NEW YORK, I LOVE YOU

Guy’s almost review...

The second edition to “Paris je t’aime”. This time they collected a bunch of “younger” directors to contribute, one of those happen to be Natalie Portman, more on that later.

I’m not gonna go into every little short that made it into the movie even though I should. I guess I’m too lazy. I’ll just tell you about the ones that I liked. First one, the one starring Ethan Hawke, Maggie Q, Chris Cooper and Robin Wright Penn- pretty good cast? Probably the best cast, too, and they delivered. This short is about one couple (Cooper and Penn) trying to rekindle their love with some role-playing (outside of the bedroom) and another couple (Hawke and Q) that meet for the first time on the street. The man meeting the woman on the street is charming and has every line in the book. When he finally closes the deal he finds out that the woman is a prostitute, a great twist and very funny.

The other short that I liked was with Shia LeBeouf and John Hurt. LeBeouf plays a weird crippled character that throws himself out of a window... yeah, out of a window. Intrigued?

P.S Natalie Portman’s short sucked.

Guy’s Raing: I don’t know if it’s worth watching to be honest.

Girl's scattered thoughts...

I saw this movie a couple days ago now and I'm having a hard time recollecting every short. I'll judge each one individually, as I remember them:

The first one, I believe, was with Hayden Christensen and his co-star in Jumper, the girl from the OC. It was alright. Definitely a good starting point for a film if all the shorts are to improve from there... expect that wasn't the case here.

The next one, which I didn't even remember without the help of the ol' internet, was with Natalie Portman and some Indian guy. They are in love, but because of their cultural differences (Portman plays a jew), they can't get married. Too bad, so sad, but definitely didn't touch this stone heart. Thumbs down.

Numero tres: Orlando Bloom. Bah!

Four was good. This is the one that Guy liked above, with Ethan Hawke, Chris Cooper and some women I don't know. The twists are a bit gimmicky, but I did not care much while watching it. With the past three shorts more disappointing than the last, this was a breath of fresh air into the whole movie.

Number five was even better, though. A step in the right direction! This was starring the Russian guy in the new Star Trek, Blake Lively from Gossip Girl and directed by the guy who made Rush Hour. What a mix! This short was humorous, awkward, and had a compact plot easily fit into the short. The director and writer didn't over stretch their time or characters, and although they used a bit of narration, it wasn't annoying.

Bradley Cooper seems to be popping up everywhere right now, and he was actually fairly good in the sixth short. I almost enjoyed this one the most, as it was about two people who had met over a few too many drinks, had a good time, and ended up having sex with other. As they head towards a second encounter, we listen into their thoughts about the whole experience, their guilt, their doubts, their pleasures. It's very true to how one feels after a one night stand that went amazingly well, but you aren't quite sure about where it could go, of if it should go there, or what you are doing... Watch this short. It explains it better than I.

Short seven is the one Guy mentioned with Shia LaBeuof jumping out of a window. This one left me looking like a question mark. Not my cup of tea.

And then there was Natalie's directorial debut, which failed miserably at everything except making all the other shorts look great!

The last two shorts were good, too. Nine involves a painter whose inspiration is a shy asian girl who works at a tea shop. He finds her gorgeous, but ends up drinking himself to death when he can't have enough of her. Ten concerns an elderly couple on their anniversary, 63 years together or some crazy number like that. It's a cute way to cap off the shorts, and definitely made Guy and I share one of those "touching" moments.

Still, even with the moments of greatness in these shorts, there were too many other moments... Like shitty moments that makes you want to turn the movie off and watch something else.

Girl's Rating: Ditch Portman and you have a great movie!

PANDORUM

Guy’s love for Sci-fi...

Usually, at least nowadays, when sci-fi movies show up they seem to have a PG-13 rating. I like the sci-fi’s that have a little bit of blood and gore in them. Movies like “Alien” and “Event Horizon”, not that I didn’t enjoy Avatar, I loved it. I mean I want that old school feel. Now “Pandorum” might not be the greatest movie that has come out in this genre, but at least it tries.

