A lot of people are describing Ruby Sparks as a romantic comedy, but I'd be more inclined to call it an indictment of people who want their relationships to be as light and fluffy as a romantic comedy. The movie follows a blocked writer who creates a character that somehow becomes real. Yet, as another character points out, she's not real. She is essentially a somewhat muted version of the manic pixie trope, but the movie gets away with it because it's more a movie about the sort of guy who creates manic pixies.Much of the movie is fluffy and funny, but as it progresses a darkness seeps in that makes me resist the romantic comedy label. To me the movie is more a critique than a romance, although I feel the script fails to follow it's own logic through to the end, offering an ending that is emotionally satisfying but feels intellectual dishonest.Still, it's quirky and funny and original, with good performances.

No offense meant but Paul Dano makes the move unwatchable. His character is trite and cliché, perhaps offensively so. But even worse is the actor himself. I mean... could they have picked more of a dolt? At least get a bloody haircut. And the fact that he types on a typewriter... seriously, how contrived. All the Catcher in the Rye/Sallinger references, spare me.It's actually one of the worst movies I could imagine. All the characters are cardboard, nothing is thought-out or original or inspiring. His brother is almost as clichéd as the protagonist. I mean really, the more I think about the more I hate it.But Paul Dano may still be the worst thing about the movie. I mean couldn't they afford Michael Cera? Don't watch this, please don't. If you're looking for something to watch, just keep rewatching the scenes in Prisoners where Hugh Jackman tortures Paul Dano. Please don't watch this.

Ruby Sparks: wonderfully imaginative concept, not so wonderful execution. I walked into watching this movie with the expectation of being enriched afterwords; my hopes were high. After reading a short summary, I loved the overall idea and character of Ruby Sparks, a woman who is literally created by an author with writer's block, and presumably, is said author's love interest throughout the movie. The film makes you laugh, cry, and paints a beautiful picture of passion and internal conflict. However, I found myself unsatisfied with several aspects of it, including the ending. I tried really hard to like the movie, and did in fact enjoy many fragments of it. But as a whole, would not want to watch it again. It definitely presents intriguing ideas, questions, moral issues, and is considerably heavy at times, but to reiterate, something just didn't click. So although I applaud the acting and thought, by the end it left me with feeling like I wished it would have been better.

Why not 10? Cinematography was great, direction was good and acting was very good. Scripting and direction could be better. In an imaginary "remake" I'd cut the brother's part and kept more mystery-like the making of the girl. In a Shyamalan fashion, revealing the truth with a twist in the end. Besides I prefer that he meets a different girl in the end: the actual ending is too cheesy, IMHO.Anyway it was a fine movie and the last scenes when he writes and makes her behave as he likes are a really good and quite creepy idea.8/10