Seth_Rogue_One Based on the book by Stephen Elliot by the same name, now although I haven't read it I assume that that did better at putting all the material together than the movie did.There are some standalone scenes that are pretty solid but there's also some questionable ones that feels a bit random.It's listed here as a crime/drama/thriller, but the crime elements is very limited and thriller even more so There is a subplot about a random murder-case involving a character played by Christian Slater but it doesn't have that big of importance in the long scheme of things, at least the movie didn't manage to convey it as it did.The movie is about memories and perceptions of reality and how that can change in time.The message and idea behind the movie is pretty clever and the acting is pretty good (save for maybe Amber Heard who feels a bit empty) and it's decent enough visually but for some reason it just doesn't quiet work as a whole.

Bob Rutzel Stephen Elliott (Franco) is upset and embarrassed when he reads excerpts from his latest novel when Neil Elliott (Harris) shows up to let everyone know they are being played as he is not dead as his son writes about him. The father and son duel goes on and we in the audience are not sure who to believe about things that happened in Stephen's life as each makes a lot of sense. The beginning of this movie seemed to indicate we were in for another druggie movie and I almost shut this down. Then the TV on screen shows a murder trial courtroom scene and this captures Stephen's interest. Ours too. The father, Hans Reiser (Christian Slater), is accused of killing his wife and claims he did no such thing and that he always acted on the behalf of his kids. Stephen realizes that his father always claimed the same thing. Stephen believes he can prove his father wrong and tell the world the truth and get his writing career back on track. He gets Lana (Amber Heard) to help him get paperwork proving he was all the things his father said was not true. Later we learn that Stephen takes Adderall among other drugs. We knew about the other drugs, but not Adderall until now. Hmmm……I must say this time James Franco has a role that works for him as he invested himself completely. Kudos. As for Ed Harris, well, he does steal all the scenes his in. He is just that good. But wait ….. there is another actor who seems to command scenes, too, and that is Jim Parrack (Who?) who plays Roger, Stephen's boyhood friend. I'm sure we will see more of him in other movies. Keep an eye. Yes, there is a twist later on and I think we all knew what it would be. The question is will this revelation actually help Stephen? Should the Director have spent more time talking about the effects of Adderall or did the movie do this for us? Inquiring minds want to know. (7/10)Violence: Yes. Sex: Yes. . Nudity: Yes. Language: Yes.

Tony Heck "A father does what he has to do to protect his children." Stephen Elliott (Franco) is a successful writer who is going through a bout of writers block. He begins to find inspiration in a court case involving the murder of a woman by her husband. The trial begins to drag up painful memories of his own past and living with his father Neil (Harris). When Neil once again shows up Stephen begins to spiral and it effects every aspect of his life. This is a strange movie. The acting is great, as expected but the idea is a little generic and overused. The thing that really keeps the movie from being too cookie cutter are the actors. Franco does a great job playing the tortured soul, Heard is great as the confused girlfriend and Harris, as always, steals the movie and plays his part so perfect that you aren't sure if he is really as bad as Elliott portrays him. All that said this is a a decent movie but nothing to rush and see. Overall, great acting and casting really makes this movie better than it could have been. Worth a rent. I give this a B-.

Paul Allaer "The Adderall Diaries" (2015 release; running time: 90 min.) brings the story of how Stephen Elliott (played by James Franco) deals with his distant past and also some current setbacks. As the movie opens, we see grainy video footage of a seemingly happy family. We then move to today, where Elliot gets the good news that Penguin has accepted a book proposal. In a parallel story, Elliot gets interested in a murder case (software engineer, played by Christian Slater, "disappears" his wife), and at the trial, Elliot makes the acquaintance of Lana, a NY Times reporter (played by Amber Heard. To tell you more might spoil your viewing experience, you'll just have to see for yourself how it all plays out.Couple of comments: this is the feature length debut of writer-director Pamela Romanowsky, who was handpicked by James Franco himself for this job. The movie is based on the Stephen Elliot book of the same name. I have not read the book so I cannot compare how closely (or not) the movie is to the book. I had high expectations going in for this movie. Oh boy, what a disappointment this turned out to be, and I'm being mild. It takes a little while to figure out what is going on, but when it finally start to male sense, I waited to get transfixed. I waited, and waited.... Meanwhile, we see poor James Franco playing the tormented writer, struggling with writers block, and his horrible past, and it all feels so... acted!. We watch, and it does nothing for us. Thankfully there is Amber Heard, always easy on the eyes (and reason I don't give the movie just one star). Ed Harris (as Elliott's dad) and Christian Slater do the best they can with the material they are given, meaning not a whole lot. PLEASE NOTE: the running time is listed here on IMDb, Amazon and other places as being 105 min., but I can categorically tell you that the version I saw today was at most 90 min. Maybe the 105 min. refers to what was shown as the 2015 Tribeca Film Festival, where this movie premiered. Yes, a year ago. Also, it turns out that Stephen Elliott himself has disavowed the movie.The movie opened today out of the blue without any pre-release advertising or fanfare at my local art-house theater here in Cincinnati. The early evening screening where I saw this at was not well attended, and I'm being mild (4 people, including myself). I can't imagine this will play in the theater more than a week. There is a reason this movie currently scores only 20 on Rotten Tomatoes: it's a pretty bad movie, in fact one of the worst I've seen in quite a while (and I see a lot of movies). Unless you are a die-hard fan of James Franco or Amber Heard, there is no reason at all to waste 90 or 105 min. on this. I'm sorry that I watched this movie, but that doesn't mean you have to.... Viewer beware!