So in the future when we have ruined everything on earth (as usual) we send out some humans in space to find us a new place to live. The fucked up thing is that there’s a mental disease that you can catch by being in space too long called “Pandorum”. This disease makes you super crazy and you’ll start wanting to kill your crew-mates. Well, Bower and Payton (Foster and Quaid) wake up on this ship to start their shifts only to find that the spaceship is full of crazy zombielike aliens.

Wait a minute. Here’s the twist and the spoiler. The ship had already reached its location, a planet that the remaining humans need to terraform, but is now stuck on the bottom of an ocean. We won’t find this out until the end of the movie, and it’s a pretty great twist.

The thing is that so much time has passed on the ship that humans have evolved into these crazy aliens. So we get to go on a alien killing spree with the remaining humans on this ship. So what about the space disease? Well, Payton (Quaid) catches it and tries to blow the ship to smithereens. This gives the movie even more adrenalin.

Guy’s Rating: A real dude/nerd flick that could turn into one of those guilty pleasure things.

Girl's rebuttal...

This movie is not a dude/nerd flick, as I am neither and I liked it. Although at times it was a bit confusing, and some of the story lines seemed redundant, it was still a good movie. I also enjoyed Event Horizon and the Alien series, as my love for Sci-Fi almost comes to par with Guy's, so movies like this one will always seem enjoyable.

There were two things I didn't enjoy. One was Dennis Quaid. I don't like him. His face always looks like he is eating something sour... The second thing is the poster. It makes no sense! What is that coming out of the person's mouth and eyes? Definitely nothing I saw in the movie.

Girl's Rating: I second what Guy said about the guilty pleasure thing.

THE LIMITS OF CONTROL

Guy’s hmmm?...

When Girl and I watched this, we laughed and sat silent in confusion as characters entered upon the screen either in slow motion or just naked. I think that’s the beauty of a filmmaker like Jim Jarmusch: He has reached a point in his career where he can do exactly what he wants. He has that built in audience who will watch whatever he does. I am one of those people.

If you watch this thinking that you’ll get a “Down by Law” or “Ghost Dog: The Last Samurai” experience then you’ll be really disappointed. I almost wish that I came in to this movie without any expectations so I could experience his filmmaking for the first time (Girl will probably have more on that).

This movie is pretty much about a guy/assassin called the “Lone Man” who by some weird encounters with people, all of whom ask him if he speaks Spanish, leads him to his attended target. Yes, he will get his man, who is played by Bill Murray.

There’s really no story here, just a collage of weird yet interesting characters and beautiful locations. It feels like he only made this movie as an excuse to travel the world. Sadly, I didn’t watch this in HD which would have made the viewing a lot better.

Guy’s Rating: I don’t know how to explain it but there was something here that made me love it.

Girl's love of the obscure...

There was no point to this movie, no concrete story, no in-depth characters, but it was great! This film had a sense of self that was humorous and unconventional, making the watching of it thoroughly enjoyable. Guy's right when he implies that I have no idea who this director is or what kind of movies he makes, but I like him because he is mad. Between the woman who doesn't seem to own a stitch of clothing, to Tilda Swinton spinning around in a trench coat and an umbrella, to Bill Murray randomly showing up in the end as the mysterious "bad" guy... I can't even guarantee that he was the bad guy as they barely touch the surface of what he even did! It's only implied that he is bad. Plus, he is Bill Murray. He is the best bad guy around! So sarcastic, so amusing.

Girl's Rating: Something about this movie was funny. I'm not sure exactly what it was, but I laughed, and that's all that really matters.

FIVE MINUTES OF HEAVEN

Guy’s half a minute of reading...

I can’t help but to feel a little bit sad while watching this movie. The reason for that is the Liam Neeson’s wife past while this movie was in post. Now after the passing he still manages to deliver some very good performances. This one should be added to one of his better.

