lannaheim Gee, Ellen Barkin looks like hell (it's all makeup; she's not THAT old), Patti D'Arbanville (about whom Cat Stevens wrote his song) -- yes, folks, we all do grow old. I don't know why people gave this such a low rating, but, without having read any of the reviews, I am here to say that while the plot is kind of ridiculous, the portrayal of old age is not. Dementia is miserable for the people who have to deal with those who are undergoing it. And this film does depict it in a Hollywood way. It's worse in real life, for those who don't have money to afford -- any of it.Okay, I just lost my mouse, so I am going to submit this without further comment. Except to say I am surprised that this film was not more popular -- oh, and OF COURSE to make the connection (I never had a doubt) between Roy Lichtenstein and the director. No one else would be able to use that "Happy Tears" logo, and the plot certainly made sense to a person who understood the difficulty of being the child -- wunderkind -- of a Very Famous Artist.Dementia is always depressing, so I think Lichtenstein did a good job. If I still had my mouse, I'd look up how Roy died, see if he went the way his son depicts...

charlytully Okay, the plot of the Michael Douglas vehicle (he plays the title character) isn't QUITE identical to that of HAPPY TEARS. The former "crazy" dad with a secret of hidden treasure has just ONE daughter, while Rip Torn in HAPPY TEARS has two. But HT is NOT twice the fun!! After all, while Douglas scuba dives, Torn wears diapers (and there is a scene in HT designed to illustrate to young people if they would make good "candy striper" candidates). Another advantage KOC has is that its plot is far simpler than HT's, which in this case is a definite plus. While the main characters of KOC are all likable and funny, most of those in HT are prickly, while more than a few are downright unsympathetic (not to mention unfathomable). Further, maybe in the go-go 1990s jokes about women who buy $4,000 boots on a whim while a sibling needs to practically gnaw on tree bark to survive (with a bunch of children to feed, to boot) would be funny. Today, only the Tea Party anarchists would laugh at that. If you fall into the latter group, you may find HAPPY TEARS to be a hoot. But for the 90% of us who are relegated to just one-third of America's bounty (a percentage that is steadily shrinking at a rate now exceeding the robber baron days which even Republican president Theodore Roosevelt recognized as a crime against humanity when he broke up the trusts), rent KING OF CAL!FORN!A instead!

napierslogs "Happy Tears" is an independent, fairly simple, dysfunctional family drama. Two grown sisters move back home to take care of their ailing father. The sisters of course have their own problems on top of dealing with their father who is in denial of his situation and very much trying to live as the patriarch of dysfunctionality.Many movies have told this type of story, and these filmmakers attempted to make their mark and do something better or at least different. But I was turned off by it. They were going for a dream-like feel with dream-like colours and imagery and of course actual dreams mixed in. I found it all very weird and made it hard for me to get into the film.The title relates to the laughs and tears that occur. The problem is there are no laughs, and although the characters were well written I wasn't drawn into them so I didn't feel what they were feeling - just uncomfortable.I appreciated the actors they cast, and the effort that they made to make this film new and good, but I have to recommend "The Savages" (2007) over this.

torrentstorm The acting talent in this movie is beyond doubt. Rip Torn, Demi Moore, Parker Posey, Ellen Barkin...excellent excellent portrayals of their respective characters as, respectively, the over-sexed but dying father, the concerned, loving, but also realistic daughter, the younger, concerned, rich, but addicted daughter, and the older slut posing as a 'nurse' in exchange for free bed and board and a bit of money.There were events in the story I didn't understand. I will not list them here for fear of writing spoilers, but they did seem incoherent. I tried to figure out why this or that point was included, such as - one exception I'll make - why the younger accepted to get high with the kid and then had sex with him, which made her pregnant, as far as I understood, and then in the end, was obviously passing off the pregnancy as coming from her husband. He, admittedly, didn't want to have kids because of his neurosis. She wanted to get pregnant. So what did she do? Use the kid as a surrogate father so the child would be 'normal'? For an already dysfunctional family beset with problems, wasn't this adding insult to injury? Well, you'll have to decide. but both sisters, at least, seemed to take the situation much as you'd be taking your regular cup of coffee. That looked weird to me, if my understanding is correct.Anyway, I decided to forget the parts I didn't like/understand and concentrate on the powerful appreciation and portrayal of real life people, and in that sense, the movie played out grandly. Worth watching, and as usual, the highlights of Torn's hilarious antics that elicit snickers and giggles are always good.For what it's worth, I think, though, he was much funnier in 'The Golden Boys'.