50/50

Breaking with tradition, I will begin my comment about a good film by not recommending it. I don’t recommend watching 50/50 on a train. I watched in on the train and I was quietly tearing up by the end, having a hard time not to start sobbing in front of the other passengers. That would have embarrassing :-D. But about the film – very good. Joseph Gordon-Levitt confirms his quality as an actor, but I feel a little sorry for Bryce Dallas Howard, who this year has played an insufferable asshole in already two Oscar hopefuls and I think I will have her forever typecast in that character. The film parades a lot of emotions, from sadness to happiness and joy, it feels natural and sincere, without any award baiting cynicism. If it cut at the strongest moment right before the ending, I would go for five stars. I won’t say the ending ruins the very positive impression, but it does reduce it. Unfortunately. Ambiguity would be fitting for a film called 50/50. (02/12/2011)

Stumbling upon an American film about a serious illness and not being flooded by melodrama is such a remarkable event that it deserves proper recognition. The screenplay was excellent in how it managed to weave a fairly down-to-earth story with a decent dose of humor against the backdrop of drama (sometimes tragedy), allowing me to have an exceptionally good time. Moreover, I could easily relate to the main character because even though my situation is different in terms of diagnosis, the reactions of those around me were unfortunately very similar. Even today, I react extremely irritably to certain words, phrases, or expressions because a person can only handle a certain amount of empty words, which are seen as suitable for a specific situation. I just wish the ending was a bit more realistic. / Lesson learned: If you try, everything will be like it used to be. - Oh, come on! Be realistic. (08/05/2022)

Some situations in life are simply not easy. You can run, not smoke, eat fairly healthy, but it still won't save you from cancer. This bitch just appears in anyone's life, she's not exactly picky. When Adam, a young man, finds out he has cancer, he is quite surprised. On the other hand, we must realize one crucial thing - the main characters in the movie are Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Seth Rogen, especially the latter is not someone who plays in fundamentally dramatic films. Is it possible to approach the diagnosis of cancer humorously, or at least with a smile? More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2013/02/5050-2011-70.html (13/02/2013)

The chemistry between Anna Kendrick and J.G. Levitt works great. Seth Rogen is appropriately awkwardly funny (more comic this time around), but his role is extremely rewarding to watch and perfectly demonstrates one of the possible ways Adam deals with everything (or, also, how Kyle (ab)uses it). It was nice, even endearing, how Katherine tried to apply her studied and textbook methods to every possible situation, because she was really incredibly cute when she was embarrassed (you almost felt more sympathy for her than for Adam). In short, I've listed probably the highlights that came out of the production of this film. Three hugely interesting characters, and in all cases superbly acted. And the trio of fantastic performances, topped off with some very darkly funny dialogue (the Patrick Swayze bit nearly killed me), a nice minimalist score, and some nice (perhaps naive to some) emotional moments, deserve some of the more distinguished ratings. (08/01/2012)

“I’m Adam Lerner, schwannoma neurofibrosarcoma.“ Another developmental stage of the bromance genre. Apatow’s comedy is intertwined with a “dying” melodrama. The boy-girl romantic storyline serves mainly as means of presenting the protagonist in greater detail, but it doesn’t answer the question of whether Adam’s girlfriends leave him melodrama because they’re bitches (as Kyle clearly believes) or because of his bland character and lack of will to change anything. Conversely, most of the truly touching moments are provided by the bromance storyline that sensibly uses Rogen’s committed (only?) position that he is a horny idiot and doesn’t care. He credibly complements Gordon-Levitt’s decent “I don't drink, I don’t smoke, I don't have a driver’s license” character (whose only bad habit is apparently biting his fingernails). The striking contrast between the two central characters is entertaining and their friendship is believable, while also offering two possible concepts of the human body – for survival/for satisfaction through pleasure. The laid-back pace of the narrative, sensitive incorporation of a serious subject into a comedy and the reduction of sentiment are definitely not qualities seen in every cinematic enrichment of oncological discourse. 50/50 not only enriches that, but also expands on it by putting a spotlight on false compassion and selfish unwillingness to take the negative with the positive, which is achieved through an initially likable girlfriend. Adam’s subsequent depressing loneliness casts doubt on the validity of the saying “live with people, die alone”. Some people are assholes, dying alone is a drag and living with a tumour involves pain, fatigue and vomiting. Banal, but true. The conveying of the knowledge that there may be no "after" was among the most powerful instance of such a message that I have ever experienced thanks to a film. Vastly superior to carcinogenic dramas. 85% (20/11/2012)