Neeson plays a man who in his teens was part of the troubles in Ireland. During that time he took the life of another young man. Nesbitt plays that man’s younger brother. Presently, they get to meet. Nesbitt want nothing more than to see Neeson’s character dead so he can have his “five minutes of heaven”. But during the movie we find out that the one who needs closure the most is the man who committed the crime.

This movie takes place on very few locations and is more about the dialogue and the tension between the two characters. Both actors deliver award worthy performances and will have you hooked in for the 90 minutes that this movie takes.

You will have mixed feelings about the two and I’m pretty sure that the audience will have a difference of opinion when they leave the movie. That’s what’s good about this film - it forces you to take a stance.

Guy’s rating: Well worth the watch and the struggle.

Girl's meh...

The picture on display to the left? Yeah, I don't even remember that part of the movie. That's how forgettable it was. So, unlike guy, I didn't enjoy this film. Nor did I have mixed feelings about the two characters... I didn't have any feelings at all.

There was an absence of suspense to this film. As the audience, you know from the beginning that the two characters are going to meet, one way or another. Unfortunately, for someone like me, I got bored too quickly with the drawn out scenes and unreasonable dialogue that I didn't even get to see the whole third Act. Maybe if I had stuck around and not gone to petter around the kitchen for half an hour, I would be able to say there was something here worth watching, but...

Girl's Rating: Nothing here worth watching.

IS ANYBODY THERE?

Guy’s respect for Caine...

Bill Milner plays a young boy that lives in an elderly home and who happens to be obsessed with death and dead people (ghosts). Why does he live there? His parents turned their house into this type of living facility to make ends meet.

Michael Caine plays an old magician who recently lost his wife. He moves into the home under protest. The boy and the old man start off as enemies, but after the boy saves Caine from committing suicide, they start to develop a friendship. Caine sees that the boy’s obsession with death has taken him away from the real world and the living. He takes it upon himself, as the last thing in his life, to make the boy fit in.

It’s a cute little coming of age tale. You get those warm little feelings all over when you watch it. Caine delivers one of his most powerful performances in years. I guess that’s what happens when you make a movie purely because of the story. I say that cause this is small budget film and Caine can not have gotten his usual paycheck.

Guy’s Rating: Did you see “About a Boy”? You probably did because everybody said that it was amazing, I didn’t. I have a hard time with Hugh Grant. This however is something I can stand behind when I say “Watch it”.

Girl's respect for Caine...

The only reason I enjoyed this movie as much as I did was because of Michael Caine. Sean Connery and him are two of the cutest old men I know, and I always take pleasure in watching their movies, whether it's shit or not.

Caine made this movie great, but there were other good things about this film besides him. Although I can't see too many similarities to "About a Boy", like Guy supposedly did, the story and characters were just as entertaining, if not more so, than that film. Maybe it's the endearing British accents, or just Caine himself in comparison to Hugh Grant, but this movie get's my two thumbs, were the other only got one of them.

The young boy was very good as exactly that, a young boy. He wasn't wiser or more mature or more special than any other kid, like a lot of movies try to make their child actors. This kid was just a kid that grew up in a not exactly normal situation, but he still acted childish, unreasonable, sneaky... All the great traits of children that I hope to avoid being around for at least another 5 or 6 years.

Girl's Rating: Worth the watch when you are bored, at home with your significant other, trying to have an inexpensive date night.

COLD SOULS

Girl's omitted review...

I barely watched this film, although from what I saw I can say that the plot was intriguing, there was a healthy balance of humor and angst, and the acting was on par with Paul Giamatti's usual best.

Still, with all that, I wasn't captivated enough by what was happening on screen to sit and watch the whole thing. Maybe it just didn't interest me, or maybe Guy has me watching too many god-damn movies! Either way, I can't honestly say much on this one.

Girl's Rating: I second whatever Guy says... Unless what he says is nonsense.

Guy's review...

