Denial

I have seen the film. Yes, it is very funny. But I also found it degrading to certain actors' professional ability in TV and in movies. This particular actor is much better off in family-type movies. Other than that it makes one think whether or not monogamy is for them. It is a delicate, controversial issue.

This was a good movie. My wife and I watched it together. She kept quizzing me on the premise of the movie - even though we have a great marriage and I've never even though of cheating. She was smiling so I think it's no big deal.

As for the characters, you'll hate Jonathan Silverman's wife! The chick from the hockey game looks to have real breasts! What a novel idea in Hollywood! OK nudity - let's face it, that's why you're reading this, looking for the scoop on the skin. Not much from the main characters, though. You do see Amy Yasbek in a see through purple top. Not great but hey, better than nothing.

Worth a rent. It's funny.

There seems to be a whole sub genre of cheap, tired old sex "comedies" out there, that say the same old things about middle class couples. Sort of like Friends, but with more soft porn and no wit. This film is no exception- it had situations so familiar I died from deja vu. People sat on couches, spinning out clichés about sex and relationships? Check. Monogamy versus cheating with some woman/man who would never look twice in reality at some other woman/man? Check. PORN The BADDIES!!!!111? Check. Some guy/girl in it who happens to be the only reason you're watching this rubbish? Check. The lesson seems to be- when it doubt, make a tired old sex "comedy" about people no one cares anything about, in order to make some statement that everybody has already heard three thousand times before. That'll get your film made. It'll even attract some sitcom nobody in a bad wig!

See Denial (called "Something about Sex" in the UK) with your girlfriend or boyfriend. It's a controversial film about the tradeoffs of open vs. monogamous vs. deceitful relationships. It's funny, intellectually stimulating, erotic at times, and provocative. Be prepared for a long talk afterwards to discuss what you want from a relationship.

...but I can't exactly remember what. When a film purports to have a philosophical viewpoint on sex, relationships, fidelity and especially on how they each involve and relate to women, and ten minutes after the thing ends you can't remember what that viewpoint was, is this a good indicator of how well it got its points across? Yes. It is.

Individual scenes worked well enough with a succession of portrayals of seemingly functioning relationships slowly showing cracks of dissatisfaction, but this is the best part of the movie. The cast of mostly TV actors is good, but the overall sociological ideas (as promulgated by Seinfeld's Jason Alexander) are weak and poorly focused, beyond that which is obvious or trite. The look of the film is good enough indicating efficient use of a middling production budget, but there are no grander cinematic ambitions here, no attempts to build up the script's ideas using the cinematic landscape. The landscape is just a background for the characters. It's not boring, exactly, and those in a mood for a relationship comedy won't hate it, exactly. They just won't get anything more out of it than they would a two inch column in Cosmo.