Based on a Nicholas Sparks novel, and directed by Nick Cassavetes, this love story stars James Garner, Gena Rowlands and Joan Allen opposite young stars Ryan Gosling and Rachel McAdams. The reading of a notebook reveals the story of a young woman who is courted by two handsome men during World War II. [TRAILER]

STEVEN SNYDER'S REVIEW

It's a curious thing, really: The only shortcoming of "The Notebook - " the only flaw inhibiting this simple, heart-warming romance - is that damned notebook.

Its inclusion likely stems from its source material: Nicholas Sparks’ popular1996 novel (which I am not familiar with). It resides in a nursing home, and is read by an elderly man (James Garner) to an Alzheimer-afflicted woman (Gena Rowlands), who does not know him although he seems vaguely familiar. She enjoys the yarn immensely, and as he begins each new chapter the film reverts to a visualization of the story, set in the South in the early ‘40’s.

  This second story is a familiar one of young, passionate love threatened by unapproving families, social class, and distance. Noah (Ryan Gosling) is a sweet, genuine, but poor blue collar worker, who dreams one day of renovating an abandoned plantation down the street. Allie (Rachel McAdams) is a daughter to an upper-class family, about to leave for college.

  Naturally, Allie's family does not feel that Noah is "worthy" of their daughter or lifestyle, and they rush her college departure to separate the two. She does not have time to say goodbye, her mother does not give her the letters the heart-broken Noah sends in vain, and soon he has joined the army and heads overseas. As the years go by Noah thinks of Allie every day, just as Allie gets engaged to another man, and they reunite only years later due to a most unlikely coincidence  

  In many regards, it is a tale as old as time. But its lack of originality is more than made up for by the story's patience, sincerity, and the vivid chemistry of leads Gosling and McAdams. I have decried so many recent romances for failing to believably portray people in love. The thrill of seeing "The Notebook" is to see a film take its time in first establishing its characters, their emotions and rationales before injecting conflict and uncertainty. 

We genuinely believe that Noah and Allie are in love, and this carries more weight than some might admit. McAdams, in a very challenging role that demands swings in emotions from a girl confused about love and life, perfectly paces her performance, slowly and skeptically allowing Noah into her heart. And Gosling plays Noah close to his chest, saying little but allowing slivers of emotion to radiate through the facade. He is a boy who pretends to be unfazed by romance, but has fallen passionately for the love of his life.  

  Director Nick Cassavetes (“John Q”) strengthens their chemistry by never allowing his film to cheat. The most dramatic moments in the film are, appropriately, the couple's few, life-altering decisions. Their reunions are kinetic with a realistic uncertainty and spontaneity. Above all, their love exists as sincere affection, free of the lust or naivete that suffocates so many contrived romances.

  And refreshingly, the film deals with the physical side of love in equal proportion to the mind and heart. Noah and Allie are not sex-obsessed teenagers, scholars or poets, but believable, three-dimensional people who more than once find themselves unsure of what to do. They do not dictate the story, but react to it.

  For all these reasons, we don't need to constantly return to the notebook or the nursing home. In fact, using this flashback structure as a crutch actually distracts and removes us from Noah and Allie’s moving story, diluting their romance with sporadic shifts in time and place. As a result the film’s biggest twist, which relies heavily on this structure, feels glaringly out of place and manufactured.

MOVIE WEB PAGE

IMDB WEB PAGE

MOVIE REVIEW QUERY ENGINE

Showtimes

DAVID JOHNSON'S REVIEW

The premise, and certainly the entire story behind "The Notebook" is entirely a cliché. It’s a film that has been made a million times, and I’m sure will be again.

It can be summed up in a few short events. Boy meets girl, boy and girl fall in love, difficulty keeps them apart and girl leaves. Then girl finds a different, but not quite as good guy and we spend the rest of the film waiting for them to get together again.

Certainly I, of all people, came into this film expecting to absolutely hate it. I was already upset by the use of the soundtrack from The Cider House Rules and assumed it simply was a complete rip off of that film. To worsen things, I was seeing the film with the general public in a crowded and teenager-ridden theatre. I usually deliberately attend shows at unpopular times, just so that I can avoid these people.

And I must admit, the movie did not start horribly well. The previews for "Princess Bride," something-or-other simply reminded me of how far into the depths of the Hollywood collective fecal matter Julie Andrews has fallen.