It seems to be trend to play yourself in movies. John Malkovich did it a couple of years back and Bruce Willis did it in that stupid movie with Robert De Niro recently. The time has come for Paul Giamatti to do the same and if I have anything to say then I say that he did a better job than both those dudes.

So Paul plays Paul an actor that has a hard time coping with life and this bleeds into his acting career. He reads an ad in a newspaper about how people can part with their souls and store them in a little box somewhere. After some thought, Paul goes to this "clinic" and extracts his soul from his body. Life is a lot easier now, but (yes but) some Russians have started a business where they sell Russian souls to Americans and steal American souls and sell them to Russians. Well, Paul's soul gets stolen and he has to go and look for it.

This is a coming of age tale as well. Paul learns about life and how to live it by traveling through Moscow with a blond Russian woman who he soon falls for.

I can't really explain why I liked the movie but I did. It seems that I have a weakness for Paul Giamatti. Not the kind of weakness that Girl has for Downey Jr. I don't think anyone has that weakness for Giamatti. This movie was well-played on all parts and, most importantly, it's something I haven't seen before. This is a plus when you have to watch five movies a day.

Guy's Rating: Something different and something great.

AMELIA

Girl's blah blah blah...

Hilary Swank has fallen far from her Oscar wins with this one. Ameila Earhart, to a young girl raised in the North American education system, was a well-noted female heroine, someone us girls were to look up to. Watching this movie, I can't seem to understand why. She wasn't overly smart. She was kind of a slut, an adulteress no less. And! She died because she was too stubborn to realize maybe what she -wanted- to do, could not be done. In my opinion, it seems my teachers were trying to teach me three lessons: one, you don't have to be smart to get far in life, so don't go to school; two, sleep with whoever you want without the guilt, even when you get married; and three, do what you want to do, even if it'll most likely mean you kill yourself and some other innocent along the way, leaving your husband a widower and many more traumatized for the loss.

This movie was slow, boring, and had no real conflict throughout it's duration. There is the flying, yes, but any conflict there is diffused by the dull visual of Hilary Swank nervous in a cockpit with a silly hat on. It doesn't make for great cinema. Also, the fact she is a woman was a big deal in reality, but in the movie she seemed to get what she wanted and charm her way along when she didn't, so any gender conflicts were, again, diffused.

Girl's Rating: It seems the script was written with the hope that the appeal of Ameila's character would be enough to pull an audience through 111 minutes... Well, it wasn't.

Guy's view of flying...

To be honest, I didn't know that much about Amelia Earhart. My knowledge of her was that I knew that she flew planes. I knew she was someone that young females looked up to as well, but not how much. I have never looked up to anyone that decided to be a pilot. I just feel that they're stupid, and I might think this because I've developed a fear of flying over the years. This movie proves my point too: It's dangerous to fly. Earhart died in her plane and nobody found her.

The thing that bugs me the most about this picture is the never ending voiceover by Hillary Swank where she recites poem-like sentences about how beautiful the sky and clouds are. Was Earhart a poet? Or are these thoughts from an old diary of hers they found? Whatever it was, it was really annoying.

Hillary Swank is famous for playing strong women. Her part in "Million Dollar Baby" is the first that springs to mind. Sure, Amelia Earhart was a strong and great woman but in this movie it seems like her husband gets her all the endorsements, planes and whatnots. After he does the legwork she "just" flies the plane. I mean they could have painted her to be a more competent woman.

On another note. The acting in this movie from everyone was just awful. Everything was overplayed and I felt sorry for most of the talent. I guess with the director strting off in Bollywood, she just got used to overacting.

Guy's Rating: I'd rather be on a nine hour plane ride with turbulence than watch this movie again.

I HOPE THEY SERVE BEER IN HELL

Guy's guy view...

Within the first couple of minutes of this movie, Girl told me that this was based on a bestseller novel. No bells were ringing as she told me about a passage in the book where Tucker Max bangs a girl up the a-hole which then escalates into puking and pooing everywhere. I've seen the cover of this book before, but never read it myself.

