Gideon24
Director Ron Howard nailed family dysfunction and the difficulties of parenting with a warm and entertaining 1989 comedy called Parenthood.This episodic comedy centers on the Buckman family, led by one Gil Buckman (Steve Martin) and his wife Karen (Mary Steenburgen), who serve as the centerpiece for a dysfunctional family that includes Gil's hard-drinking father (Jason Robards), who took Gil to baseball games as a child and used to leave him alone and pay ushers to watch him. Dianne Wiest plays Gil's divorced sister, Helen, who is the mother of two teenagers, one a horny high-schooler (Martha Plimpton) sleeping with her boyfriend (Keanu Reeves) and the other (Joaquin Phoenix) wants to live with his father.Tom Hulce plays the proverbial black sheep brother who has returned home with an illegitimate son and a get rich quick plan. Rick Moranis is effectively cast against type as a stuffed shirt married to Gil's other sister (Harley Kozack) who is raising his toddler like she's a sophomore in college.The screenplay by longtime Howard collaborators Lowell Ganz and Babloo Mandel might play like an extended sitcom, but it is a very entertaining one, that provides consistent laughs without sacrificing realism or realistic situations. The screenplay is insightful and clever and well-served by Howard's hand-picked cast, who give uniformly fine performances down the line, with a standout performance from Wiest that earned her an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actress.Thanks to a smart screenplay, sensitive direction, some offbeat casting, and some fun performances, this is a very special comedy that got by a lot of people but is worth checking out. Later turned into a television series.
lasttimeisaw
What leads me to watch this film is Dianne Wiest's singular Oscar-nomination, how rare a mainstream comedy stars Steve Martin could generate an Oscar-caliber performance? Is it as wackily diverting as Marisa Tomei in MY COUSIN VINNY (1992, 7/10) or a rowdy and raunchy scene-stealer as Melissa McCarthy in BRIDESMAIDS (2011, 7/10)? Neither is the case here, thus the answer could only be that it is Academy's honeymoon period with Wiest, who has just won an Oscar 3 years earlier for Woody Allen's HANNAH AND HER SISTERS (1986, 8/10) and would harvest her second trophy pretty soon in another Allen's satire BULLETS OVER Broadway (1994, 8/10).However, skimming through the credits, it is a quite impressive ensemble here, besides Wiest, there are Oscar winners Steenburgen and Robards, the flash-in-the-pan Oscar nominee Tom Hulce with future leading man Keanu Reeves and Joaquin Phoenix, the burn-too-soon starlet Martha Plimpton, and it is directed by Ron Howard to boot, chances are the film might be more than a crowd-pleasing family fare, and again, I am so wrong!It is a big family, its patriarch Frank (Robards) has four children, the eldest Helen (Wiest), a divorcée with two children, the adolescent Julie (Plimpton) and the introvert teenager Garry (Phoenix); Gil (Martin) is the second, he and his wife Karen (Steenburgen) have 3 children, among whom Kevin (Fisher) is a school-kid has some mood issues and needs special treatment; Susan (Kozak) is the youngest daughter, married to Nathan (Moranis), they have one girl Patty (Schwan), who is under Nathan's unconventional upbringing method and on her fast lane to become a child prodigy; the most problematic one is the youngest son Larry (Hulce), a black sheep in the family, a ne'er-do-well addicts to gambling. Spoiler alert, this is not the end, the family is keeping expanding as if it is a blatant advertisement of unprotected sex. Not exactly an out-and-out comedy, the film sums up a menagerie of headaches of being a parent, all are laboriously entwined in a cumbersome plot, and even though, in the end, everyone is still fearlessly riding on the way to make babies, yeah, being a parent is sometimes irritating, but you know what, no one can escape that, 3 is never enough, 4 might be better, even though he or she may end up being a jerk like Larry. It might be edifying 25 years ago (low birth rate in the state I assume), but now, it seems shamelessly narrow-minded and self- pleasingly irresponsible, we don't buy that now, not everyone suits to be a parent, it is a demanding job and should need a certificate, paraphrasing the dimwitted Tod (Reeves) who expresses the most incisive remark which should be legitimized so that there will be far less lousy parents in the world. On a whole, the film doesn't age well, its content feels uneasily predictable, most of time it persists in stating the obvious and plugging a unified American lifestyle, the cast is inequitable, Martin, Steenburgen, Wiest and Robards all have their moments from time to time, but Hulce and Moranis are tainted by the crappy script. Even grandma's sensible credo (roller coaster Vs. merry-go-around) sounds jarringly self-important near the end, anyway, not my cup-of-tea, period.
mmunier
I usually never give a rating as I believe that is very futile, but after reading the review left on the first page, where some one calls the IMDb low rating "Criminal" I thought I do my bit to redress the balance a little. I truly believe this movie is so great anyway but I could not say I idolised everything in it. I can take Steve Martin only for so much as he can be so extreme in his range of emotions that it really gets on my nerve a little. But here I had to make allowance and he really turns an astonishing performance. The whole thing feels so close to home it's hard not to be involved. I have watched this movie many times over the years, and every time I too ride its roller coaster as it goes, almost as if I had not seen it before. As for each leading characters aren't they superb and each with their particular particularity! From the grand father to the youngest son. Each family fights its own battle and mostly wins despite the odds. I have been a great fan of K Reeves but nothing prepared me to see him in this film role! Come on people, join the rating counter balance, this movie and its actors deserve it.