Then came the opening sequence and I about lost it; the audience settled into a nice intellectual malaise of ducks flying at sunset and I just about up and left. Yet I stayed, and somehow near film's end I was impressed that I actually I was watching a real film. Artistic, yes. Art, no. But it was certainly something that managed to keep my interest for the entire two hour period.

The real question we need to be asking ourselves is : What makes a formulaic and unoriginal love story so compelling and interesting.

The process comes in a few steps.

First, the film has to convince you to completely turn off your brain. The film must essentially tap directly into that irrational part of you that wants ever so badly for that one great lost love to walk into your life, get caught in an oh-so-sexy thunderstorm and make passionate love to you on the stairs leading up to your bedroom (and of course end it lying in front of the fireplace).
Then the film has to convince you that even though you genuinely know how the films going to end up, you still have your ‘doubts.’

Lastly, and possibly most importantly, the film must convince you that the two people Love each other. You must feel some connection to these two lovers.

Most films utterly fail at this third step. They often simply place two Hollywood stars next to each other, speak the magical words "I love you," and suddenly they are in love. Of course we all know that doesn’t hold true in real life. Simply speaking the words doesn’t make them true and just because your cast is attractive doesn’t make them suitable to fall in Love.

To Rachael McAdams and Ryan Gosling’s credit they are not only an incredibly attractive couple, but one that genuinely seems to be in Love. They act in ways around each other that make you believe they really are.

There is something about the way these two talk, look and act towards each other that makes you believe in them. They seem so comfortable and honest without any pretense that they seem real.

The film also chooses to not make all its issues black-and-white. When Allie falls for the infamous "lesser guy," he isn’t a jerk, but someone she could indeed love. When they part ways, the scene is not primarily simply them crying forever and forever. Their emotions are complex and contain the full range from anger to love.

The film attempts at times to make some subtle commentary on class, but it is largely undeveloped and included more simply to create a sense of period than anything else.
Luckily this sense of period is not used as a subversive attach undeserved acclaim to the film. Instead, the placement of this film in a specific period provides an appropriate and quite stunning background for the films characters.

This film is not without its glaring mistakes though. I personally found the entire ending confusing. A randomly inserted one- minute scene left me wondering what was really going on. Strangely enough, it was the believability of this scene that left me so confused. Near the end, the film had succeeded so well in convincing me that I didn’t really know what was going to happen, that when the unexpected did, I believed it

This moment instantly snapped my intellectual brain into motion and very quickly ruined the film. Suddenly there were so many questions that I could hardly stand to finish the film.

Luckily, this scene occurs after the events in the past are finished unfolding and it didn’t ruin these scenes. In fact, most of the glaring errors in this film occurred in the sections which are supposed to occur in the modern day, with these lovers modern day counterparts.

First, there is the slow motion ducks. I cannot stress enough how inappropriate slow motion ducks, doves, falcons or for that matter any flying animal is. I have never seen it work and doubt I ever will.

The second major error is the entire pretense for this modern day parallel. In the long term scheme of things do we really care about his heart condition or what they are having for dinner? These scenes are included for the sole purpose of giving narration a motivation. While personally I would rather they simply use narration and screw reality, there are not many that share that point of view.

As a result of this contrition, the modern day scenes are forced. Every time these scenes occur, we cautiously use them as an excuse to check the weather on our cell phone or bury ( ourselves in the significant other we brought to the film in the hopes of getting nostalgic enough to take advantage of later.

The most horrific mistake is the ending.

The final scenes are an act of violence on the part of the filmmaker. It’s a manipulative puerile attempt to make sure that not one tearless eye left the theatre. If you are like me and hate when characters are unnecessarily killed, maimed, hurt, beat or otherwise disadvantaged, leave whenever you feel sufficiently satisfied at the ending. I promise you won’t miss anything.

Maybe some of the rest of you think that our lovers must have one final touchingly dishonest moment to prove their love for each, but personally I was entirely satisfied with the look in their eyes.

There is a place in my heart for these kinds of romances. Perhaps it is an all-too-soft spot. Films about love and war are clichés, yet lurking behind these films are two of the most powerful of human emotions. When such a film is believable, it can’t help having an impact in spite of numerous inappropriate flying reptiles. They strangely enough just work.

Movies @ Zertinet | Oscars @ Zertinet | Main Site
IMDB | Moviefone | Movie Review Query Engine
Contact Us | Subscribe | Unsubscribe

Best Viewed at 800 X 600 or greater
Design by David Johnson