THRASHIN’ (1986)

Directed By: David Winters
Written By: Paul Brown & Alan Sacks
Cinematography: Chuck Colwell
Editor: Lorenzo DeStefano & Nicholas Smith Production Designer: Catherine Hardwicke

Cast: Josh Brolin, Robert Rusler, Pamela Gidley, Josh Richman, Sherilyn Fenn, Chuck McCann, David Wagner, Tony Hawk, Tony Alva, Brooke McCarter Jr, Brett Marx, Mark Munski

Two skateboarding gangs battle each other for supremacy, and a member of one gang falls in love with the sister of his rival.


Now I have to give a curve to this skateboarding movie. As it is nostalgic fun that I probably would have enjoyed if I had watched it when I was younger and when it had initially come out, but watching it now. 

It is funnier in unintentional ways other than just the styles of yesteryear. Though the film does raise some questions and gives way to many observations like… 

Why do the corporate sponsors and owners of skate and Nike companies in these 80s movies come across as pedophiles? As they are way too old and way too giddy to be around young people. 

The daggers are way too obvious in their sabotage. Especially laughing while their victim is getting stitched up. Right in his face. Is this a machismo thing? Or just I dare you to say something? 

Also, why is it a gang when it involves minorities but a crew or group of friends when all caucasian? In this movie and beyond. Nice to see Robert Rusler as the suave skateboard villain leader of the daggers. Even if his casting makes you wonder exactly how old these characters are supposed to be. 

It always amazes me to see Josh Brolin in early roles as until MOD SQUAD the movie I really didn’t start recognizing him from movies like THE GOONIES, but you know you’re in another era of movies. When the integrated skate park gang are the villains. 

The film has the usual teenage romance in between the skateboard drama as well as lame jokes. Though I am not a prude it is shocking how fast Josh Brolin and Pamela Gidley’s character hook up on their first date practically but I guess when it’s true love you just know. 

This is more a film for teen girls to watch and fall in love with probable hunky poster boys at the time, but strangely also a film that bypasses that audience making the film more advertised for teenage boys, who might be into the fad of the time skateboarding. Leaving a definite unintentional homoerotic charge throughout the film and in the scenes. As even the villain of the film seems more into his look and glamour above all else

The highlight of the film is the joust skate off and just how trusting and willing a female character is to hitchhike her way to California with random truckers, but hey this movie is presented all in good fun and in supposedly simpler times. 

And the RED HOT CHILLI PEPPERS are in this movie performing!!!! Some added cool points for the film. Though you will find them in quite a few films. It also makes it feel more like a teen movie by having a noted band in the film and their performance being a centerpiece almost.

If looking for a totally tubular nostalgic blast from the past check out this film. Even though for all of its ridiculous juvenile fun. I just couldn’t get on the same wavelength. 

Grade: D+

SWITCH (1991)

Written & Directed By: Blake Edwards 
Cinematography: Dick Bush 
Editor: Robert Pergament 

Cast: Ellen Barkin, Jimmy Smits, Perry King, JoBeth Williams, Lorraine Bracco, Tony Roberts, Bruce Payne, Lynette Anthony, Victoria Mahoney, Basil Hoffman, Catherine Keener, Kevin Kilner, David Wohl, Tea Leoni, Jim J. Bullock, Rick Aiello 

Steve Brooks is a sexist and the prototype macho. Unfortunately one day he is killed by one of his girlfriends. In heaven, though, there is no place for men like him and he is sent back to earth in the body of a woman so that he can see how women are treated by men like the one he once was.


Initially, it seemed this was a movie that was going to be a comedy of comeuppance and body-switching that had a kind of. Resurgence with moves like VICE VERSA, LIKE FATHER LIKE SON and 18 AGAIN or the teenage version SOMETHING SPECIAL 

This film is definitely outdated. The premise is Intriguing when it came out and caused some controversy when it did. It seems like a movie that is intentionally trying to be provocative and subtle In its own way. 

Watching it now it seems a bit tame but it does feel like a lothario male getting his come upance and Learning life lessons as having to go through life as an adult woman to try and get into heaven.

Learning through trials and tribulations. Though the film is trying to be pro-female and their rights. It still comes off as sexist. While allowing for plenty of sex scenes and nudity that it comes off as a sexual farce. 

