User reviews

I thought this was just another comedy, but decided to watch it regardless, as Edward Norton usually makes good movies. And this was no exception. This movie was really, really cool. It had a good combination of comedy, drama and action all blended into one mix. And it worked out quite well.

This is not just a movie about weeds and drugs, it is so much more than that. Sure the weeds are a core essential to the movie, but it is also about family values, friendships, embracing your heritage, and coming to terms with your past.

The cast was phenomenal, especially Edward Norton, who did a superb job in both his roles. And the supporting cast was really good as well. Some famous names in the bunch, and everyone delivered good performances.

"Leaves of Grass" never left me bored, as it was compelling from start till end. You should watch this movie, because it is somewhat of a gem in a vast market of endless movies.

Highly recommendable.

Edward Norton stars as Bill Kincaid a sensible ivy league philosophy professor who makes a trip home to Oklahoma, and Edward Norton stars as Brady Kincaid, twin brother, a rash hillbilly drug dealer who gets himself mixed up in bad drug deals and murders. "Leaves of Grass" is a dark comedy, crime drama and ultimately character study.

It starts out with a fair amount of comedy. Both brothers are pretty funny in their own way. There are a number of pot jokes which even seem original. The film slows down as it introduces us to all the different characters. Too slow, in my opinion, as we are all anxious to see what crimes the brothers get themselves into. And then those crimes play out with a lot of violence.

The interesting thing about this film as that it really is just a character study at its heart. Norton and writer Tim Blake Nelson do a great job with Bill as he examines who he is and what he really wants out of life. I recommend "Leaves of Grass" to people who like the idea of a philosophical character study played out as a violent, comedic, crime drama.

I enjoyed "Leaves of Grass" for awhile, until writer/director Tim Blake Nelson, who also has a supporting role in the film as a hillbilly pothead, tired me out with his insistence on pushing the film into directions it just didn't make sense for it to go.

Edward Norton is immensely enjoyable as a pair of twin brothers, one an intellectual from the city, the other a country bumpkin with a major marijuana operation, who are reunited after the country brother fakes his death to persuade the other to visit home (a home he has shunned) and then drags him unwillingly into a shady scheme involving some other drug dealers once he gets him down there. There was plenty of interesting potential to be had in the story of these two very different brothers who maybe aren't quite as different as they think they are, but Nelson insists on throwing in a bunch of other distracting plot strands that make what should have been a low-key comedy something schizophrenic and exasperating. The film is only 105 minutes long, yet we have a storyline involving the brothers' mom (played by Susan Sarandon) and the city brother's estrangement from her; a love interest for the city brother (Keri Russell) who recites Walt Whitman poetry while filleting a catfish; the whole drug war storyline that gets queasily violent; and the dumbest storyline of all, involving an orthodontist in debt who hatches a half-assed blackmail scheme. I think Nelson is going for black comedy with much of his film, but he doesn't succeed; the abrupt changes in tone are jarring, and one of the violent scenes at the end involving the orthodontist character is downright tacky.

This movie is a prime example of what happens when a lot of talent is assembled and then squandered by a bad screenplay and unsure direction.

Grade: C

"Leaves of Grass" at its core is a coming home movie like many others. Typically, coming home movies are about city folks coming back home to the country. Initially, they experience all the things that made them flee to begin with, then they are reminded of all the things they love.

In this film Billy Kincaid (Edward Norton) was a philosophy professor in Boston while his twin brother Brady was a marijuana grower in Little Dixie, Oklahoma. Brady was in hot water with Pug Rothbaum (Richard Dreyfuss), a Jewish loan shark. Brady had a plan to get out of his predicament, but it involved his brother Billy.

"Leaves of Grass" had plenty of known names and faces. Besides the two actors I already mentioned there was Susan Sarandon, Tim Blake Nelson (who wrote, acted, and directed), Pruitt Taylor Vince (known for "Identity"), and Josh Pais. The movie was humorous and a little surprising--in a good way. It wasn't as predictable as I thought it would be and that's probably one of the highest compliments you can give to a movie.