The movie is pretty much an "American Pie" movie in disguise. It's "coming of age", naked women and a diarrhea joke (more on that later). As I've been led to believe the book is apparently very graphic and full of hardcore stories. This would have been way more interesting to see. Well, I guess you don't make money that way, but I don't think this project made that much cash anyways.

Back to the poo joke. There's a scene in this movie where Tucker Max gets enlightened to all the bad things he do to people. It takes form in violent diarrhea. We get to follow Tucker through a hotel as he searches for a john. He doesn't really make it and shits all over himself. A scene that was supposed to be gross out funny (I guess), but just ended up being very stupid and stomach turning.

Another thing I hate. In movies where there's a wedding, there's always someone (in this case Tucker Max) that shows up and steals the thunder from the bride and the groom. This time Tucker realizes after shitting all over himself that he was a bad friend. He goes to the wedding which he was uninvited to for making his friend lie to his fiancee and takes the mic out of the best man's hand. He makes a speech which pretty much is about how bad he was as a person and how good he is now. Well, everybody forgives him and they live happily ever after. Scenes like this are bullshit and that's all I have to say about that.

Guy's Rating: Stupid, and not very funny. I'd rather watch "Porky's", "Animal House" or even "American Pie".

Girl's guy view...

Yes, I've seen this book and read snatches of the content here and there. I've never purchased the book, and for that I am grateful. Reading just parts of it offended me, and I'm not easily offended, so I would not want to endorse the man who is benefiting from this.

What offended me was not the sexist comments or blunt misogyny, but the fact this guy has such low morals and high thoughts of himself. The capacity for a human being to get through life in this manner, and not get knocked down, must lie in such an overwrought egotistical nature neither you nor I can comprehend it. This book, and this movie, best display a personality type rather found in a gutter than on the bestseller list or blockbuster highlight reel.

That being said, unlike Guy, I did laugh at the whole diarrhea scene. It was so disgusting, I couldn't help but cackle a bit, while cringing all the while.

Girl's Rating: It's not a crime against women to watch this movie, it's a crime against humanity.

SHERLOCK HOLMES

Guy's review...

A much needed reboot of a British classic that has been kicked around for many, many years. This time Hollywood shows up to the rescue. I would never say this about Hollywood usually, but this time they did something good. They thought twice this time and got a great British director (Richie) to put his teeth into the project. I heard that people complained about what they did to Holmes and I have to admit that I did at one point in the movie as well. Just let go and go for the ride it's a lot of fun.

Law and Downey have great chemistry and Mark Strong plays villains really well. They could have had a better bad guy but I guess they can save that for number two. There will be a number two for sure cause solving mysteries hasn't been this fun since "Raiders".

I'm not gonna go into story line that much, but the basic plot is that people are dying and Holmes needs to solve it. The problem I had with this is that at one point in the movie Watson and Holmes find the baddies' lab. In this lab, Holmes gets all the clues he needs to solve the case. This is in minute 30. Towards the end where he has a "Monk" moment, he explains how he solved the mystery. All the flashbacks go back to that one scene. Needless to say this rubbed me the wrong way.

This little bump does not stop this movie from being entertaining and funny. All the acting is well directed and old London looks really good in CGI.

Guy's Rating: Great reboot and I'm looking forward to the sequel.

Girl's all-encompassing love for Robert...

Hello, my name is Ms. Downey Junior and I am in love. He is not that tall, a bit wide-eyed, has weird, disheveled hair and has made some questionable life choices... but he sure is sexy.

This movie was great fun. I was entertained, so therefore I was pleased. Jude Law and my husband make a great pair, as Mr. Guy said. They are funny, they have good timing, and they are both good-looking actors. The story was a bit hokey, but it was supposed to be. Sherlock Holmes is one of the best action heroes, up there with James Bond, and who better to play him than the revamped, better than ever, sassy RDJ.