The film does have Its fair share of funny scenes and Ellen Barkin is really Terrific in the lead role. Showing she has comedic timing and is thoroughly believable throughout. This is actually one of her better and more memorable roles. Where she isn’t necessarily the bad girl sexpot for a change. Normally this would have been more of a star-making role for her. As it is one of her unfortunately few leading roles in a film.  

Though the third act is rough. Having a child by means of drunken encounter pretty much seems at least as far as the character goes as date rape as she didn’t really give consent and finding a kind of happiness afterward with her best male friend who falls for him In Female form. 

Though ridiculous it doesn’t come off as physical or far-fetched as his previous movie SKIN DEEP. As here it seems that legendary writer/director Blake Edwards is trying and has invested interest in this film. Though he definitely seems to be trying to push some buttons when it comes to the subjects. While at times crasser than it needs to be. It definitely is more outdated than expected

There is still plenty of physical comedy throughout which is his specialty and some satire though towards the end it gets more serious and dramatic from its sillier early antics. 

Though this caused a bit of controversy at the time. This might have been a film that was made too early or too late for the times. As it is certainly a high concept and would have probably been more insulting than thought-provoking if made in the 1980s

The film also treats the killing of the main character so easily as flippant and more like a plot device rather than needed or really felt. As he never lied to these women so their murder seems madder at themselves for falling for him. Not only that but the film treats the fact that he was promiscuous as more his major sin and maybe his attitude towards women as we never Hear or even see him really treat any of the women. So the film generalized and tries to make a point figuring the audience will go with it 

Grade: C+

JUMBO (2020)

Written & Directed By: Zoe Wittock 
Cinematography: Thomas Buelens
Editor: Thomas Fernandez 

Cast: Noemie Merlant, Emmanuelle Bercot, Bastien Bouillon, Sam Louwyck, Tracy Dossou

Jeanne, a shy young woman, works in an amusement park. Fascinated with carousels, she still lives at home with her mother. That’s when Jeanne meets Jumbo, the park’s new flagship attraction.


This film will remind some audiences in the know of Titane. As they have particular storylines that are similar but are in Totally different ways.

The French film, TITANE is dark and about more than necessarily meets the eye. Where it has things to say about many subjects. This film Is sweeter and has no pregnancies though it is a fairy tale based On reality and tries to keep matters at hand. 

This film has a sweetness but doesn’t ignore its own implausibility. As it even has the character question her sanity. Though her own faith shows through. We in The audience begin to question as we see erratic behavior and every time there is something fantastical involving others we never see it as random there is a logical reason for it all. 

The film doesn’t shy away from sex but it doesn’t make it feel tawdry it feels erotic but more out of innocence. 

Even those close to her who doubt her and her sanity. We are left to wonder if they are doing it for their own self-interest and out of jealousy. 

As the main character feels like a typical one you would find in a quirky romantic French film. She looks and dresses like a shy teenager even though she is a young woman in her 20’s.

The movie starts off innocent and as it goes along it gets more serious and into more issues and questions that are surprisingly asked. That is usually left out in films with scenarios such as these. 

Noemie Merlant really shines in this film. She stays believable and strong even though her character can be weak at times and doesn’t speak up for herself. She seems to run away rather than confront. Though she gains our sympathy and soon finds ourselves rooting for her. As we watch from the beginning her character is a tomboy but wears such shapeless clothes we wonder if she is in arrested development. through it all even in various sex scenes. She still seems like an innocent more than anything.

Emmanuelle Bercot as her mother is also strong. As a hard-driven woman. She has had her heart broken quite a few times and wants to believe in love but finds herself defined by the company she keeps usually male. She wants the best for her daughter but that seems in the daughter more or less getting into a relationship and finding a man. As she tries to act more like her sister than her mother. She is tough to a certain degree but has a soft spot for her daughter that she rarely shows.

This is a film that might not always make sense but it does have a charm that is constantly on display and tries to always stay in reality. Even with its more fantastical elements.

