Great Film overall

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

After wondering why I had not heard much about this movie - approached it with caution - now I understand why it failed big time. The best way to summarise might be to see it for what it is - Neurotic Minimalism. What might have been a good study of attempting to re-engage with yourself gets totally lost in the movie makers obscene & disconnected self indulgences. This style of pseudo sociology appeals to the in-crowd & those who think of themselves as 'insightful' - while actually being estranged from any worthy reality. Christopher Tookey (Daily Mail) sums it up rather accurately: "This is the kind of low-budget movie that attracts respectful reviews, but tiny audiences. That's because there's virtually no story or character development",etc. Writer Jennifer Jason Leigh and director (co writer) Noah Baumbach both end up tending to glorify grotty people who display no understanding of how to engage in healthy relationships. It's the sort of movie that won't benefit anyone attempting to improve their lives so, maybe best stay away.

'Greenberg' is a Noah Baumbach creation featuring Ben Stiller and Greta Gerwig. Like Baumbach's other films, characters constantly butt heads seemingly out of the blue. Unlike Baumbach's other films, 'Greenberg' features too many parameters needed for any viewer to get full satisfaction. With a 6.1 rating on this site and many people calling it boring and repugnant, it is very easy to see why and how little liked this is. There was a time when I didn't like this either. But there is a good movie buried underneath these depths. I recommend watching this a few times to ingest all that is presented. Whenever I would revisited this, I would always learn something new about Baumbach's choices in filming and characterization. When a movie gets better after each viewing as 'Greenberg' has, the more it becomes apparent just how good it truly is. The first person we meet is Florence Marr, played beautifully at ease by Greta Gerwig. She is the baby-sitter for the wealthy Greenberg family in suburban Los Angeles. Florence is likeable. She has flaws just like anybody else, so nothing to complain about. At first, it seems like Florence will be the protagonist. Within the first few minutes, Florence comes across as a kind and heartfelt person that would make a nice lead. The Greenbergs love her just as the audience is starting to. The Greenbergs will spend six weeks in Vietnam for a business trip, and Mr. Greenberg explains that his brother from New York named Roger will housesit and build a doghouse in their absence.Ben Stiller gave his best performance in his career (until being eclipsed recently by his role in 'Brad's Status') as Roger Greenberg. Now unlike Florence, Roger is not likeable at all. But it is him that's the protagonist. With an unlikeable protagonist, there's no wonder why any movie in a similar situation would attract a large audience. But watching 'Greenberg' we see some sympathetic individual buried in mean exterior. Throughout most of the movie we think to ourselves: "Come on Roger, snap out of it!" Roger is not a character that can be given up on that easily. He had a mental breakdown and recently got released from a mental hospital. As we get to know Roger and the situations surrounding him, his outbursts can be forgiven since he is still having a hard time filtering what's nice and acceptable behaviour.Roger is from L.A. but resides in New York. He was a skilled musician that passed a lucrative record deal that caused his band to split up. Living life as a carpenter in an expensive city with unbearable pressures from the world around him, he just snapped. Returning to L.A., Roger must deal with past demons and face harsh realities in order to move forward in life. He is a fish out of water, and the interactions he has with old friends and acquaintances is all awkward. But the key to Roger's happiness is Florence. Roger is not good with animals (but he does like the dog), so he relies on her for any other the Greenberg's pet dog emergencies. The relationship between them is constantly blossoming and floundering, thanks to Roger's fears of commitment. The relationship between the two is similar to a vintage Woody Allen scenario and nearly as smart. While we get to know both individuals and their chemistry, the more we can somehow relate to their setbacks. The reliability is what makes the characters shine in every Baumbach movie. But Roger is a little different. He is a little to specific for just anybody to get. But if you do, the movie becomes all the more intimate.As a director Noah Baumbach is massively underrated. In terms of general directing, 'Greenberg' is probably his finest. After each watch, his stylistic choices and how they coincide with the characters get extra clear, causing the movie-going experience to illuminate. Not very many directors nail the technological filming/character relationship, but Baumbach is one of the select few. The one bad thing about Noah Baumbach is his endings. He loves open-ended finales in his movies. There is so much awkwardness lingering throughout the movie that can be a bit of a turnoff, but it is not as bad as the ending. It was not a smart move this time around. A movie of this much complexity does not need such a vague ending. If anything, the ending in this is a major drawback and the biggest flaw. 'Greenberg' may appear to be about an immature middle aged man who needs get his head out of his ass, but the core of it is about two people with relatable issues that handle the pressures of life in different ways. Each rich detail will have a profound affect on the viewer. What adult isn't feeling overly-swamped with pressures of nearly everything?

