Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

TuDiosEsMiBastardo Mild non-vital spoilers come until the section marked ***(text goes here)*** Claire Goldstein is an elegant bimbo but a bimbo nonetheless, her friends are a sl*t, a nerd, a druggie, two TV-looking women and another bimbo, all who love to spend most of their time in wishful thinking and the parties these inspire, her sister is an absent-minded obsessive neurotic, her mentor is a strange swan in the way that he is not the corrupter but the other way around, he is more like her father figure with her parents very absent from her take on life in the movie... And I highlight the fact that he is not the cause of her corruption since in gossips, stereotypes and archetypes the gay friends conduct the women towards bitchery. She allows for an asshole playing an overdeveloped act win her and mourns with drugs just 'cause. Her mentor is not any better when it comes to his story with a guy who dumped him but whose existence is still important to him. The madness of the father developed by the father ***and the accidental drugging of the parents*** makes no sense, its funny but exaggerates the concept ***of being affected by a drug***. ***The strength of the slut grows dim very soon but its not appropriately explained and the protagonist cant answer the help provided by paying proper attention to her friend.*** A premise exists in the lessons she is taught to be all false. The druggie is meant to be the source of wisdom and again his actions makes no sense. The hypersexual asking her to join the orgy was so blunt and lacking of style that everything was influenced for the worse by his appearance. The scenes are filmed in such a way that everything seems great and important, this visual grandiloquence is the best in the film and the only thing that could draw me further and further into the end, expecting something to happen for the plot and its realization to improve. The plot, like this text, lacked any organization and the more I saw of it the more I hated the character for her stupidity, the more I hated all the characters in the movie. So it seemed the productors wanted to defend the lifestyle of its pitiful characters and, at the end, all I could appreciate was the beautiful use of the camera and the pity it made me feel for the everyday fool it was aimed for. ***The most I could cheer was the dumping of the as*h*le for a professional career, but seeing how the marriage was not canceled there was more for me to pity.*** The end product is kitsch in all the worst ways something can be kitsch. It was such a rubbish except for its nice visuals that I've not willed to do any effort to polish this entry, I did to much by just watching it. Luckily "The Fantasticks" followed and whether the later is a good film or not, the previous film left a good context to enjoy the later, with the aftertaste of this rubbish I could focus in the movies secondary plots to enjoy its criticism of quixotic females a la Madame Bovarie and a culture of feigned feelings like the rubbish I'm trashing in here did.

LilyDaleLady Despite the presence of many "name" actors (Marlo Thomas, Elliot Gould, Harvey Fierstein, etc.) this is an embarrassing lame independent film that feels like a student project rather than a professional film. Apparently aiming to be a slice of life comedy, it falls very flat as most of the jokes are dated and extremely unfunny. The tone is very uneven and the setting -- contemporary San Francisco -- is poorly utilized."Playing Mona Lisa" is about a recent music conservatory grad, Claire Goldstein (Alicia Witt) is dumped by her boyfriend and goes into a tailspin of depression and bad luck. She's surrounded by "crazy" friends and family, including Harvey Fierstein as her gay piano teacher and parents Marlo Thomas and Elliot Gould. I can't give away any spoilers here because there aren't any -- nothing happens in the course of the film and none of Claire's problems or issues are resolved or even dealt with.This is the kind of film that is written by someone who is either WAY out of touch with young people today -- someone well over 50 -- or someone from a foreign culture who has no idea how Americans live or act in the 90s. Claire -- a 21 year old college student -- apparently owns her own ROW HOUSE in SAN FRANCISCO...this would be virtually impossible unless her family were multi-millionaires as San Francisco is one of the most expensive housing markets in the US and Claire does not even have a job. Or maybe I have something with the multi-millionaire thing, because her parents live in a huge Victorian mansion on the banks of the San Francisco bay with views of the Golden Gate Bridge (approx. value: $10 million plus).If it's the filmmakers intent to show the life of a super wealthy princess, that's one thing. But this is supposed to be a story about a down-to-earth, regular girl with normal life problems and a goofy (but normal) family. What wacky planet does the director/screenwriter come from that she does not realize that virtually nobody lives this way? There isn't much of anywhere to go from a premise this completely detached from normality...humor derives from exaggerated real life situations we all can recognize, if you start with an absurd, unworldy premise then there isn't much of any place to go to.There is plenty to laugh at and find humor in amongst young people in the late 20th century...if you had ever MET any of them. None of the 22 yr olds in "Playing Mona Lisa" have body piercings, tattoos, JOBS, college loans, computers or anything else that I associate with young people that age. In fact the whole tone of the movie seems to come from the early or mid-70s. There are a lot of marijuana and drug references, trying to be cool in a desperate way, and an excruciating scene where Claire's stuffy middle class parents "accidentally" get high....as if the parents of 20-something kids would not themselves have grown up in the early of Woodstock and pot and rock music!!!!This film has nothing whatever to say about contemporary young women, or the choices/problems that they face in life. It doesn't even have anything to say about the struggle that a classical music student would face in transitioning from music conservatory to professional career in one of the most ruthless and competitive fields of music.The only remotely interesting thing to comment on here is that Alicia Witt -- who has no gift for comedy or dialogue and utterly fails to carry the film or charm us -- appears to actually be playing her own piano pieces. This is refreshing compared to the many other lame films out there where a talentless actor "fakes" playing. However, if she was selected for the role because of this talent, it was still a mistake. It takes some charisma and personality to head a film, and Ms. Witt is a blank slate.This is a film to be avoided, even as a rental. Complete waste of your time.

sorabji The movie itself is what it is. A tolerable, at times engaging chick-flick with good writing and a good balance of storylines.As someone who's played piano most of my life, I usually roll my eyes at Hollywood's depiction of performing pianists. Usually, the pianist sways one way when they should sway the other, they gesticulate extravagently for no reason reflected in the music, or they rotate their arms back and forth like they're churning butter when they're supposed to be playing the piano.Most of Alicia Witt's playing was believable, presumably because she was actually and in fact playing (she was classically trained and is credited as the performer in the film's credits).The only exception I noticed: the scene where she's playing the Chopin G minor Ballade while talking in a full, articulate voice to her piano instructor (Harvey Fierstein). Not impossible, but not typical either for a pianist to whip through a pretty demanding piece such as that Chopin and carry on a full-throated conversation at the same time. To me it looked like a Victor Borge routine for just a moment.Other then that, this film gets high marks from me for its believable piano playing. As for the rest, well, let's just say I wouldn't even be commenting on this film were it not for the goofy scene with the G Minor Ballade.

stormdude This movie is fairly campy but Alicia Witt is an engaging jewel that kept me glued to the screen. Other than that, I feel you must need a screwed up family to appreciate the humor involved in many of the scenarios. I know I enjoyed this film...