Yes, I am smitten, but I'm not letting that blind me. The bad guy wasn't that bad of a guy. Hopefully in the next movie, they'll have a real menace to make things interesting. There also could have been a bit more magnetism between McAdams and RDJ. I blame her. She just wasn't good enough for him.

Girl's Rating: Just plain good fun.

CASE 39

Guy's stuff...

We kicked off the day with this movie, and what I mean about that is that we started watching it around 7 AM. Luckily, the mornings here in Sweden are pretty dark and suitable for horror.

Zellweger plays a social worker that saves a child from getting burnt alive in an oven. After about half an hour we find out that the parents had a reason for doing this, the kid is a demon and kills everything around her by using their fears against them. For example, Bradley Cooper, who plays a child psychiatrist, has a fear of hornets. After a conversation with the demon child, where she finds out about this, he has a hallucination where he sees hornets come out of his own head. This makes him go crazy, fall over and die. Pretty cool kill, though nevertheless.

The kid is creepy and has shown up in other movies with creepy kids before. She's pretty good. Zellweger is meh. The only people really worth watching was Ian McShane, who plays a badass cop and Callum Keith Rennie, who plays the original father of the child.

Guy's rating: Just an alright horror.

Girl's impression of Rene's new career path...

Not a good idea.

This movie, although not entirely bad, wasn't really a horror. Rene's pouty little face and terrible acting skills outside the safety net of her fat persona, Bridget Jones, guarantees that this movie isn't a horror. The fact they have one of the creepiest kids in the horror business doesn't measure up against one of the worst actresses in the whole business.

Still, there were moments when I cringed or was captivated. The story line was interesting, despite the fact you understood what was going on as soon as Rene inherited the demon child. The dialogue was believable. The characters were entertaining. The kills... okay.

Girl's Rating: All in all, an okay movie. Rene shouldn't quit her day job, though... Wait, shit, this is her day job. She's fucked then.

AN EDUCATION

Guy's judgement...

An education. Yes, an education in not getting involved with the slimy Peter Sarsgaard (listen up, Maggie). This movie is about a girl that falls in love with an extremely charismatic (hmm) man that shows her how to live life. She gets to go to fancy restaurants, bid on paintings and even travel to France. But wait, life is not just roses and stuff. What she actually learns in the end is that you learn from your mistakes.

The one to watch in this movie is the father, played extremely well by Alfred Molina. He seems to be picking smaller parts lately but when he appears on the screen he's usually very good. The girl, Carey Mulligan, who I've never seen before, made a pretty good breakthrough performance. Let's just hope that the visual of her falling for Sarsgaard will fade with time for moviegoers. This could mean the end of her career (kidding, she'll do fine).

Otherwise, the movie was well written and charming, although I hear Girl thinks the opposite. It's a good watch and you'll learn to despise Sarsgaard a little bit more, a thing that I thought was almost impossible.

Guy's Rating: Sure...

Girl's judgement...

Hmmm, no, I didn't like this movie. I thought I would, and after watching it, I thought I did, but I've decided in the past hour that I did not. There was no point to it! The story lines were tied off poorly, with very little dramatic climax. The ending was very awkward for every character involved.

The one good thing about this movie was that the actor's didn't completely fail, as the director and writer had failed them. The girl, her father, and that funny blonde "friend" she made were all charming and engaged me into the story line, so at least I paid attention. The blonde's stupidity was delightful...

But! If they expected me to believe Peter Sarsgaard is charming, think again, casting agent! That man is no more charming than diarrhea on a plane. Graphic? Well, it's cinema! It's supposed to be graphic! And this movie just didn't give it to me like it should have.

Girl's Rating: When I watch a movie, I wish to be entertained... I wasn't.

THE FOURTH KIND

Girl's bogus review...

This movie was really inspiring. It inspired me to tidy the house, clean the bathroom, have a shower, do my hair, read a book, catch up on sleep... Do anything but actually watch the pain-inducing movie. Hence why I said "bogus review" - I can't really say with all honesty I watched the movie.

