Every Day

[yoco]

Release Date: January 14, 2011 (limited)
Studio: Image Entertainment
Director: Richard Levine
Screenwriter: Richard Levine
Starring: Liev Schreiber, Helen Hunt, Carla Gugino, Eddie Izzard, Brian Dennehy
Genre: Comedy, Drama
MPAA Rating: R (for language, sexual content and some drug use)

Ned (Liev Schreiber) is in the throes of a mid-life crisis. His work as a writer on an outrageous, semi-pornographic TV show is less than satisfying. His fifteen year old son has just told him he is gay and his eleven year old is afraid of, well pretty much everything. When his wife, Jeannie (Helen Hunt), moves her sick and embittered father (Brian Dennehy) from Detroit into their home in NY, it puts added stress on an already strained marriage. And when a sexy female co-worker (Carla Gugino) puts the moves on Ned, the temptation sends him spiraling. Every Day is about one family's struggle to survive the unexpected curve-balls that are simply part of real life; aging and death; commitment and freedom; love and acceptance. It's an uncompromising look at an ordinary family making an extraordinary journey towards themselves and towards each other.

[slikrapid]

His fifteen year old son has just told him he is gay and his eleven year old is afraid of, well pretty much everything.

that must be the result of their 'excellent' parenting skills, where his teenager can't even make his own toast or where his wife doesn't mind her kid appearing at the prom dressed like a punk

judging by the trailer this movie will be everything else except extraordinary, where the acting depth is just plain shallow and the plot relies heavily on piling-up the usual marriage related cliches (take the temptress angle as an example)

for much better movies with helen hunt see:

What Women Want (2000)
Pay It Forward (2000)
As Good as It Gets (1997)
Twister (1996)

[SealLion]

I guess it's toned down to be a light-hearted comedy-drama film of sorts. I see that you mentioned 'twister', slik that starred Helen Hunt at that time. I recall watching that.
I couldn't help but see the unreality of one twister after another becoming more and more violent than the next one that just came and went with cows come-a-flying every which way you could think of.
Some of these films that Hollywood pours out a-dime-a-dozen are just that. There're only worth about a dime or so when comparing them to something that might be a little more quality. Some times Hollywood does make some decent films but not always. I know, it sounds optimistic in some respects, but I wonder sometimes if the directors take their que from their peers in Hollywood.
But that's Hollywood and the business that comes with it.
The purpose of a business is to make money, yes??.. ...even if it means churning out lesser quality films than what they probably could be. I personally wish that Hollywood would take a harder look at some ( not necessarily all, though) of the better quality films made offshore. But that's just my opinion and hoped-for wishful thinking.

[slikrapid]

I couldn't help but see the unreality of one twister after another becoming more and more violent than the next one that just came and went with cows come-a-flying every which way you could think of.

another aspects of that movie was its enthusiast attitude towards science & exploring natural phenomena while still having fun doing it, a contrast between the wild testing of one's boundaries vs. conformist societal molds, corporate-backed greed for fame and exploitation of other less-known but genuine explorers and afaik there was also a commendable view on how human relationships can be resolved without resorting to obsessive paranoia or emotional hysteria that may appear in other movies regarding that particular subject

regardless of the exaggerations appearing in the movie it had a high entertaining value with inspired acting performances and imo was very enjoyable

But that's Hollywood and the business that comes with it.
The purpose of a business is to make money, yes??.. ...even if it means churning out lesser quality films than what they probably could be. I personally wish that Hollywood would take a harder look at some

i'm afraid that its original goal may have been a bit more sinister than just making profit, one that aims at influencing human behavior (social engineering), having a significant influence in directing societal/cultural developments/opinions/habits/values (like consumerism that spans both of these goals, like the 'american way of life') as opposed to just play a role as social commentary/criticism/entertainment/addition/distraction/education - in a more symbolical way one could say that hollywood is a forest of wizardry, where different kinds of magicians/sorcerers weave their spells, ones that influence those that enter their realm, where unsuspecting viewers may receive (or loose) more than they thought, wanted or bargained for

[SealLion]

That's an interesting idea there, slik with respect to the element of influencing ideas and behaviors as well as thought patterns.
Recall that during WWII, the Germans, being led by the Third Reich, were the evil cousins of this world. Hollywood, and the government led propaganda machine behind it (which of/c is led and orchestrated by outside elements having an ulterior motive to long to discuss in this thread probably), inculcated and indoctrinated the general population on the severity of how evil the other side was. Of course, no doubt, the Germans did the same thing with thier population as equally as the Russians did with thiers.
Now take the current global situation. Terrorism.
Terrorism is a good thing for Hollywood to exploit. No doubt, movies like United 93 had a big impact on the minds of people and the evils of terrorism let alone that terrorism is an exploitable theme by some governments in the Middle-East and their European and North American cousins.