Up Close & Personal (1996)

Sally 'Tally' Atwater (Michelle Pfeiffer) is ambitious and green starting out as a local TV reporter in Miami hired by news director Warren Justice (Robert Redford) from her amateur tape. They fall in love as he grooms her rise from weather girl to star reporter in the newsroom. Agent Bucky Terranova (Joe Mantegna) recruits her to a bigger Philadelphia station. She struggles from jabs by jealous anchor Marcia McGrath (Stockard Channing) and unkind public judgment. Warren has been struggling himself. Sensing her despair, he goes to Philadelphia to help her recover.This is loosely based on the late NBC News anchor Jessica Savitch but it has more in common with the play Pygmalion. It's a bit too broad at first with Pfeiffer stumbling awkwardly to portray inexperience. It's so broad that it actually becomes off-putting. There is also the age difference but Pfeiffer and Redford are great enough to overcome it. The plot has much of the formula of a good romance but it just feels false. The actors' cinematic presence helps a lot. In the end, I don't feel it.

Up Close and Personal (1996): Dir: Jon Avnet / Cast: Robert Redford, Michelle Pfeiffer, Glenne Plummer, Stockard Channing, Joe Mantegna: Meant to be the arrow that Cupid shot but ultimately becomes a thorn in the side of sober viewers. Title is a pun onto itself describing physical affection and two journalists. Michelle Pfeiffer lands a job as a news reporter but she falls for her boss played by Robert Redford. This all ends as a tearjerker that is enough to warrant urination on the screen. Director Jon Avnet does what he can with the routine formula. Pfeiffer and Redford are both reduced to props that do nothing more than sleep with each other. Pfeiffer begins with promise using humour to highlight her yearning to succeed but unfortunately she gets lost in the formula. Redford can only walk the familiar path before being sold out on a cheap tear jerker ending. Glenne Plummer plays Pfeiffer's cameraman who gets caught in a prison riot with her. Stockard Channing is wasted in this boring drivel. Joe Mantegna also makes an appearance but if the leads cannot strike any life into this junk, then the supporting players are hardly qualified to fix it. Fans of the genre will discover that this is nothing to get up close and personal with. On the surface it displays news and journalism but underneath it is a lame romance that deserves to get up and personal with the receiving end of a sledgehammer. Score: 2 / 10

Technically this is a well done movie. The scenes are constructed well, the cinematography is excellent, the acting is fine. At the end of the day what one is left with is a LifeTime Movie Network movie. A pretty LMN film that is better than most of the material the network runs...but it is LMN fare.**SPOILER** The end says it all: Cat Woman is at an office farewell party. She is the glory of the party. Everyone hangs on her every word describing the events that have just been witnessed. The TV is turned on and the dramatic build of the death of Jeremiah Johnson occurs where at first Mrs. Montana is the only person to realize who's sole of who's shoe laying on the ground. The dramatic build is heightened by...by...a glass of champagne falling at hitting the ground!!!!! WOW!!!!!!! Then comes the obligatory shameless acting cry and wail. Can't you just feel the tears jerking out of the audience!!!! Play it as it Lays, Michelle, Play it hard. Play it like Susan Lucci! If you think that this is life you need to get one. If you like this soapy teary weepy waily incredibly constructed climax then this is a 10 max film for you.

Usually I like to research a movie for fun before watching it. I don't like to waste time watching a movie for 2 or 3 hours. What I learned is that this movie is based on "Jessica Savitch" who in the 1970s became the first female American anchor on television.The movie was based on the book " Golden Girl: The Story of Jessica Savitch" written by Alanna Nash.The movie is said not to be as accurate in detail and also over dramatize and exaggerate events. Also emphasizing on aspects that are debatable. So the movie might be leaning more towards fiction, then of true events. But that's debatable.I didn't give the movie a rating because after 20 minutes i couldn't bare to watch anymore. The movie had nothing to draw me in at all. Nothing to captivate me into sitting there and watching it for free.I suppose if you are the type that like to judge a movie after watching it then the best thing for you to do is watch the whole thing.