Just like Heaven.

Keeping with the Avengers theme, since despite doubts from critics Mark Ruffalo's Hulk stole the show, let's take a look at the film that arguably made him famous! Enjoy.


I know the film spoils itself from the start by explaining in its blurb that it's about Mark Ruffalo falling in love with a ghost (insert Twilight and or Necrophilia joke here) but I have to say I was still genuinely surprised we followed Witherspoon's character Elizabeth just long enough to see her achieve her character goal...only to then die... or end up in a coma or whatever. Seems a really risky way to open your movie.

And about Ruffalo's performance...erm, yeah... it's very...goofy? He plays a borderline alcoholic recluse whose best friend is also his psychologist. His wife died two years ago which apparently is the reason for his drinking and recluseness. He is looking for an apartment for some reason and a flier won't leave him alone and ends up getting an apartment because the flier says so. In the apartment he starts seeing a blonde woman who subsequently vanishes almost as soon as she appears who turns out to be a ghost or an astral projection or something. His performance isn't bad but he almost comes across like a bland Jim Carey at moments and that is just weird.

The film itself is silly, very silly even silly for a film about a guy falling in love with a ghost but whether that's the reason why or not, it still turns out to be a highly enjoyable and in places laugh out loud funny, movie, I guess that is helped since the main supporting character is played by Jon Heder but at times both Ruffalo and Witherspoon are really funny themselves.

Ruffalo and Witherspoon have a decent amount of chemistry but I think a lot of that is down a to a great script, the dialogue is tight and witty. I certainly doubt it is down to the director anyway, given his back catalogue of films but that being said the two writers for the screenplay haven't really done a whole lot worth mentioning themselves so maybe it has more to do with the original novel instead. They are a weird choice in my mind too, despite both of their résumé's they just don't ever seem to be the first name that springs to peoples minds when it comes to a leading man and lady and I'm honestly not sure it works either.

In terms of special effects, Elizabeth's ghostness is minimal and I understand the film is seven years old but it looks surprisingly 80's when she phases through things plus it has the usual inconsistencies of things like reflections on surfaces and the fact she doesn't just fall through the floor, why do they always do this?

The whole film is riddled with plotholes and inconsistencies, although as you know I'm against the Hollywood 'let's write an essay to explain every small detail' crap but there is a lot here that needed an explanation. I mean why can she vanish and reappear but only David and some kid can see her anyway? And why does she remember that it is her apartment but not her own name? Also I was brought up that hauntings had rules, you had to haunt something be it person, object or place but where Elizabeth starts in her apartment when David comes along she seems to be able to materialise for longer and follow him around the city with no real explanation, why didn't she do this before? And the whole fact she is a ghost... but is alive at the same time. I mean they do give an explanation to some degree that it's all about like fate and destiny and love and shit (although even this is never specifically stated) but that raises further questions, her destiny was to die so she could meet David? Surely it'd make more sense if her destiny was to meet David? It just seems over complicated with this explanation.

I dunno don't get me wrong this is a good film but it just always annoys me when stories like these use something like say a ghost for a plot device but only really use it when it suits them. I know ghosts aren't real so you can do whatever you like with them but have some consistency in your own universe at least because the whole message of the film is beautiful, but I found it lost under all the inconsistencies.

So do I recommend this? Just like Heaven is no masterpiece, I'm not 100% on the chemistry of the lead actors or really their performances much either. Also all the little inconsistencies got on my nerves a little too. With that said though, the script is still pretty solid which certainly seems to hide some so so acting and chemistry pretty well and in the end the movie is pretty damn beautiful.

Think About It!

-Locke