Grade: B

UNDINE (2020)

Written & Directed By: Christian Petzold
Cinematography: Hans Fromm 
Editor: Bettina Bohler

Cast: Paula Beer, Franz Rogowski, Maryam Zaree, Jacob Matschenz, Anne Ratte-Polle, Gloria Andres De Oliveira 

Undine works as a historian lecturing on Berlin’s urban development. But when the man she loves leaves her, the ancient myth catches up with her. Undine has to kill the man who betrays her and return to the water.


Writer/Director Christian Pertzold, Always seems to bring nostalgia and powerful epic love stories into the modern age. 

The film feels like a short story compared to his other films that felt like full novels even if the same length. This just doesn’t feel as strong or as Rich. Making it feel somewhat lightweight, not as daring or demanding. Which can be forgiven. As not every movie needs to be a fraught tragedy. 

As this like most of his films is expressive, vivid, and powerful. Usually unforgettable with a romance that you might aspire to have and dream of despite their tragedy. To love is to gamble and lose big at times. Even when getting what you want it hurts to a certain degree and you lose or have to sacrifice a bit to be affected in the end.

Amazed by what you went through and proud of it. As an expression of passion in all ways. Your own epic story that is universal. Only you can truly understand. As you have your own point of view and are telling this particular tale as a memoir. That is what went through my brain while watching this film.

This film feels like a more modern fairy tale, but the emotions are deep. As it is detailed and textured as one without the lore though. The tragedy is that the tale feels like it ends too soon. Never knowing what you have until over and the characters obsessing over it. Raising it to a level of legend.

Think about how you feel when you break up with someone and feel you will never get over them. Then you meet someone new and realize how bad the other relationship really was. As you never reached the same happiness or highs as is the new one

This film Feels too short. Yet it doesn’t disappoint as it has the same strength and emotions affecting two lives immeasurably but seems to have the substance of a shorter story. That here gets by more on emotions. A brief romance that packs a full love story rather than one that takes place over a longer time period. 

That has an intensity where you wonder if given more time together. Would it have flamed out? Had more stories to tell that reinforced and made this love story as rich as Uncle Scrooge’s vault from DUCKTALES or with time made to realize it was a footnote and more a blueprint for future relationships to revolve around and know what you want and how you want to feel.

It Seems after romantic epics such as PHOENIX and COLD WAR. That Writer-Director Christian Petzold has set his sights on a smaller story that while not having as much of an expanse. its depths are just as strong

Grade: B

FIRST LOVE (2019)

Directed By: Takashi Miike
Written By: Masa Nakamura 
Cinematography: Nobuyasu Kita
Editor: Akira Kamiya 

Cast: Masataka Kubota, Sakurako Konishi, Shota Sometani, Jun Murakami, Masayuki Deai, Cheng-Kuo Yen 

Leo is a young boxer, successful but unable to show emotion. He has a fight scheduled and is sure that he will win. Instead, his opponent knocks him out. This triggers a chain of unpleasant events involving drugs, corrupt cops, the Yakuza, a female assassin – and Monica, an escort that he must rescue. It’s one hell of a night for Leo.


The film is brutal in its Violence at times but what else would you expect from director Takashi Miike. Though it similarly stays silly and fun. It also keeps an emotional connection. 

This is a film that will feel immediately familiar but tries to be different in the details. As this isn’t lovers on the run but two characters with nothing to lose on the run. Who seem to fall for one another while on the run and trying to survive. 

Throughout the film, you will be able to identify what inspired the movie, characters, and scenes.

The male is More motivated and driven as the only reason he goes out of his way for her. Is that he believes he is dying. 

For the female character, the boxer is The first instance or ideal of the perfect person who did something above and beyond then for them and not fully realizing or taking time to see who the person truly is. 

Some people experience this. When they experience it fully with knowing a person. All around can be rewarding rather than just connecting for a moment.

Though strangely the couple is the least interesting part of the characters. As they are pawns In a larger story but needed to advance the story. Is more of a crime Story involving two different mobs who end up in a war over a stolen shipment set up by a dirty cop and inserting 

Each monster fang either tries to double-cross or is out for vengeance. Though each of them, also seems to have its ridiculous quirks.

The film offers some well-contained action sequences and constantly involves misunderstandings and double-crosses that leave you wondering who is out for who half the time. 