As often, most other reviews here cover virtually all you need to know, so what is the point to add another here? Well, because I want to guide better use of ya time, since from the outset I wanna immediately warn (advise): pointless, pointless and - if unsure, pointless = truly I feel, a waste of time to sit through.But I should try to be fair and explain where do I get the arrogance to recommend DON'T WATCH? After all, as with any film, a huge amount of work and effort have gone into getting to the screen, so that even if a film is so apparently poor, I tend to still always also make an effort to search out some sort of redeeming factor somewhere .. yet, as this apparently 'comedy' unfolded, not only could I not discern nor garner one iota of a smile ANYWHERE, but that one aspect was, quite conversely, crass tragi-verging on the callous: GG's character finds herself pregnant so, just sort of off the cuff decides, oh so routinely, oh I'll just go and have an induction* (=abortion!) As you do, no doubt? (Really?) And soon after, there it's done, back to routine life, so dull, that she needs a self centred curmudgeon ex-mental institute elder guy to comfort her. No introspection, no life learning epiphany, no, nothing - the film moves on .. And that's with a co-writer in also a supporting role in it, Jenifer Jason Leigh (along with director Baumbach): so how did she 'feminist-ly' countenance that? And of GG, she provides another of her characteristically dippy 'what am I supposed to be doing here' non-performances (cf. 'Frances Ha' - in, ohh, surprise, surprise, same director's same tedious offering!)And as for Stiller (bias warning too, here now - I can't think of any of his films that have ever made me laugh - except perhaps in Ricky Gervais' guest spot in Brit comedy series 'Extras' - although, then in effect taking the p out of himself as just such a spoilt curmudgeon ...) by which, perhaps his role here is an extension of that: and if non-committal to role (mere wooden shuffle through your lines delivery) acting - except for a couple of presumably leftover from earlier mental institution incarceration issues outbursts - is considered stylish, then my take is, it's style without ANY substance - at all.Nothing proceeds or really develops or happens throughout, with any commitment: what are NB and JJ Leigh trying to impart?There was one sex scene which struck me as archly realistic (probably!) - but another tragi-aspect coz it's over in matter of seconds (old guy comedy?) and in another review there was already criticism as to why a twenty something girl would plausibly find any interest in afore assessed forty plus miserable narcissist, anyway: at least in a later party scene, nicely illustrates the frisson of youngsters (c.twenties) inanely mocking him as an older guy sadly out of his age league depth, one even thumps him for daring to think he knows the music that should be played in his own home: (irony?): so there, possibly a 'striking' insight set out in the script: but is it worth sitting through to cringe at? Resolutely NO.Even Rhys Ifans seems also at a loss what to do with his character that simply never opens up beyond supposedly BS's best (most loyal?) friend moping separtee missing his only kid (who we never see). Even the dog goes through a more compelling character development with (almost) loss arc as counterpoint to ... well, what? 'Don't feed him that (sausages) coz it has a constitution disorder' - is that the message?' 'Take care of - (not my cat**), but - my dog'?Oh, but then, at one point, when about to feel flirty with one another, GG goes on a banal witter about some earlier time when her and some high school friends almost got sexually compromised for laughs (!) ... to which BS storms out, ranting on 'what was the point' to tell him that? That it was the stupidest story he'd ever heard. Well, exactement!: Was that NB and JJL's point about this film's purpose?So there you go: this is indeed, apparently stupid; stupidly pointless .. oh had I already said that? An insult not only to the wasted resources but an audience whose time is stolen from them in sitting through this, ah, what was it billed as? Ah, yes a 'comedy' frustratingly awaiting even a smile if not a chuckle. Abysmal = NO stars at all, whatsoever. * and if you do still decide to - perversely? - travail through, and some plot aspects maybe prove a little inaccurate, that's coz I would not give a second viewing simply to precisely check so. Sorry.) ** better see the Korean film instead :-) !

Ben Stiller is always a safe bet, and this movie is no exception to that rule, it's just a bit dull, sad, and broken. Filled to the brim with great talent, and written very well, there is just no real moment of victory, just a lot of defeat. I re-watched it today in order to give a fresh review, but now I remember I was not able to finish it last time, it was just that drab, and uninspiring. Really if there is anything to take from this movie, as in life is that you always need a real skill to fall back on like Solomon's violin playing. The sad factor is the point of this movie, I get it, and Ironicly I was actually going through a similar experience when this movie first came out, it is just that Stiller plays it too well I think. Juno Temple as an Australian is kind of silly, but he needed that torture to set him on the right path. You can't say I didn't get the story, it just wasn't something that I Enjoyed watching. I can only recommend the acting, and writing of this film, of course it is filmed quite well, all of the angels are caught, I just can't recommend the actual story. unless you are looking to be brought down, then have at it.