Ed Norton is great as always, playing two diametrically opposite but highly intelligent identical twins. One brother, Bill, is a professor of classical philosophy who has worked hard to eradicate his Oklahoma accent and fit into the world of east coast academia. The other, Brady, stills lives in Oklahoma and makes good money selling high-grade marijuana with his red-neck buddies. Brady tricks Bill into returning home for the first time in 2 decades so that Bill can be an alibi while Brady commits a crime in another city. Although Bill is furious and is tempted to fly back home immediately, he ends up staying a few extra days and visits his mother for the first time since childhood. He also meets Janet, played by Keri Russell, a beautiful, intelligent woman who can recites poetry while gutting a catfish. It's an enjoyable movie with quite a few surprise twists along the way.

The strengths of the movie were excellent performances by Norton and Russell, and even director Tim Blake Nelson was great in the role of Bolger. This movie will probably do very well at the box office because of the big name cast plus some great dialogue and humour. I didn't love the ending though, because of too many coincidences and some implausible scenes near the finish. Also, there was an exploration of Christian-Jewish animosity which seemed like an awfully heavy theme to (briefly) deal with here in what is essentially a romantic-comedy. I almost gave this a 6, but the great acting is definitely worth at least an extra point and I bumped it up to a 7 out of 10.

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer ... but never forget the closest thing of all: Family. Although it seems quite distant (beginning) it might be actually the closest (especially if you consider the mind set). But this movie is not about interpreting things or about good or bad.

And while Ed Norton (1) tries to make sense of things, Ed Norton (2) also is very free and does everything he wants to do (either you read the summary and know what I'm about or you are going to have to watch the movie to understand). Great actors in a very twisted little story, that has not easy answers or solutions. Which might be satisfying or not. Depending on your view of things. I liked that it dared to go the direction it took and that it switched gears between comedy and violence (though it didn't feel right mood-wise for the movie).

It is fascinating to see certain movies that achieve a specific balance between the familiar and the unique, a particular dynamic perfectly representative of writer/director/actor Tim Blake Nelson's Leaves of Grass. On the surface, the film's prevailing themes of family, reconciliation with one's roots and the tensions between educated/"upper" class and working/"lower" class are identifiable as those articulated in countless films and other cultural texts, suggesting just one more re-tread of the same material. At the same time, in an elusive sense, the particular angle the material is addressed feels somehow fresh and unique, making Leaves of Grass particularly vibrant, dynamic and compelling, both as a narrative and individual character study.

In its most distilled essence, the film charts a rampantly successful Ivy League philosophy professor (Norton) forced to return to and come to terms with his less than glamorous family ties in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Of course the narrative covers significantly more ground than that, particularly the professor being sucked into an ill-advised and hardly legal scheme by his madcap, drug dealer twin brother (also Norton), but Nelson returns so continuously to the aforementioned central themes that the increasingly complex plot surrounding them runs the risk of feeling somewhat besides the point, as enjoyable as it is. However, it is through evolving such a complex web of narrative that Nelson's film feels all the more unique, allowing him to tackle often covered themes with not only a more fresh and indirect approach, but also a great deal more authenticity. Each of the film's characters, as colourful and occasionally larger than life as they may be, feels strikingly real, making their actions and interactions within such a convoluted story alternatively more resonant and hilarious, as if each are playing the 'straight man' against an increasingly madcap story unfolding around them.

With the same charming, powerful yet slightly kooky tone which pervades many of his acting performances, Nelson sets up his film in a wonderfully askew fashion, taking delight in veering right when the logical narrative progression would suggest left, and offering a fair share of surprise twists, including several jarring or downright uncomfortable bursts of serious intensity discordantly changing altering the generally breezy mood. However thematically familiar, the framework of Nelson's film does feel refreshingly unexpected, even if it does somewhat lose its momentum towards the end, trundling towards a denouement that feels somewhat under-thought or vaguely less than effective. Nonetheless, a lively musical score and crisp editing propel the film along at a generally steady pace, assuring that despite the rare stumbling, Nelson's film feels fundamentally alive, truthful and riotously enjoyable.