The problem here is that as the tale goes on it builds momentum and smartly to a degree doesn’t keep building and putting out its Scenes slightly distanced. So it gives characters time to breathe before the next crazy scene instead of overloading and best one after another.

The drug deal subplot and mobsters do remind the viewer of the movie TRUE ROMANCE. But other than the simpler coincidences this tale goes its own way. As this film has a bit more humor.

Though the main characters are interesting in their reasoning and characters. Including one a drug addict who is beloved, she is haunted by her father who is always in his underwear. It’s the supporting characters who

Are more interesting and keeps the film interesting and on its toes.

Grade: B

PUMPKIN (2002)

Directed by: Anthony Abrams & Adam Larson Broder
Written By: Adam Larson Broder 
Cinematography: Tim Shurstedt
Editor: Richard Halsey & Sloane Klevin 

Cast: Christina Ricci, Hank Harris, Brenda Blethyn, Dominique Swain, Marisa Coughlan, Sam Ball, Harry Lennix, Nina Foch, Caroline Aaron, Melissa McCarthy, Julio Oscar Mechoso, Michael Bacall, Erin Bartlett, Amy Adams, Michelle Kruseic, Shaun Weiss 

Perky, perfect Carolyn and her Alpha Omega Pi sisters plan to win Sorority of the Year by impressing the Greek Council with a killer charity: coaching mentally challenged athletes for the regional Challenged Games. When Carolyn’s assigned to coach Pumpkin she’s terrified at first, but soon sees in him something she’s never seen before: gentle humanity and honest clarity that touches her soul. To the horror of her friends and Pumpkin’s overprotective mother, Carolyn falls in love, becoming an outcast in the process. As Carolyn’s “perfect life” falls apart, Pumpkin teaches her that perfect isn’t always perfect after all.


This film tries to be subversive in that it tries to satirize 1950s forbidden romance melodramas. While also trying to be one with a few modern sensibilities. As well as more humor that tends to be cynical at times.

Where it seems like the whole world will be shattered because of this romance between a sorority college girl and a mentally challenged man she meets while trying to do charity work.

That at times can be seen as in bad taste, but ultimately remains sweet. 

Most of the characters here come across as stereotypes at first until the film allows them to show more depth. At first, it seems fairly typical but then becomes more subversive.

Though there is sex it is delivered in a more subdued manner, Except for one scene.

The film plays more like a teenage melodrama. Though too mature for them. So it might appeal to college-aged audiences. It is also a film full of bright colors 

The film seems to try to be naughty and a little controversial to gain more interest. Almost like a stunt, but as it goes along proves itself to be a little more conventional.

Though it does show a nice transition for the characters. From living their lives in a kind of young dreamworld and then being awakened to the harsh truth of reality and the world outside of college.

The soundtrack is very catchy and achieves a life of its own. As I was obsessed with it and one particular song immediately after watching the film. It ended up being the thing I remember most about the film:

The reason I discovered it was the cast. Especially Star Christina Ricci. As this was a time when she seemed to be the independent film girl. After BUFFALO’ 66 and THE OPPOSITE OF SEX. Though this doesn’t rise to the same level as those films. Here she gives an earnest performance. As most of the film is built around her character.

This feels like a film that is missing writer/director John Waters’ touch as he might have made it a little more sharp and grotesque to a degree. Though the filmmakers here seem to win for his territory with a little more modesty and sweetness, that can be bitter, with touches of bad taste. Lacking the camp needed. As a throwback to simple times and exposing the ridiculous class traditions with humor 

GRADE: C

SONG TO SONG (2017)

Written & Directed By: Terrence Malick 
Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki
Editor: Hank Corwin, Keith Frase & Rehman Nizarali 

Cast: Ryan Gosling, Michael Fassbender, Rooney Mara, Natalie Portman, Cate Blanchett, Val Kilmer, Berniece Marlohe 

Two intersecting love triangles. Obsession and betrayal set against the music scene in Austin, Texas.


The film offers cameos from bands and musicians. Like Robert Altman’s THE PLAYER only less about the life and business just what kind of culture it takes place in 

The film is filled more with moments of the day-to-day. That is broken into fragments and left for us to witness and examine. As really the film takes place and shows us the lives of those attending a music festival. 

