Shortcut to Happiness

2003

Comedy / Drama / Fantasy

111
IMDb Rating 5.5 10 4,648

Synopsis


Downloaded 18,382 times
August 12, 2019

Director

Cast

Amy Poehler as Molly Gilchrest
Anthony Hopkins as Henry Wilcox
Jennifer Love Hewitt as The Devil
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
827.2 MB
1280*720
English
PG-13
23.976 fps
106 min
P/S N/A / N/A
1.52 GB
1920×1080
English
PG-13
23.976 fps
106 min
P/S N/A / N/A

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by roycevenuter 6 / 10 / 10

Don't Believe Anything you Hear and only Half of What you Read

As a teacher of fifty years experience in language and cinematic arts,I taught "The Devil and Dan'l Webster" as part of the fictional pantheon of American Literature. Although Alec Baldwin certainly has burned some bridges along the way in his career, this film takes creative risks, many of them worthy of consideration, which exemplify a significant part of Americana. Like its forbear, the 1941 cinematic adaptation starring Walter Huston, this version was attacked, condemned and dismissed when it was released. I believe that every adaptation of any book is an aesthetic fossil caught in cinematic amber. The movie substantiates the same sort of meretricious value system in its depiction of Jabez Stone that struck Stephen Vincent Benet and the makers of the 1941 gem. In its lampooning of pretentious high society panderers of cheesy albeit popular writing, casting them as best-sellers, "Shortcut to Happiness"dramatizes a contemporary examination of what actually constitutes success in the dizzying world of publications. Anthony Hopkins was well cast in the role of Daniel Webster. It is instructive to compare and contrast Edward Arnold's portrayal of Webster in the 1941 classic with that of Hopkins, because both actors have earned a lifetime of accolades, portraying both admirable and despicable characters. Hopkins and Arnold remain symbols of financial and thespian success. Hollywood has a bad record for disapproving of movies solely on the basis of profit. I would love to see "Shortcut to Happiness" go into post-production, be subjected to a diverse array of test audiences after a skillful rewrite. The issues that concerned Stephen Vincent Benet in 1937 are alive and with us all today in almost every area of business, politics, entertainment, and government. Success is whatever you can get away with. Audiences will go to see bad movies. But Hollywood only seems to take the loving and meticulously-artistic care to produce two or three cinematic gems each year. Whoever had the final say in terms of condemning this movie wasted time, money, and the potential for achieving what its creators had in mind when the idea was but an inspiration culled from reading the classic and wishing to update it. If one of my students had submitted this movie script to me, I would have said, "Promising rough draft," and suggest various ways to improve it with my reasons for doing so.

Reviewed by cute_little_seniorita 6 / 10 / 10

A Very Good film and definitely worth watching

I saw this film at the Venice Film Festival and have waited a long time to comment on it as I wanted to see it again when I was released. However, it still has not come out and I don't know if it ever will. Alec Baldwin is a writer, down on his luck and nowhere to go but down even further. As with many viewers I suspect, I was attracted to this film by the cast and the fact that it has received so much press, good and bad. The plot is based on the old casino idea of a writer whose career in next to nil and is getting ready to self destruct – and unless you get into it, it'll feel rather forced and silly at times. However the film helped me to overcome this by being very low key and downbeat – very much like Baldwin himself. The film is not a great thing but one that is easy to get into. The film uses Las Vegas really well but it is a classic story that is fun to believe in. It is much better than the fun, breezy and slick fantasies that we are sold in other films. The mix of romance, comedy and violence works very well – at points it was very touching, at others quite funny. It isn't perfect of course and the writing is where the problems lie; the story did rely on the audience buying into it and at times the dialogue comes very close to corn (but just misses). The only time I felt really let down was the ending, which, although fitting with the spirit of the film, missed a great chance to be fun, exciting and original all at the same time. Still, a good film and definitely worth the watching.

Reviewed by kyleuhland 6 / 10 / 10

I'd like to see the director's cut.

One of the reviews says there were three versions of the film. I'd like to see Baldwin's original cut of this movie. The last version was cut badly, there are many unnatural breaks in the film. like it was edited for commercial breaks. The breaks where scenes were cut seem apparent. Apparently the 1941 movie suffered a similar fate, with many titles and severe editing. The story runs counter to the traditional American ethic of money equaling happiness. The film was purchased out of bankruptcy for a fraction of production costs, and renamed and hacked for a fast return on investment.

Read more IMDb reviews

0 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment