| Overall Grade: |
C |
|
| Story: |
C |
|
|
| Acting: |
C |
|
|
| Direction: |
C |
|
|
| Visuals: |
C |
|
|
Not What I Expected
by PhilosopherJay (movies profile)
Apr 17, 2007
1
of
2 people found this review helpful
Okay, the cover of the DVD had the back of a naked women in an embrace with someone. However you cannot tell that the other person is another woman. It says simply, "A Tasty Cinematic Treat". The back has "Sexy! Delightfully Erotic". My thinking was that it was a follow-up or rip-off to that wonderful old French movie "Chocolate".
Okay, I'm a heterosexual, and I realize that the film was not made for me, but since the advertising was misleading (not the filmmakers' fault) I feel I have a right to criticize it.
I felt it was a lesbian soap opera and just not deep or broad enough. The characters were shallow and the situations, girl meets girl, girl loses girl, girl gets girl and clueless mother comes for surprise visit, were not particularly interesting.
Take the mother-discovers-daughter is gay situation. I had watched the episode of "Will and Grace" the night before where Will gets his father to admit in public that his son is gay and I thought it was hysterically funny. (I love that show). Here, I was expecting some humor, but it just fell flat. The mother hardly notices or cares. Most of the movie was like that, potentially funny situations are introduced, turn out not to be funny and are abandoned.
The production values reflected the low budget nature of the film. I thought only Karen Dwyer's performance as Maggie stood out. She was exuberant and cute. Peter Outerbridge occassionally was touching as Judy. However, they really didn't overcome the soap opera style plot.
The first love-making scene between Maggie and Kim was interesting, as they painted their naked bodies and rolled around on a canvass. But the several other love making scenes were pretty pedestrian. So we have a comedy that is not funny and an erotic movie that is not erotic.
I can appreciate that gay women would enjoy this movie a lot more than a heterosexual man, but I think it relied on its gayness as a gimmick instead of telling a story that might have been more interesting to a broader audience. |
My Public Profile 
