moonspinner55 It can't possibly do Albert Brooks' ego any good to know that he co-wrote, directed and stars in such a limp comedy as "The Muse" which, looking back, might be pinpointed as a stalling-point in his career (actresses Sharon Stone and Andie MacDowell don't come out of it unscathed, either). Mystery-neurotic (and movie-kooky) lady seems to bring good luck to a blocked Hollywood screenwriter. She claims she's a descendant of Zeus; he doesn't care as long as he can sell his next script. Having never found her footing once she became a star, Stone made it an unfortunate habit of churning out a string of big-budget movies that were artistically no better than the B-grade, direct-to-video titles she started out in. "The Muse" is a step backward for all concerned, an immature, minor offering from a man who used to know the difference between silly-smart and smarmy. *1/2 from ****

leplatypus For a hard of hearing french, watching an American movie without subtitle is "mission impossible". I don't understand what people say, so it's like everybody is mute. So, have laughs: here's my debriefing of what I have understood: Mr Brooks is a famous director (or writer?) who gets fired by a studio! Why? I don't know. Desperate, he believes to have an appointment with Spielberg but meets another one. Hopefully, the real Bridges gives him help with the address of his muse. If this muse brings inspiration, she needs a lot of things and attention. He works about of script about fish but it's her wife that benefits much, becoming a successful cookie maker. What does the muse says exactly: I don't know.If the dialogs were hard to follow, the music wasn't and for a Elton John composition, it is really surprising good. But it is used to fill the walks or car errands! Finally, it's a pity to understand so little because it seems to be a good comedy about Hollywood. The cameos are funny even if I think that making a movie about movie lacks of inspiration! Where is the muse?

Marco Trevisiol I remember going to the cinema to see this film back in 2000, being mildly entertained but underwhelmed by the end result, especially coming from someone who made one of the best comedies of the 1980s in 'Lost in America'.I had the chance to watch it again on cable today, and if anything, I was even less impressed with it the second time around. This is an occasionally amusing but generally uninspired and sometimes even dreary film. Its main downfall is that Brooks (as both actor, writer and director), has nothing new to say, and is still relying on the same stale old persona and situations that he used much more effectively back in 1985.There are some saving graces in the film: Sharon Stone is excellent in a tricky role, she avoids the easy trap of playing her role for laughs and in light of the revelation about her character at the end, her performance rings true.And the ending - where we learn that Stone isn't a muse but actually a person with mental issues who has been based in a sanitoraium - is an apt comment on the gullibility of Hollywood types who are so distanced from reality that they would actually seriously believe she was a muse. Jeff Bridges is also fine in his small role.Having said that, up until that revelation this is a very toothless satire on Hollywood. Brooks' character is also hard to take. He's doing his usual whiny persona but there's nothing in this film to suggest he has anything to whine about.Also, Andie McDowell fails to make much of an impression with her character. She's not helped by the relationship between her and Brooks being weakly written and not adding up to much.Probably most disappointing is how weak it is as a comedy. As an earlier reviewer noted, the scene where Brooks (as a punchline) ends up with a Waldorf salad all over his face is a very lazy and sitcomish moment that one expected Brooks had the talent to avoid. Another sign that the passion and purpose is ebbing away in his work.Another weak comic moment is towards the end where the Doctor and Nurse visibly crack up when they learn Brooks/MacDowell seriously believed that Stone was a muse. It's another lazy, unrealistic 'sitcom' attempt at humour - it's just not believable that a doctor would behave in such a manner. Something more subtle was required to be effective.While an OK timepasser, in the context of Brooks career trajectory this was a dispiriting disappointment.

triple8 SPOILERS THROUGH: The Muse is an odd sort of comedy, definitely not your run of the mill typical Hollywood comedy. I thought it was OK. They took an unusual premise and made a movie about it, with big name stars. It had some genuinely funny moments and the premise was a good one.The Muse is a likable movie in a lot of ways but does suffer from very slow pacing. There are some really funny moments but also moments when the movie tries to hard. The cast for the most part was good. But I was a bit baffled by the casting of Stone as the muse.The main thing about This movie: The Muse is that, for a movie with such a whimsical storyline, it lacked a certain fanciful quality. I'd have liked this to be more of a fairytale and in that regard, it was hard for me to see stone in the part of Muse. Not because she isn't talented or beautiful which she is, but because she is very intense and there's an edge to her. I'd have liked to see someone softer, more delicate in the role. Likewise, Andy McDowell seems miscast as the wife. I think it would have been better if Andy had played the Muse. She does have a more ethereal quality then Stone. The Muse could have been such a whimsical movie but I did feel the female casting was off even though the movie is above average in general. I'd rate this a 6.5 of 10.