But, as is common with such character-focused material, it is the cast that ultimately drives the story home. Nelson himself has admitted that he wrote the lead twin characters for Edward Norton, and it is impossible to imagine any other performer offering two such superbly nuanced, powerful and entertaining, not to mention fundamentally different characterizations within a single film, managing the rarely seen trick of playing off himself to perfection. Norton infuses so much life, passion and charisma of such varied sorts into both roles that it is easy to forget they are played by the same actor - a masterclass of acting propelling the emotional centre of the film, and almost singlehandedly making it merit viewing. Keri Russell is similarly fantastic, channeling her trademark sweet, down to earth charm into her performance as a reflective poet and teacher – her riverside philosophical musings make for some of the most quietly thought-provoking and enjoyable cinematic asides of quite some time. Tim Blake Nelson himself manages several laughs and sturdy emotional support as a stoic fellow marijuana grower, and Susan Sarandon offers raw and frequently hilarious emotional vulnerability as both Nortons' ex-hippie mother, forced to reflect on a life of questionable choices. Finally, in a tragically but necessarily brief role, Richard Dreyfuss is hilarious as a respectable Tulsa philanthropist with several shady ties to the less respectable underbelly of the community, making his few scenes shine with shrewd hilarity.

Wacky yet poignantly credible, Nelson's film hits its stride through its melding of familiar content with unfamiliar approach, propelled by a careful, clever script and tremendously memorable characters. In an age filled with ambitious studio films making hefty grabs at easy emotion, it is a delight to witness cinema that manages something powerful, profound and incredibly enjoyable without obvious, clichéd emotional hooks of any sort, making Leaves of Grass without question worth a watch.

-8/10

There's some movies that deserve better performances. The script is there, but the casting is wrong, and the film suffers because of it. "Leaves of Grass" suffers the opposite problem. Edward Norton delivers one of the best performances of his career (which says a lot), but the film doesn't deliver on the same level of his performance leading to a less than mediocre movie that would be hard to recommend regardless of how good that acting really is.

Leaves of Grass is a pretty simple stoner film. It's about two identical twin brothers (both played by Norton) who live completely different lives. One decided to study classics and teach out of Brown University. The other decided to study marijuana and build his empire in the heart of Oklahoma. When the marijuana business goes south, the cultured classics professor is forced to head the the small town swamps to help his brother. What ensues is both equally interesting and entertaining, but quite frankly doesn't deliver on the comedy that the premise is clearly built upon.

Edward Norton really steals the show here. Personally he's been one of my favorite actors ever since American History X, and films like 25th Hour have done nothing but increase my appreciation. Here he plays a straight laced cultured character and a hillbilly hick town drug lord and he plays them both extremely well. Couple this with the fact that the characters appear on screen together fighting, consoling, shooting, and conversing, and you can't help but be amazed at the range one man could show in a single movie.

Despite the performance and the interesting intertwining story of brother helping brother, I still don't think I can recommend this film. It delivers some heartfelt moments, ends on sweet spot, and entertains on somewhat of an emotional level (lot of talk about god, our existence, good vs. bad, and the importance of family) but has such an inconsistent tone that tries to do too many things at once (comedy, action, inspiration, and emotion).

A lot of critics claimed this to be a hidden gem, one of the year's best. I for one wouldn't 100% agree. It's a small-budget film that tries to have a big heart. For me, it just didn't quite get there.

For more reviews, please visit http://www.popcornjury.com

Michael Buffa- Editor, Popcorn Jury

I had the pleasure of watching the world premiere of Leaves of Grass at the Toronto International Film Festival and was not disappointed. Edward Norton plays identical twin brothers, Billy, an accomplished university professor and Brady a big time drug dealer in Tulsa. The film wonderfully builds up to their first encounter after many years of being estranged, bringing with it much hilarity. The acting was superb - I was thoroughly engrossed in Norton's portrayal of two seemingly different characters. The supporting cast was strong and the director, Tim Blake Nelson had a major role in his own right. Billy and Brady's mother, played by Susan Sarandon brought a nuanced and understated performance. Subtle references to Norton's other films such as Primal Fear and Fight Club were a clever touch. Overall, the film had some great humour and lots of suspenseful moments. This movie is a must see for any Ed Norton fan.

