Denial

Enjoyable, funny film that didn't drag! No really intricate plot or especially deep characters but there are times when you want to watch a film like that and other times when you want to just sit back and enjoy a film without having to really think about it or keep track of a complex storyline. That said - the film deals funnily with issues of trust, monogamy and, of course, sex.

Very funny performance by Jason Alexander - different character in many ways from Seinfeld's George - he has some of the best lines and the best laughs.

Overall - a fun little film

Ladies and men who do not want to be stereotyped as creeps should stay away from this one. It's no fun and a complete disappointment. More of the same old tired "boys will be boys" routine. It was largely an excuse for gratuitous female nudity and the promotion of the stupid idea that women must accept certain behavior from men. We're supposed to consider it a happy ending when a female character accepts behavior that is unacceptable and hurtful to her and keeps the jerk around instead of kicking him to the curb. As if that is the best deal she can get. It left me with a very bad impression of Adam Rifkin. It's bad enough when a very young man acts/thinks like an adolescent, but Adam is getting old enough that it is especially unattractive.

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.

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.