rsternesq Just for starters, this is a very, very boring movie. Not even the clothes or the icky implied sex plus dirty words said with a smile reduces the overwhelming ennui. Her dad is played by a 70 year old man saying he is 57. She says she has been legal for three years. Does that mean 21 or 24? When you look thirty, who cares? If Mr. Doughboy is the love interest who is suave and a skateboarding infant is the love interest who went to Europe to "find himself," my advice is recast, recast, recast. By the way, the complaints about the blonds all looking the same is correct. they were too similar and I think it was intended as a joke but it was flat. Too flat to help lift the proceedings. Boring. Boring. Boring. Is that 10 line minimum satisfied yet?

ab993 Wow. I turned this movie off so many times, but I kept coming back to it, like a bad accident on the highway that you can't turn away from!Where to begin?As others have pointed out, the leads have NO chemistry, to the point where it actually turned my stomach to see them together, and not even because of the age difference (Sarah Michelle Gellar actually looks about 40 here...)SMG is supposed to be playing a bright, vivacious, preternaturally smart young woman. She comes across as a sullen sorority girl. Her acting was terrible, especially during a scene where she is supposed to be drunk. The movie gives you no indication as to why a legendary editor would be interested in her, other than issues with his daughter (which the movie hints at). She and her family are supposed to be Jewish. Those were the WASP-iest Jews I've ever seen...The dialogue... oh boy. A bunch of seventh grader references to major literary texts doesn't make the script sound smart.

pandit Take your average brainless romantic comedy, that is fluffy but entertaining enough, that gives a few laughs. Formula food for movie goers. Remove the comedy, and then remove any believable romance. What do you have remaining? Not even drama. It is nice to see Sarah Michelle Gellar in something, and she is a fine enough actress. Alec Baldwin, stock rising after 30 Rock, was not the right choice for this 'story', and between them they cannot save a weak script or inject anything of interest. They are not convincing of love, nor even interact in any interesting way. Nor are there any compensatory laughs. The plot is a straight forward slice-of-life of a girl who meets an older man, and shacks up with him. What happens in the end? Nothing to care about.

DominiqueAinsley Was this movie a cinematic revolution? No. But how many really are, anyway? Was this movie cute and fun? Absolutely. Was it any worse than any other romantic comedy out there? No. Maybe it was a little bit formulaic, but the formula it followed has resulted in success for a number of other films, so what's so offensive? It wasn't racist, it wasn't intolerant, it wasn't discriminatory or anything else that should cause people to condemn it. It was fluff, with some moments that were very genuine (ie, the scene on the swings between Brett and her brother). The acting, while maybe not Oscar-worthy, was sincere and likable, especially Sarah Michelle Gellar. I liked this movie, judge me all you want. It was cute, it was fun and it wasn't as cliché as most romantic comedies (ie, they don't end up together). The characters are slightly more self- reflexive than you see in most romantic comedies, and the self-reflexivity of a character leads the viewers to be self-reflexive. Maybe we all need to grow up, and seeing Brett navigate the waters of young adulthood in pair of leather pants and some fabulous Louboutins was enough to make this film worthwhile. So again, will it be one day considered a milestone in cinema? No. Did it make me smile? Yes. Isn't that what film is about?