As it becomes a travelogue of the surroundings with a love of narration, that is supposed to help explain but becomes more oddly poetic. Meaning that what we see while visually stunning is a surface. While we learn what is underneath from the narration. Which offers up an explanation of sorts. 

The films of Writer/Director Terrence Malick usually revolve around the individual and their relationships with the world. Romantic and intimate ones are at the heart of the films. 

This could have easily been a modern NASHVILLE type ensemble, but the music festival is a backdrop for the intentions of music. With emotions and thoughts expressed through the melody with words. just like an album has a bunch of songs. Some are in the same Mold and some are distinct. Others offer a different slice of life and a continuation of themes,  but still a different moment and rules.

Going in you don’t know what to expect. But when it comes to director Terrence Malik’s later films. You kind of do, wide-angle lenses, narration, beautiful cinematography, poetic license almost abstract to the non-existent story. Left for you to meditate on, believing that this new film will be the one they have wanted from him and waited for. That will be his next BADLANDS or DAYS OF HEAVEN 

He tries to stick with the story more and each time while considered good. Not the classic fans hoped for. Though that seems better and is taken more seriously later,  then When they come out originally slow them to be seen more as pieces of art. Then just movies. Even if more and more end up as passable yet disappointing to a certain degree rather than good or even memorable 

The camera never really stops. We see private moments more glossy and pretty people doing normal things. Only with more shine and attention on these moments. Offering Communication through images. Never let lies during full conversations do it.

Though you might know what to expect. Though he offers you shards and then Leaves you to interpret and figure out what just happened. Sometimes with Narrations that sound like excerpts from books 

Usually, Actors clamor to work with Mr. Malik and his films usually are star-studded. Only then did he cut out half of them from the film. As they are not needed in what he wants to present. Which he finds during the editing process. 

So his films always seem like a cut he came to that was releasable after cutting down in the editing room from what might be the first draft filmed. If there was even a script. That it ends up feeling like A book with missing chapters and characters whose fate we never learn.

It ends up feeling more Like a music video with a score but missing the main song as there is a score but no singing necessarily. 

As characters who are almost like newborns come in and take out the narrative partially after an initial connection. Twisting things around a bit. 

Then the actors are filmed like fashion shoots. Like a footnote or introduction to a side story that affects the overall narrative.

Usually one can get excited when he sets his films in the present. Not so much historical epics,  but his strongest films are those usually based on books and true stories that have actual plots. Allowing them each a few chapters they tend to overlap through each other. To be the one In control of their own POV and their marriage and romantic missteps with guest stars.

The film seems to want to be ambitious but leaves itself hard to grade as it comes across more as an art installation rather than a film. 

TO THE WONDER was his last most consistent film.  As it seems the most focused 

This ends up as A long movie that feels longer than it is and monotonous 

It seems like Michael Fassbender’s character is a music manager who is in love with Rooney mara’s character, who works for him and is mildly in the know but once she falls in love with Ryan gosling’s character. At first, she still cheats with Fassbender. Then once she stops, Fassbender meets and marries shortly afterward a waitress he picks up quickly. Where it is all love at first then they start to sleep around. Until she has a romantic liaison and he gets her into drugs and groupies 

Then His wife dies and Mara’s character is with gosling. But he seems to still have feelings for his ex and they break up. Once he finds out Rooney had an affair. She signs with Fassbender and then has a same-sex relationship. Gosling moves home to be around family and falls for Cate Blanchett who no one seems to think is good for him. So it continuously plays with this melodrama. 

This is one of these Films where you find yourself constantly checking the time where it’s headed and shocked it’s not over yet. 

A film that might be smarter than the audience. It is also a film that wants the audience To Interpret it all rather than explain. which can equal big filmmaking wishes handled by a true artist or someone who knows what they are doing.

He sets himself apart as Brave. Most filmmakers choose to have the audience interpret relationships or endings or characters. 

