OK.

I loved it. I know everyone will be shocked. The film transitions between comedy and drama rather well despite brief moments of awkwardness in these shifts. The Family Stone handily avoids any Stepmom-esque melodrama in achieving its emotional grip over you. This is not a groundbreaking film but writer/director Thomas Bezucha knows exactly what he is doing and the film is extremely successful at what it attempts to be. The film's best aspect is its wonderful cast. I've never been a fan of Sarah Jessica Parker, but she does well here. Meredith sees more growth as a character than anyone else in the film and Parker nails her repressed, icy personality. Diane Keaton and Craig T. Nelson are both touching as the headstrong matriarch and patriarch of the Stones. Ever bland Dermot Mulroney finally displays some recognizable talent, Luke Wilson brings a welcome laid back touch to the proceedings, Rachel McAdams devours the supporting role of Amy with relish and Claire Danes is appealing as Meredith's sister. The Family Stone is arguably the best holiday-themed film to come a long in a while and one of the best, in my opinion, movies of the year. A-

Didn't I say you'd love it, Libs?

Actually, I thought Mulroney was as bland as ever in this movie, sadly. The only real negative stand-out from this great cast. Keaton was the best, but Nelson's turn was probably my personal favorite.

Lots of A- grades going around. That's what I gave it. I didn't think it was "heavy" at all, it just had a heavy plot point involving Keaton's character, and it was heart wrenching. It was easily one of the most enjoyable films of the year. The comedy was well done, and the characters were very real.

I also agree about Mulroney, who I've never cared for, but he was very good and fitiing in this film. Sarah Jessica Parker's role is very much a female Ben Stiller from Meet the Parents, and she makes it work just as well as he did.

My comments on Rachel McAdams, and I'd like to know what you guys think. Is it just me, or does she command the screen better than any actress working today? Seriously, she steals every scene she's in. You can't help but focus on her. Am I the only one who sees this?

You didn't think the Christmas dinner scene was somewhat heavy?

As I don't plan to see this film in the near future, can someone just spoil for me what's so false-marketed about this film?

It's more of a drama than a comedy.

Not for me, I still say that scene was played out to show how different Parker was and was wrong for DM.

I don't think it is. I think the comedy element far outweighs the drama. The problem with the marketing is, there is no sense that it's anything but light fluff, and although I wouldn't call it heavy or even a dramedy in the truest sense, it's anything but light fluff.

Lecter, are you referring to Craig T. Nelson slamming his fist down on the table and the whole gay conversation where SJP put both feet in her mouth? If so, yes, it had it's uncomfortableness about it, but there was also humor in it that lightened it up right away.

Yes, that's the scene I meant because I don't think it was brought up for the heck of it, but actually was taking a stance on the issue and making a statement. The scene is very uncomfortable, but incredibly well-staged. And wasn't Nelson great in this movie? Probably the best performance by him I've seen.

I would say it is more of a drama than a comedy, though. As a comedy it just did not make me laugh, really. I was amused, but not more. It did make me sad (espcially at the very end), though.

Also in that scene, Parker couldn't even get the words out to make a decent argument - she kept on stumbing around the point > I don't think the film-maker wanted to present those 2 points, 2 men raising the son or the black vs the white baby, as discussions. They were just there to prove other points.

Now that I think of it, I don't really know where to place it. I've heard some reviews call it a romantic comedy, which it is far from. Others have said it's a comedy, which it's not exactly, but it's not exactly a dramatic movie. I think part of the problem I had, was with the crowd I saw it with. I know that's an easy out, but they weren't exactly responding to anything on the screen (And this was a full house). There were no outbursts of laughter - they were scattered - and no one was wiping away any tears except for one woman leaving the theater. They mostly seemed to be indifferent to the film, which was kind of how I felt at the end. I'll probably rent it again on DVD just to have the experience of seeing it by myself. My grade might change then.

It wasn't just put there for the heck of it, there was a reason. That ending dinner scene had the part where DM said and what do you mean > it was the point were they both knew they were wrong for each other.

Also, if you look up the previous movie by the director you'll know that it was not the only reason.

Maybe I'm speaking, err posting, too soon when I say this but it may well be my favorite movie of the year.

This year is shaping up to be one of the worst for movies, at least in my opinion nd this may sneak into my 10 best of the year.


I loved it. Completely loved it.
I thought the first half was, how Parker's character felt, a little awkward. It wasn't bad, it just felt like it was missing someting and it was coming off uneven though weirdly effective. Maybe cuz there was like almost no music in the first half.