A lot of films claim to be "dark comedy" when in actuality they're more like "comic horror". There's a difference.

Dark comedy should make us laugh at the concepts of death, violence and tragedy. Examples would be the hilarious "Beetlejuice", "Grand Theft Parsons", and even campy stuff like "Men at Work" & "Weekend at Bernie's". The idea here is to take us to a goofy, cartoonish world where death & violence are meaningless. Either that, or the dead guys always deserve it.

Other films, though excellent in their own right, are a little too rooted in realism, and unless you catch yourself in a somewhat sick state of mind they can come across as being disturbing (probably intentionally so). Examples would be "Heathers", "Pulp Fiction" and the Coen brothers films. I love all of those movies, but sometimes they just freak me out.

"Leaves of Grass" pulls off a violent story but does it in a way that's not upsetting. The movie takes the philosophical approach that it's irrational to fear death. Midway through, we get a quote from the Greek philosopher Epicurious who argued that death (or the state of nonexistence) should not be feared as long as we're alive because it can't touch us. When it finally does claim us, we're dead (nonexistent) so we're not able to feel it. In other words: what you'll never know can't hurt you.

I loved the little bits of philosophy peppered throughout the movie (the main character being a philosophy professor). It was just enough to keep it on a deep level without getting us bogged down in heady psychobabble.

The story itself is somewhat unrealistic, but that adds to the cartoonish vibe I mentioned earlier. You're not supposed to look for loopholes & inconsistencies. Just sit back & enjoy the ride. Like I mentioned above, fans of philosophy and literature (Walt Whitman's "Leaves of Grass") will get a kick out of it. If you're one of those, also check out the Jim Jarmusch films "Dead Man" and "Ghost Dog".

Bill Kincaid (Edward Norton) is a classics professor at Brown University. Bill's identical twin Brady is growing weed in Oklahoma. Local drug lord Pug Rothbaum (Richard Dreyfuss) is pressuring him to sell his business. Colleen is Brady's pregnant girlfriend (Melanie Lynskey). Daisy (Susan Sarandon) is their mother. Bill returns home after being told that Brady is killed. Brady isn't actually dead and he want Bill to be his decoy. Bill is unwilling until Brady's friend Janet (Keri Russell) shows up.

Edward Norton does a relatively good job at the duo role acting. However the movie is not nearly good enough. It wants to be funny wacky caper but it never gets truly funny. There is a dark unlikeable edge to both characters. I actually dislike the professor character more the weed growing brother. Keri Russell has limited chemistry and the darker turns are done too carelessly by director/writer/actor Tim Blake Nelson.

In his fourth feature film as a director Tim Blake Nelson proves once again that, if nothing else, he's an auteur in the strictest sense of the word - he's a director of his own vision and inspiration, but he's not quite there when it comes to making a film that works as a satisfying and complete experience. His most solid film so far has been The Grey Zone, but while Leaves of Grass is more scattered, it's just as surprising and intriguing - but it's also heavily flawed in terms of structure and pacing.

In Leaves of Grass Nelson shows that he's very influenced by his good friends Joel and Ethan Coen; like many of the Coens' films, it's disguised as a genre film - a stoner movie in this case - but is actually a character study, and a half-cynical study of Americana and American culture; the characters are quirky, disquieting and very intriguing, and the actors all deliver wonderfully, especially Edward Norton in a dual role that stands with his wonderful performances in the late 90's.

Nelson's directorial work is quite capable, but his script, unfortunately, has some problems, and while the film is very promising in its first half, it falls apart in the last thirty minutes or so, as the character study turns into a nonsensical action film. The ending is rushed and doesn't deliver on the promises made by the first half of the film, by the great aesthetics and the wonderful acting. The result is that the film is a great watch - especially for fans of directors like the Coens, Wes Anderson, Jim jarmusch and Spike Jonze, and independent film as a whole - but it's pretty forgettable and doesn't measure up to its own potential.