Whereas by the end explaining the plot/story is simple as there is so little of it. It whereas it is started out with visuals montages narration poetry, but barely any music which the title suggests there should be more of some 

It all feels Pretentious where One might wonder if the director had a script as it feels like there is none and they are making it up as they go along at the location and trying to fit it all In

In the end, the film doesn’t offer as much music as expected 

Grade: C

TALK TO HER (2002)

Written & Directed By: Pedro Almodovar 
Cinematography: Javier Aguirresarobe
Editor: Jose Salcedo

Cast: Javier Camara, David Grandinetti, Leonor Watling, Rosario Flores, Mariola Fuentes, Geraldine Chaplin

After a chance encounter at a theater, two men, Benigno and Marco, meet at a private clinic where Benigno works. Lydia, Marco’s girlfriend and a bullfighter by profession, has been gored and is in a coma. It so happens that Benigno is looking after another woman in a coma, Alicia, a young ballet student. The lives of the four characters will flow in all directions, past, present and future, dragging all of them towards an unsuspected destiny.


When it comes to Director Pedro Almodovar, With certain films his attention to detail is mesmerizing by even just the appreciation to women their style dress mannerisms and femininity is fascinating and he pulls us in 

Especially for a filmmaker who has always been artistic but also an early provocateur looking more to shock it seems Maybe now,  we Just pay more attention to every aspect of his filmmaking. Such as Melodrama, sense of color and suspense

As he seems to base his later films around stories and the works of noted authors he is a fan of, trying to match the depth and tone of their work.

Which might be why this film feels like reading a book. Introductions are made for our main characters but we really don’t know their situations, emotions, motivations or history until the film. Keeps moving and chooses to make the revelations of the twisted stories and personal histories. 

As things aren’t always as they seem. It feels like watching Two love stories that are parallel, but then come together. Though it could also be seen by the end. As before , that leads to the worthwhile love story of two damaged people brought together.

As one character stays a victim throughout. As she is more an object of fascination and infatuation. A kind of ideal, who is violated without her knowledge or permission. Then in the end. Looks to get into a romance with someone involved with her attacker of sorts.

It’s a film that challenges you. As the audience might not like or agree with the ending. As one romance is cut short though has time to blossom, yet find out it was ending. The other romance never truly existed. As it had a promising start until extreme acts ended it before it could truly start.

As the character of Benigno could be seen as hopeless romantic, but is more a stalker. Who gets his chance to be near his obsession. Ultimately being devoted to her care and taking care of her, but also getting to be physically intimate with her. Which he never treats as sexual or abused in that way at first. In fact he seems asexual sexually as though he loves her. He seems attracted and flirtatious with Marco in their friendship. 

It would seem he lives up to the ultimate title of caregiver. He also seems to idolize women as when he first falls for Alicia, it is while he is taking care of his own dying mom and it seems once she is gone. Out of loneliness his care and loving feelings are transferred to Alicia. just as he is devoted to her in the hospital, but opens up and shows feelings for Alicia even as his co-worker obviously likes him but he stays blind to it.

In fact until he is inspired by a silent movie (in a shocking and visually stunning scene) he never gets sexual. The one time he does in a selfish and undefendable act, is when he is finally punished. Throughout the movie we never really see sex, but it is introduced and we are thrown in The emotional pull of it. 

Where it gets more troubled is that this act actually brings upon a kind of miracle… a cure. Where he suffers and deserves to for her recovery and it feels like a minor religious allegory of it all. It also causes a salvation for his friend Marco

Throughout the film there are artistic touches that only add color to the characters and situations. In the end what should be simple is so haywire emotionally, but has beautiful conclusions. Albeit dark and in moments that feel sumptuous.

Even in the bullfighting sequences more the alpha but most emotional of the couple. She always feels more in control. As physically stronger and masculine yet always needing to be saved and supported in life.

It feels like we are watching lives with a bit of serendipity, not a movie or a story. Yet we are still showcased the more interesting parts 

Oddly this film is exactly what I thought it would be but still amazing. As it unfolds like a novel and feels nurturing and strangely full. Even though at heart it is disturbing if you think deep about it. it is also romantic

Grade: B+

SOLO CON TU PAREJA (1991)

Directed by: Alfonso Cuaron  Written by: Alfonso Cuaron & Carlos Cuaron Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki  Editor: Alfonso Cuaron & Luis Patlan 

Cast: Daniel Gimenez Cacho, Claudia Ramirez, Luis De Icaza, Astrid Hadad, Isabel Benet, Toshiro Hisaki, Dobrina Liubomirova, Ricardo Dalmacci 

A womanizer is falsely diagnosed with AIDS by a jealous lover and falls in love with a woman equally suicidal as he.