I think we knew, right from the start, when Mila whatever-her-name-is approaches the camera and states that these were "true events", but what you believe is "up to you", and that some images are "disturbing". Both contradictory and annoying, this statement took this movie in the wrong direction right away. Good job there.

The rest of the movie was a write off. The dramatizations could have been tossed for all I cared about them. In this thinker's opinion, the real footage wasn't believable. The only interesting part of the movie, was the lovely chats between the director and this woman, Dr. Abegail Tyler. She seemed quite loopy, and thus, entertaining. There's nothing quite like watching a human being who has lost their marbles somewhere, preferably in an imagined alien abduction scenario.

Girl's Rating: Absolutely unpleasant, but my dishes thank you.

Guy's whatever...

I wish little green men would come and abduct Olatunde Osunsanmi (yes, that is his real name. I think he's going for the whole Shyamalan thing). He has a couple of things that remind me of M. Night, a director I dislike by the way. Olatunde put himself in this movie, so does M. Night in his. That was probably it, and the name thing. Yet, there was no twist in this movie whatsoever.

So what is the movie about. A bunch of people get abducted in Nome, Alaska. Milla "Multipass" Jovovich plays a mother, widow and a psychiatrist that specialize in the people that claim being abducted by aliens. All of this makes this movie more horrible.

The movie is divided up in two parts. The acted out part and the "real" part. The "real" part is so badly acted and poorly produced (for authenticity I suppose). It added nothing to the film and if you get fooled and you actually think you're watching the real deal then you should be taken out back and beaten. This will help you in the long run. You'll never be tricked again, which will help you to avoid getting into strangers' cars, drinking out of bottles underneath the sink and licking the light sockets in the house.

Guy's Rating: No! Bad! No!

UNCERTAINTY

Girl's brooding review...

This movie should not have been called Uncertainty, it should have been called Unnecessary. Ha! Bad jokes excluded, this movie was really awful.

A little fun fact for you readers: This movie was written with no dialogue. Smart move? Nope. The actors, with the director's help, would create the conversation through rehearsals, and this was obvious right from the first stilted, halting, obscure conversation between the two main characters on the Brooklyn bridge.

The gist of the movie was this... Two people in a relationship make a choice and live through the consequences of that choice. The twist is that they get to make both choices. The girl, in a yellow dress, runs off to follow the choice of abandoning family and living with her beau, expecting their child, in a fun-filled adventure-full life... With guns and crazy chinamen. The guy, in green shirt and shoes, runs off with his girl to dedicate their lives to family, hearth and home - no matter how dysfunctional. They are both the same couple, and the colors yellow and green help you to differentiate the story lines (as though action gun story versus drama family story isn't enough). But! In case you missed the fact you are following duel story lines about the same characters, they even flash the word "YELLOW" and "GREEN" over them in the beginning of the film.

Girl's Rating: Did I say this movie should be called unnecessary? Bad joke or not, it's the truth.

Guy's yawn...

What can I say that Girl hasn't already said. This movie was, as girl said, unnecessary. If you can't even bother writing a full script, then don't bother directing a full feature movie. This has been done before, don't get me wrong, and it has on certain occasions worked out. That type of filmmaking is called Dogma (watch "Celebration" from Denmark). This, however, is not a Dogma movie, this was a full-fledged cinematic experience.

As Girl said, this movie takes off on two separate story lines, yellow and green. This is to help the audience differentiate between the two. Green: Nothing happens. The girl is pregnant and they have to go to her parents barbecue. Yellow: They find a phone that belongs to a homicidal maniac. This might sound really exciting, but no. They just keep changing positions and wait for the bad guy to show up and then there's a little chase scene.

I have a little advice for this "filmmaker". Write a whole frickin' script the next time. You won't come off as a lazy douche.

Guy's Rating: Don't watch it. There's no uncertainty in that (I also made a joke of the title).