Grand Canyon (1991)

You won't be disappointed!

It is a performances centric movie

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Sad, but this movie bored me to tears. Sad because I love Danny Glover and Steve Martin, and the chemistry between Glover and Kline was excellent! The plot is just, well, life is hard, at all socio-economic levels. Thanks. Got it.

Somehow over the years I managed to miss this cinematic masterpiece, but today my luck ran out. I am amazed how such a stellar cast would be a part of one of the most disjointed, horribly produced, and cheesy flicks of all time. Like a slow-motion train wreck, I couldn't take my eyes off it. Just gawd arful.

I tend to favor Lawrence Kasdan movies, but "Grand Canyon" is a vexing one. In this post-"Crash" world, it seems like I can't look at a high-caliber film about human relations without some inherent baggage. Thanks for that, Haggis."Grand Canyon" smacks of Oscar bait, which is disappointing. And to be honest, I came away disliking a few of these characters (surprising, when they're played by Steve Martin and Kevin Kline; they're unlikely unsympathetic actors). Feels like every time we take a break for the social lesson, someone goes into another speech. What separates this from the more manipulative fare is that there's sincerity in those speeches; like Kasdan's desperately trying to work out that's puzzling him. There's merit to that, but the meandering pace and clunky delivery spoil the lesson.5/10

"Grand Canyon" (1991) is essentially about the 'grand canyon' that exists between the races and the haves & have-nots in America. It starts out powerfully with middle-aged lawyer Kevin Kline taking an unwise detour in L.A. and breaking down on the bad side of town; the situation turns threatening when a group of thugs harass him, but a tow truck driver comes to his aid (Danny Glover). Thus begins a relationship that positively impacts both of their lives and the lives of those connected to them.One subplot involves Kline's love/lust for women (like any red-blooded male). He and his wife (Mary McDonnell) are experiencing the empty nest syndrome; he naturally veers toward an affair at work. There's an early scene where the potential "other woman" (Mary-Louise Parker) comes into his office at work and puts her hand on his. It's a simple yet potent scene. Is it wrong for Kline to have feelings for this woman? Should he risk destroying his marriage by pursuing a more intimate relationship? And, if he does commit adultery, can he still change his mind before it's too late? Will he?That's just one subplot amongst many. Some reviewers feel there are TOO many stories going on. I suggest they stick to lighter fare, like maybe "RV" (giggle).Anyway, some themes explored include:Miraculous life-saving encounters. - White/black relations. - The rich/working class/poor divide. - Homelessness. - Why do kids join gangs/become hoodlums? - The challenges of a 20-year nigh romance-less marriage. - The drive to improve one's living standards. - Does violence in film escalate violence or is it simply a reflection of society? Does a filmmaker have a moral responsibility to society? - Life-changing experiences that aren't so life-changing after all. - How many split seconds do you have to make a left turn in downtown traffic? - What do you do after miraculously finding/saving an infant? - Divine intervention. - Matchmaking, blind dates and finding Mr. or Ms. "right." - The ripple-effect each person's actions have on others, revealing humanity's significance, which is contrasted by the idea that humanity is inconsequential compared to the Earth & universe's timeless marvels, like the Grand Canyon itself.The picture obviously bites off a lot, but is well able to chew it. It bespeaks of real life and doesn't come off contrived at all. Take for example the teenager's driving lesson: He makes a serious mistake and then pulls over. After his father explains a few things he attempts to start the vehicle which is ALREADY running. We've all done that. Another example would be Steve Martin's beautiful redhead girlfriend Vanessa (Sarah Trigger): She's calm, happy and pleasant one moment but then suddenly starts crying (obviously provoked by a statement). A rambling and uncomfortable emotional rant ensues. It's real. Another example would be McDonnell's reaction when her son asks if she and Kline are getting a divorce. Completely shocked, she asks, "Why would you ask that?! Do we seem like a couple on the verge of divorce?" She KNOWS that her son wouldn't ask such a question unless he sensed there were problems in the marriage on some instinctual level. These are just three minor examples off the top of my head.I've heard some complain that there's no humor. Did we see the same movie? There's actually quite a bit of humor or, at least, amusing and light-hearted moments. (How could there not be with Steve Martin in the cast?). Even though the picture is essentially a serious drama I busted out laughing, snickering or smiling on quite a few occasions. The film delivers in this department. Plus it's realistic humor, not contrived.Scanning through the reviews you'll note that "Grand Canyon" is a love it or hate it piece. I love it. The acting is, for the most part, great and you really come to care for the characters; you care about the outcome of each of the story lines. One reviewer commented that "Grand Canyon" is a depressing film; he couldn't be more wrong. Yes, there are some disconcerting story elements, but watch it till the end! Other reviewers criticize Steve Martin, who has a beard and plays a filmmaker. These people need to get a life; Martin was perfect for the role.A couple things I appreciate about "Grand Canyon" is that it respects the intelligence of the viewer; it's not dumbed-down, nor is everything spelled out. Some things you simply have to read in-between-the-lines, others are left to the imagination. It also provokes you to ponder the numerous issues it addresses for DAYS afterward. Few movies have this effect. In fact, there's so much to "Grand Canyon" that you'll get something new from the picture with each viewing. Oh, about the New York Times critic that lambasted "Grand Canyon" as the worst movie ever made (Why sure!): First of all, who cares what some moron at the NY Times says? The very fact that he writes for The Times tells you that his artistic judgment shouldn't be taken too seriously.Also, most critics hailed 2004's "Crash" as a masterpiece but it obviously borrowed much from "Grand Canyon." The difference is that the latter is the better film. Although "Crash" has its merits "Grand Canyon" is more entertaining and has a more positive vibe.FINAL WORD: "Grand Canyon" is a film of the most eminent order; a masterpiece.GRADE: A+