The second half sewed in very nicely and I was completely taken aback by the emotional punch it dealt me. I seriously wasn't waiting for that. I can remember crying in a movie theatre twice before; first in Mystic River and second, barely, was in 21 grams... or maybe I just got choked up in 21 grams. Anyway... it seems grieveing over a loss of a chld is what turns on the waterworks for me. But this movie had me teary eyed in multiple instances and that's not the sappy effect these kinds of movies have, but the excellence in both writing and delivery from the actors. It's not something I would ever brag about, crying in a movie, but just wanted to say how much it moved me.

I also agree with one poster who mentioned they deal with very heavy handed subject matters but switch too quickly from comedy to the heavy-heart moments. At one time, I had a tear running down my cheek and eyelids full of fluid when I suddenyl burst out laughing.

It's not a perfect movie but it's very good, quite the holiday treat, and my favrite of the year.


As far as the marketing is concerned...
Am I the only one that thinks that that was absolutely the best way to market this movie? Yes, it was false advertising but if they stayed true to the themes and tone of the movie and represnted that in the trailer, it would not only give alot away but alienate some audiences. Going the comedy route tv spots and such, especially with McAdams and Wilson in it was truly the way to go to draw in viewers how would, otherwise, not have come to see such a movie.

I quite enjoyed this movie as it unspooled - the family relationships rang true, but I don't believe it's storyline will hold up to any concentrated thought. Some of the characterizations were inconsistent and character development seemed quite abrupt at times - most especially (and sadly) for Rachel McAdams character. The whole central dramatic twist after being introduced, hardly amounted to any emotional payoff. The Family Stone is certainly up-to-date on family issues/dynamics and is definitely above the norm for this type of film, but nonetheless ends up pretty slight if you open the hood...

4 out of 5.

However, misleading the audience is the quickest way to alienate them once they saw it and induce bad WOM. Even when a movie is decent to good, going in with a different expectation can drop the movie a grade or two in a person's mind. It happened with The Village and Jarhead. It helps the opening weekend but hurt the legs big time. The Family Stone may be able to spare a similar fate or at least mask it with the holiday, but I think the misleading marketing is one of the reasons its Yahoo grade has steadily dropped from B+ to B-.

Hmm, it might be the same result, though?

In each case, with different marketing the opening would be smaller, but the legs better. Same result at the end.

All of you bad marketing people aren't giving any examples. Usually a Christmas holiday, has these types of trying heart-felt moments. As Mav said, these moments weren't heavy or whatever word he used.

and can't you see that all of these moments centered around Parker > and if the diretor felt the way you are saying, she would have sent packing and not accepted into the family at all.

what were they suppose to say in your vision of the marketing > ????? haven't seen you comment on anything specific or a better direction.

I don;t see the comedy elements outweighing the drama, the slipping on the food (which was stupid and predictable) Parker letting her hair down, again we all saw that coming, though that scene was funny, compare those scenes with the dinner scene were Parker goes on about being gay, when the children each ahve their moment deailng iwth their mother dying...when i remember the film I don't, who the slipping on food, that made the film. I think, I think the film handled this idea of a fmaily ocming home to say goodbye to their mother really well.Yes, there are humourous moments, but unlike Meet the parents or osmthing like that they dominate the film in number or tone.

I agree. There is just no way comedy outweighs the drama here.

It wasn't "haha" Jim Carrey type of comedy, but this was not the heavy movie that some of you are making it out to be. It wasn't light fluff, but it was humorous, and the drama definitely doesn't dominate the film as much as the one liners do.

I would consider this to be a family Christmas comedy with some drama thrown in. I actually think it's probably my favorite Christmas comedy that I've ever seen. I'm glad that most of you guys seem to have loved it as much as I did.

Its not Schindler's List.

My point is, its marketed as haha Jim carrey funny, and evne though its a good movie if peopel expect that and instead the get a smart film that has a good combination of comedy and drama it coudl lead to bad WOM...if people expect one thing and get another they could complain. As I left the theater i heard alot of "that was good but not what I expected, or i thought it would be funnier." If I saw the trailer an dnot much else, i would have thought this was a MtP style comedy staring Parker, and that's not how'd I describe the film.

In fact, if I had not heard from Lecter that movie was more serioes then potrayed i would not have bothered to see it opening weekend.

Ah, seems like Cyn sometimes actually listens to me too

No, seriously, it was not 21 Grams, surely not. But it was a family drama, the trailers made it seem like pure slapstick with the whole family terrorizing SJP. In fact the movie is about the strong bond this family has and about the fragility of its memmebers and a strong-willed and loving mother who holds them together.

I still can't grasp that SJP was nominated at the GG's, but Keaton and Nelson weren't. For shame.