I did not like this movie. I found the kid obnoxious. He was just so perfect.

I almost turned this off after the first 15 minutes. There was some truly horrible acting, primarily from bit parts, but the story soon focuses on the Nanny (Eleanor, played by Leighton Meester) and the boy (Reggie, played by Julian Shatkin), and things begin to improve. It also took a while for young Julian Shatkin to grow on me, but eventually his nearly emotionless portrayal opens up with more facial expression and age appropriate gestures. He seems to take on more personality as the chemistry between him and Ms. Meester grows. The acting continues to be unbalanced, mostly when Reggie is acting so precocious, which is when lines are delivered with the least emotion.My biggest complaint about the movie is that the cello scenes weren't staged better. Mr. Shatkin shouldn't bear the weight of portraying a "cello prodigy" in those scenes since he doesn't play the cello. The music is described as "beautiful" in the dialogue, but I don't see it. In one scene the camera stays on Eleanor as she ascends a flight of stairs with music in the soundtrack, but there is no shot of Reggie playing. For all we know, she's just exploring the house, not following the "beautiful" sound of the boy playing. How about some close ups of a cello being played well, by a real cello player with young hands?

I don't know how many you will agree with me that it was an underrated movie of the year. This film was so poetic, very unusual theme, but you have to understand it, otherwise it will be a plain babysitting movie. I believe as the filmmaker said, it was inspired by the real and so tried to be true as much as possible. The entire film was shot in just 20 days and there's no compromise in quality or the performances.It was a tight call, to label it as a coming-of-age movie, because the definition does not match as the boy in the film was very matured, but only the end answers for that. It all begins with a 23 year old Eleanor, who broke-up with her boyfriend, at a same time lost the job. Standing in the middle of the street knowing nothing about what to do next, luckily a job offer comes her way. A temporary nanny job, to look after a 12 year old wealthy prodigy, Reggie. Subsequently the true narration begins where these two spend those two months together."Welcome to the weirdness. I'm just trying to navigate a course towards safety & sanity best way I know how."I have seen many movies of Leighton Meester, but not that at least one pops-out of my mind, other than maybe 'The Roommates'. This film might not bring her any awards, but definitely remembered for her simple and perfect character display. I have never seen this boy before, he was just a movie old and awesome as a genius boy. The screenplay was very naturalistic, sensitive, no twists, no sideshows, whatsoever to distract from the main focal point. There's only one perspective where the story flows in one direction, i.e., these two characters. Only the end splits as similar to the opening sequences like the before they came together.The movie reminded me 'Uptown Girls', except the boy in place the girl. Only for the one reason, because in both the film the kids were very smart and matured more than their nannies. One film was a comedy- drama and the other one was a music-drama. But like I earlier mentioned, the end scene leaves a new dimensional meaning of the movie you have watched and understood from the initial parts. It runs at the pace of a snail, so requires patience, but the music was so sweet that you might adapt the slow narration and drift till the end like I did. The film is not proving anything, but just an another perspective of one of the human emotion from the millions relating to the relationship and its uncertainty. The best way to get the movie is trying to understand the fusion of the characters from their mentality, not by the physical appearances. I suggest simply to skip it if you are looking for an entertainment or the inspiration, because it is none of that. An ordinary flick with an emotional conclusion and only a very few would end in happy of seeing it.7.5/10

Julian Shatkin did quite well playing a preteen savant named Reggie, considering his age, but writer/director, Frank Whaley, let him down. The role would have been more believable had Whaley given him a wider emotional range (and, in my view, it's the director's job to coax the writer into writing each character equally well - funny that the director did not have that conversation with himself as the writer!). From the start of the movie, the boy's isolation is palpable as his mother plans to leave him on travels. (Debra Messing plays her well, but the part is limited and is only consequential in that it shows how emotionally deprived Reggie was.) He "snaps" at his friend at one point, as he put it, but compared to the frustrations of dealing with adults and children who rarely understand him or his choices, there was not enough emotion, particularly not enough anger. I feel his character loses a certain amount of aliveness because of it.In great contrast, Whaley was able to figure out Eleanor's (the nanny's) emotions, and Leighton Meester was in turn able to play those emotions brilliantly.After the movie ended, I attempted to flash back to moments where Leighton had not played her role authentically, and could not find any such moment. That's how great her acting is. The fierceness of her initial confrontation with her boyfriend was placed into context by our understanding of her family that followed. A beautiful young woman emerges from the initial mess, and we quickly find that she possesses advanced maternal instincts toward Reggie, supporting him exactly as he is, with all his awkward brilliance, even as he bends her to his wishes along the way. Her character is no pushover and she has her own plans, caring for her own soul as well.Overall, the film is well worth watching, as it will move you, and you may even understand what children need a bit better. They need love. Leighton Meester clearly has that love in her, and her performance is a credit both to her and to Whaley. Yes, both actress and writer/director got Eleanor exactly right.