Tim Blake Nelson's 'Leaves of Grass' can be called a weird dark comedy about a dysfunctional family. The focus is more on the relationship of two estranged twin brothers. One is an Ivy League professor and the other a pothead dealer. The first hour focuses more on the buildup of the relationship as the two brothers reunite and Brady reacquaints himself with a past that he had left behind. Then what follows is some unexpected and bloody twists exacerbating the situations.

I found the pace slightly uneven. The first half is a bit slow (but thankfully not boring) but the second half, after the introduction of Pug, the story moves at a rapid pace and sometimes it feels rushed. However, the movie remains entertaining from start to finish. The humour works excellently. Nelson has already proved to be a competent director with 'The Grey Zone' and now he shows that he can do comedy too. Only someone like him could have done justice to 'Leaves of Grass'.

Even in the acting department he is very good as Bill's sidekick. Susan Sarandon, Melanie Lynsky, Keri Russell and Richard Dreyfuss provide fine support even though their screen time is limited. But it is Edward Norton, in a double role, who leads the movie. Bill and Brady couldn't be any more different but Horton nails both parts and plays them with élan.

'Leaves of Grass' also has a great energetic soundtrack. The special effects and the stunts have been done very well. It's a well-made film. Even though flawed, I enjoyed it a lot and would be revisiting it later.

I never saw this one coming... Set in contemporary Oklahoma, "Leaves of Grass" is a safe bet for finest film in Oklahoma history. Edward Norton delivers an outstanding performance, guided by a superb screenplay from director Tim Blake Nelson. Richard Dreyfuss and Keri Russell bolster a strong supporting cast. The script is noteworthy for its verisimilitude on a wild range of subjects from Socrates to hydroponic marijuana production. "Leaves of Grass" is a profoundly intelligent film made with genuine philosophical insight and laser sharp wit. If you go into this film expecting a stereotypical pot comedy, you're in for a shock. The pacing of the film is excellent, tightening the screws until you're on the edge of your seat. In fact, it's spectacularly tough to write a spoiler-free review of "Leaves of Grass". Ultimately, Norton and Nelson deliver a film that would make the Coen Brothers proud.

I really enjoyed this film and think that it will only get better with multiple viewings. The story is not as some reviewers stated dull and boring(if you expect a typical stoner film maybe you would find it slow & unfunny) the film moves at a sedate pace but never feels like it drags, the humour is often gentle or subtle. Ed Norton delivers a stunning performance as the twin brothers, within minutes of watching you forget they're played by one person(this is helped by the fact that there are no scenes that look fake or CGI'd)

The film uses philosophy quotes a lot to explain character motives or personalities and it could have seemed contrived but the director/writer has made it such an integral part of the film that without the quotes and passages the film would be hollow and not have the depth or be as touching and thought provoking as it is.

If you get a chance to see this film, do so, you won't be disappointed(but go into it with an open mind and don't expect slap stick fart gags)

I rate this film a 10 for Edward Norton's terrific acting, and a 5 1/2 for most other aspects of this film.

I absolutely loved Norton's portrayal of the hillbilly pothead genius brother. Also good were some amusing observances about the two very different cultures of academia and drug dealers. However the rest of this film is a complete waste of time. The script writers had a terrific character but a terrible script for using that character.

One of films deserving be loved.

For actors - Susan Sarandon, Keri Rusell, Edward norton and their fine job.

For humor- from dark to absurd.

For the portrait of Oklahoma, William Whitman ( giving not only the title of movie but being nice tool in beautiful scene ), for philosophy crumbs and for the drops of Quentin Tarantino.

And for the last scene, no doubts.

Sure, unrealism rules and the flavors of indie are dominant, both representing just fair virtues of film.

But the great good point remains the performance of Edward Norton and easy you understand why Leaves of grass is, in high measure, exactly his film.