The film already feels outdated. The humor seems a bit lost in translation with the town being so dark. A misdiagnosed aids story played for laughs. As a kind of slapstick sexual comedy.

There seems to be so much in the slapstick situational first half of the movie. That it never feels quite enjoyable or cohesive.

There is plenty of sex yet the films never quite achieved becoming erotic. Instead, it feels crueler.

The last third of the film feels ridiculous as only one scene throughout the film truly feels actually funny.

Most of the film feels so far-fetched and then over-the-top romantic that it takes a lot to believe most of it. 

The thing the movie does have going for it. It is artistically directed by director Alfonso Cuaron making his feature film directorial debut for what ends up such a slightly heavily comedic premise. Which ends up coming off as soft and weak though. Ever seems to penetrate its own artifice.

The best friends are set up to be so over the top nerdy that they lend themselves to stereotypes.

The shocking part is that considering the subject matter you would expect more shocks but the film Is surprisingly bland.

Maybe looking back at the film through modern eyes. Makes what might have been cutting edge seem like an artifact that was of the time more of a fad and modern that fell out of fashion quickly. As it might have been looked at as In Bad taste.

It also seems like a film whose story was made to shock to get attention, for the rookie director to get noticed but ended up pretty lightweight 

Grade: C

DOWN TO YOU (2000)

Written & Directed by: Kris Issacson 
Cinematography: Robert D. Yeoman
Editor: Stephen A. Rooter

Cast: Freddie Prinze Jr., Julia Stiles, Selma Blair, Rosario Dawson, Shawn Hatosy, Zak Orth, Ashton Kutcher, Henry Winkler, Lucie Arnaz, Lauren German, Lola Glaudini, Adam Carolla, Jimmy Kimmel 

A young man wins and loses the first serious love of his life. Al Connelly falls in love with the girl of his dreams. After the summer she breaks up with him. As he tries to recover Al goes to desperate measures.


This was after Miramax studios had a hit with the movie SHE’S ALL THAT and seemingly green-lit a bunch of teen aimed romantic comedies. Usually starring their golden boy at the time Freddie Prinze Jr.

This feels like a budgeted student film for a studio release. Everything looks cheap and garish. As it feels amateurish in direction and story.

The film is a simple romance story about a relationship and distractions as well as temptations and the influence of friends who rotate around them.

Selma Blair plays a temptress and Freddie Prinze Jr’s crush but the film Never makes her look that attractive or tempting. Maybe because they make her more television teen movie friendly, a woman of the world supposedly who comes off like the movie and it’s character pretentious but have nothing to even back any of that up with. 

Rosario Dawson seems to be cast only to add some diversity, for Julia Stiles’ character to have one constant friend of her own. Even Dawson is barely used except to add stoner humor to the film. Why the only minority character for that? 

You have seen this type of film a thousand times, much better. This adds nothing new or original to the formula.

The worst is that the film believes itself witty. When it is clearly not. As obviously this film again is made more for teens than the older ones? Just going by subject matter. Though plays more for a younger audience as their ultimate idea of love and romance.

Maybe because it is set in college that everything comes off as what college can be frugal, fun, and messy with bad taste. Yet believing yourself sophisticated with glaze drunken confidence and room For plenty of overcompensation. 

Mainly because we get to know these characters. Yet never become interested in them. 

The film tries to be true to and force the time periods and is adorable. Like putting them In a blender filled with the then-current themes and styles. Trying to be naughty or edgy yet cool but so watered down to make it feel dormant and dull.

The film has a particularly uninspired music Video playback that feels like how one would play if the director needed to over compose with dialogue for lacking any visual panache or he’s forced into that Miramax/Dimension romantic teen comedy formula. 

The soundtrack is filled with basic or generic general music that might have been popular at the time. Except for a song from the band  Cibo Matto

To give the film a kind of indie feel. Not to mention matching its College setting and fits the film’s mindset. 

The film is a familiar tale where all the fun feels taken out of the way. While trying to seem fun. Including somehow cross-promoting with THE MAN SHOW.

The film does offer some creative touches and luckily has a cast of recognizable actors before and during their popularity. 

GRADE: D