Adrift in Manhattan (2007)

Enjoyed the film very much. The three main characters each have issues to deal with and are a bit trapped in themselves. The young man is so inhibited, you can practically feel the pressure in him about to explode. The old man is facing new horizons and is afraid of what that will bring. And the doctor is consumed with grief. The way the movie threads the lives of these 3 ordinary characters is done beautifully. Without knowing each characters intentions we see how our actions, great or small, affect others. My only complaint is it took a while to figure out what problem the Doctor was having, and there was not much information provided as to how the child died. As to the old man, the scene where he is drawing is incredible. His story unfolds quickly and the woman he works with does a great job in reaching out to him. The young man is a more complicated story. There is little to go on in trying to figure him out. His mother is overbearing, and a little "too close" to him. Yet, that is about all we can tell, except that he likes to take pictures. His inability to communicate clearly with anyone creates an enormous amount of tension, and the sex scene with him and the Doctor finally breaks down his wall. Beautifully produced. Would recommend. On a purely technical note, I occasionally found the sound track not consistent, and would have to raise and lower the volume on the remote. ( This could be due to my TV or the actual copy that Hulu is transmitting).

I admire the filmmaker's ability to squeeze so much out of a limited budget. When you actually make a film yourself-- with the occasional incompetent crew member, the snags in acquiring permits and licenses, etc.-- you realize that its mere completion is almost a minor miracle. I also admire the filmmaker's courage to tap into issues that mainstream films would never touch such as (spoiler) incest or in this case, near-incest. However, I believe that this film suffers because its protagonist is probably not relatable to most people. At times he seems as if he is a DANGEROUS stalker, and the idea that Heather Graham's character was attracted to a stalker-- even in her poor condition-- seemed improbable. The acting is mostly good except for the very weak performance that the girl who played Heather Graham's character's former sister-in-law turned in. Her performance is cringe-worthy, actually. Overall, I believe that this filmmaker might eventually strike gold with a future project, and I wish luck to him.

Ah, look at all the lonely people. Adrift in Manhattan focuses on three very lonely New Yorkers whose lives are destined to intersect. Heather Graham has the role which is meant to tie the plot together. She plays optometrist Rose Phipps, a woman who has suffered a great loss and who now lives alone while trying to piece her life back together. Dominic Chianese plays our second main character, Tommaso, an elderly painter, classical music enthusiast and mailroom worker. As we meet him he is being informed by Rose that he is going blind. And then there is young photo shop worker Simon, played by Victor Rasuk. One day Simon sees Rose sitting on a bench in the park and decides to more or less become a stalker, following her around the city taking her picture. He even follows her all the way home, taking pictures of her through the windows. Creepy? You bet.As the film progresses we learn more about each of these characters. We learn why it is that Rose is seemingly alone in the world. We learn that Simon is extremely shy and withdrawn, apparently having very little idea of how to relate to people. This may have something to do with his mother with whom he has one of the most uncomfortably, bizarrely affectionate parent/child relationships ever seen. The focus of the story really is Rose and Simon. Which is a shame because Tommaso is far and away the most interesting character in the film. We see his frustrations as he deals with his failing sight, blindness akin to a death sentence for this simple but proud man who so loves to paint. And we see him fall in love with a much younger woman from his office, Isabel, played by Elizabeth Peña. Their relationship tugs at the heartstrings, their interactions always compelling. And Chianese and Peña easily give the best performances in the film. Rather unfortunately it seems the movie is always rushing through Tommaso's scenes so the focus can get back to Rose.The film meanders about, cutting back and forth between our three main protagonists. But the story never really pays itself off. Tommaso is compelling, Rose somewhat less so, and Simon, barely even communicative, hard to identify with. Eventually Rose does something which makes absolutely no sense, something you would never believe anyone in her position would even conceive of doing, and from there the movie really falls apart. For a film which seemed to have some genuine promise, especially in Tommaso's story, in the end it just kind of limply fizzles out. Chianese did excellent work and created a great character and he and Peña work together wonderfully. But the story which surrounds them ultimately falls flat.

Watched it, enjoyed it, but...Adrift in Manhattan follows the lives of 3 main characters for a very brief period, each having a problem. They connect at some point in the movie, but it isn't clear why they connect or why it results in something, if it does at all. I really don't need to have everything layed out for me, but some clue as to what is happening would be nice.Spoiler: I only read here that their lives seem to connect cause of some subway line, or it is supposed to revolve around that. I never would have guessed that, so there is something pretty wrong with the movie. Actually i was wondering if some of them were living in the same building, or if it was all just coïncidental. Characters don't have a lot of lines so you get no information from there; no interesting dialogues. The acting is OK. Camera-work is OK, its all pretty OK and i didn't fall asleep, but I'm pretty sure a few weeks from now i won't remember what this movie was about at all. I don't even think i know what it's about now. (?!) If the object was to show coïncidence on peoples lives, Magnolia is by far superior to this one. If the object was to depict people dealing with huge personal problems i know a lot of movies that pass this one left and right. So i guess i don't get what this is about, what the object was, or they messed up.Something's adrift in Manhatten for sure, but what that is remains the question.