siderite It involves romance between romantically experienced people. They are intelligent, articulated, educated and their greatest concerns are more complex than just "getting together". They are above 35, they have children and past baggage, complicated lives and still they crave love, like any other primate.Ian Holm is the spice of the movie. I would venture to say that without him the entire thing would have been a fiasco. It's not that the other actors don't act well, but their roles are so bland and uninteresting. Even the obvious intelligence of the lead male character has only an intellectual academic form and the emotional chemistry is rather poorly expressed.Overall it is above the average romcom, but average towards weak in its category. Since the target audience is older educated people, it should have had more spunk and a lot more brains.

Richard_vmt I grabbed this off the shelf without much thought but was generally pleased with it as a selection. It is the story of a single Manhattan high school teacher who is in psychotherapy. The film makes good use of fantasy by startling us with imaginary interventions by his extraordinarily aggressive and ribald therapist at dramatic junctures during his day. While the leading character, Jake, has experienced a romantic disappointment in an earlier relationship, the main thrust of his therapy seems directed at a battle against mediocrity. Apparently, acareer as a high school teacher does not count as success. Apparently also, the elderly therapist considers a year without sex a major red flag. Apart from these shortcomings, Jake seems to conduct himself cautiously but extremely well, leaving me wondering about the correctness of his mediocrity.This film does a good job of representing older people, for example the therapist and Jake's father, as well as others, as something else besides useless. Here they are accepted enough to assert themselves, their intelligence is respected and occasionally heeded.The plot held my attention through its twists and turns. Two points I felt were a lapse into hackneyed stereotypes involved the feminism of his lover, Allegra. To begin with, she initiates the first sex (even though things seemed to be proceeding along nicely) and routinely assumes the aggressive role after that as well. I questioned whether this would really be cool in real life. I suppose this could be taken as the otherwise lacking evidence of his neurosis by accepting it except that it is all her actions.Secondly, after they have had frequent and mutually gratifying sex, get along great, he well on his way to being accepted by her two children, and to cap it all off she is about to lose custody of her young daughter because the adoption stipulated a two-parent household-- with all this in play she rejects his heartfelt proposal of marriage because she is 'not ready' just a year after becoming a widow. These two facts might suggest that she, a rich woman, was using him as a convenience. However, the rest of her character as portrayed does not support that at all. Instead the flick is merely waving a PC flag of liberated woman-- even when it is absurd-- to garner brownie points. Ultimately however, all such complexity of living is suddenly swept away in a traditional happily-ever-after romantic ending--but one so hasty that I definitely felt they were running out of film. I don't want to sound like I would entirely re-engineer the film, but I definitely felt it was going somewhere else. But these are lapses in authenticity in a film notable for authenticity. It is an engaging and often quite funny flick.

kingyhtd the trailers for "The Treatment" were kinda crappy but the movie is something else entirely this is a movie that is much better than its trailer suggest it's Light hearted and funny with a lot of substance it isn't at all cheesy or dark . the acting is truly amazing we have three unmatchable leading actors Chris Eigeman ,Ian Holm and Famke Janssen all three give some of their best work here..the movie is smart and funny and the ending leaves the Dr Morales bit open is he real or just a figment of Chris Eigeman's imagination? watch this one in theatres fans of any Famke , Ian and Chris will not be disappointed no matter how high their expectations.

The Visitor Each to his own, but I'm really surprised at the review above.I also saw this in Edinburgh (it's where I live, and incidentally the Edinburgh Film Festival was the best ever this year for me).The film I saw was cute, funny and unpredictable. There are some lovely unexpected moments. Without giving too much away... it's a relief to see a script dispense with the old "lie piled upon lie" cliché and instead have characters who decide to live up to their responsibilities. If you thought you would never get to see a New York intellectuals film in which grown-ups behave like grown-ups for once - well, here's your chance.There are also some great lines. It's impossible not to smile at Ian Holm's vaguely monomaniacal therapist intoning, in his Argentinian accent, "once you start driving ass-backward through life, it can be very hard to stop. And you realise too late that the major decisions in your life are lying in the road like so many crushed squirrels." This is possibly my favourite therapist quote since Ingrid Bergman was told in Spellbound to have "sweet dreams - and tomorrow we will analyse them over breakfast." Ian Holm makes the part work perfectly because he doesn't overdo it.You end up feeling affection for both the therapist and his client, even though they are at odds. This is one of the film's best qualities. Secondary characters get a chance to develop, so for instance the father is not just an old tartar and the mother-in-law not just a disapproving snoop. What's most evident in this film is the writer's sympathy for almost every character, so that whether or not they are redeemed, you find yourself seeing their point of view, if just in momentary flashes. I loved this.Meanwhile, Famke Janssen gets a rare chance to act, and lives up to it.The sweet thing about this film is that it isn't slavishly Woody Allen, or pointedly anti-Woody Allen either. It plays as if Woody Allen never existed. This means that there are no weary inevitabilities. Anything might happen (and frequently doesn't, because something else intriguing happens instead).It doesn't all work, but I've only got minor gripes. Overall, it could have done with being just a little longer, to make some of the secondary relationships more convincing. But erring on the side of keeping it short was probably the smarter mistake to make.If you get a chance to see this, go. Decide for yourself which review gets it right.