paulouscan Implausible betting, especially the way the script brings it and the performers and the play make it. A few twists of the plot may attract some interest, but overall, the film is perfectly stupid, "eau de rose", despite his unrealistic disguise behind NY American artists. Some gags are trying to make us believe that nothing is serious there, but the insistence of the scenario, the traditional Disney-type music of U.S. cinema, relentlessly trying to highlight ten times with bold lines all the time any love emotion when it is supposed to be present. We feel that it addresses an audience which it does not think too much good about its ability to feel and judge for itself, or is it because if fear of misinterpretation or direction that would betray the intentions of the writer, the author. Why such a thick layer of musical peanut butter (brain?). Sarah Jessica is doing its best, obviously, but has not yet be seen out of the cart of the series B… Scenario is rather confused, message stinks the scent of rosewater usual easy clichés. Not much to be grabbed out of this, in my opinion.

lorinarae1 Eric Schaffer is excellent and so funny. I look for really big things from him. Sarah Jessica Parker is a hoot and an early Scarlett Johanson is beautiful. I'm not a big romantic comedy fan. But I love this movie. I hope it goes down as a cult classic. Ben Stiller is also a hoot as only he can be. I recommend this movie to anyone of the age to watch it. It is a great viewing pleasure for all ages old enough to see an R rated movie. Although some may call it a quirky movie, and it is, it is worth all the quirkiness it holds. It is also an independent movie and I usually don't care for those either. Even my husband enjoys this movie. It is one we watch at least once a year. It is definitely on my top ten list of favorites.

chaoscraz I don't know how to classify this movie. It is disgustingly bad. It is not funny, yet its supposed to be a comedy. The only part mildly entertaining is Ben Stiller's character, yet he is not developed at all. Everything else is just so serious. These two losers have it so bad. Oh, poor them. Please! Do jump off the Brooklyn Bridge.I did not know anything about this movie before watching it. Initially I thought Joe (Eric Schaeffer) was a homosexual. After all, he had very feminine characteristics. Additionally, he wore a dress in parts of the movie. And also, there is his hair (you know what I'm talking about). And the makeup, etc... etc... I'll admit that I couldn't stand watching the last 20 minutes, but I do know how it ends. Anyway, it would have turned out better if Joe came out of the closet.This is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. It should get a rating of 1. Don't watch this movie!

tedg Spoilers herein.I sought this film because I was impressed with `One Night at McCools.' That project had flaws, mostly related to the poor acting and production values. but I thought the vision behind it was clever, and in line with some admirable projects. But the vision behind this project is pretty cookiecutter. Its a quite serious attempt at the primary formula for a date movie, made worse for missing the mark because it came whole form one guy's mind.But it had some clever elements: Ben Stiller as a painter who literally throws himself into his work, clearly the alterego of Schaeffer. That's fun if you know Stiller. Its something like his `Mystery Men' character. Another element is the Beatles reference. Lots of writers my age are using them, from `Vanilla Sky' to `I Am Sam.' Here, the target is the famous `Lucy in the Sky,' which is great fun if you know what's behind the song. Otherwise, it is a long dreary march to the end.The notion of stealing a narrative from spying (as Joe does to the Elle character) has some promise too. Squandered, alas.Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 4: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.