Tracey Hecht has a firm hand on an interesting and large cast and her script meshes the characters deftly,creating some drama without knocking heads. The film is realistically and interestingly placed within the world of architectural design and construction while at the same time offering an older New York office milieu kind of story. Without being cliché wealthy types, the main characters are likable genteel professionals on the way up, but reconsidering some avenues of personal and professional fulfillment. Amy Smart is charming, Wilson spot on, and Lynn Collins solid. Cinematography is excellent as are sets and locations. It's a truly unpretentious film and so may not be exciting enough for some.

dansview This was a particular demographic that you don't always see in a New York-based film.I don't think any of these people are native to the city. They are white, educated, and urban, but no one in the group of friends is Jewish, Italian, identifiably Irish, Gay, or over-the-top Liberal. This is in contrast to the Sydney Pollack, Woody Allen, Ed Burns type of N.Y. based relationship picture.Also, they don't fit the "yuppie" stereotype entirely, because they are architects and radio station personnel, as opposed to lawyers,doctors, stock brokers, fashion editors, and art gallery owners.The difference being that architects actually create something of lasting value, rather than fix, sell, or trade something. Radio guys are non-traditional professionals, by virtue of the underdog nature of their medium.You see a view of N.Y. devoid of urban squalor, violence, dirty snow, rude people, profanity, sirens, homeless, and dilapidated housing. These characters live in neighborhoods with upscale brownstones and funky gentrified apartments. They frequent rooftop coffee hangouts, and homey diners with lovable old waitresses.Our main character takes cabs, and doesn't have to sit on some dingy subway. The female lead enters a subway staircase, but we don't see the grim reality of her ride. So you come away thinking that you can live in New York and be oblivious to thugs, foreigners, crime, etc. Maybe some can.Waking up with morning breath, a stressed wife, and loads of responsibility isn't too sexy, as we see clearly in the opening scene. Being a grown up can be a real drag.I love the male lead. He's trying so earnestly to hold it all together, and you get the sense that he really cares about the work. He's a stoic Anglo who is good with technical stuff and short on expression, but he gets things done. We need those types. (not the type you normally associate with N.Y. either.) I love his facial expressions as we see him contemplating new concepts.Introducing a blissfully compatible designer couple was a beautiful way to show our character what it can be like to have a lover who shares your outlook and interests. You can tell that he's taking it in and admiring them. Nicely played small roles for that couple. Bravo. Very natural. I totally believed them.There's an old 70s song that goes: "Oh it's sad to belong to someone else, when the right one comes along." Hey, I support people toughing-it-out when marriage hits a rocky point. I agree with the other reviewers on this point, but sometimes people have irreconcilable differences.My favorite scene is where the female lead finally breaks down and shares her true sadness. Remember, we hear early on that she had a wrenching breakup just a year ago, and at 30 or so, she is starting to feel fragile. I loved the emotional honesty of this scene. Well played, lady.This script also gave supporting characters a chance to shine and add some real flavor, even though the picture centered on two refined people. The guy's best friend was spunky and caring. The girl's brother was funky and deadpan.I didn't think the birds-in-flight metaphor was trite. I loved it. Or maybe you simply see it as a way to show that this woman appreciated nature and the subtle pleasures of life, and had the ability to wake up this very busy man. Watch his face when she first tells him about the birds, and then later when he watches them the first and second times.Stop assuming that they are going to sleep together while he is separated. Maybe not. Just because they went out for a drink, does not mean that they were going to go overboard before a divorce. You cynics are expecting the worst, but there's no reason to believe that either of these people are the type to take adultery or divorce lightly.This movie does not slam you over the head with any points. "Wall Street" did and Devil Wears Prada played on New York stereotypes.It's a simple portrayal of real people, real problems, subtle moments, and the often confusing moral, social, and strategic dilemmas we all face. Beautiful photography.

marvinbluth It was great seeing the locations around NYC, but it was a seriously boring, going nowhere, total disaster of a movie.How the talented cast said the words, deserves some appreciation, but the film said nothing, and never had an iota of cleverness, or humor.It seemed more like a film school project, then an actual film.How Patrick Wilson and Amy Smart got to star in this, is a bigger mystery and more thought-provoking then the actual movie.Anyone who grew up in NYC, and has been away for a while, might be able to enjoy the various places the film was shot, but, there's many better films to watch.

eggboy Saw this at Tribeca Film Festival and was surprised by the wretched writing. The cast is professional, and the photography, set and production design are all first class. The problem is a script that presents a somewhat dopey male lead, an unredeemable monster (b*tch) of a wife, and a seven-year-itch scenario.The result is good actors reciting bad lines in overwrought scenes. We bought these tickets expecting that a cast including Patrick Wilson, Amy Smart and several other fine actors would deliver a good result. Tied to that script, they couldn't stay afloat.The movie inspires me to create a new rule for young filmmakers: don't write a script with an architect as your main character, unless you are remaking "The Fountainhead." And don't remake "The Fountainhead."