5/10
not catastrophic enough
14 November 2005
The one word review for this effort would have to be twee. The words wet and trite also come to mind, but it has some things in its favour. The relatively unconcerned approach to the depiction of the relationship between the two lesbians is refreshingly focused purely on the internal dynamic, and not milked for any audience reaction. This I feel would be in stark contrast to a similar film made by Americans. Over there the concept of sexual deviation has moral overtones that are not as important in most sections of our occasionally more enlightened society, and there are several in-jokes for film-students, clumsily handled though they may be. As a detached observer of the behavioural mores of this group, it seems incredibly bourgeois as well: they are all so clean and bright-eyed. Perhaps this is just a reflection of the socio-economic background of the director: I lived in Fitzroy and Carlton in my younger days, and the Melbourne Uni students I met had a harder edge than this bunch of fluffy ducks. Their concerns were, shall we say, less egocentric. But I show my age, and the fact that I never went to Uni as a youngster, and perhaps have a more prosaic perception of it.

The story is utter guff really, girl/boy meets/splits up with girl/boy/girl, overcomes obstacles and they all live happily ever after. Deep it ain't, there are absolutely no motivational insights into any character: they are all ciphers from a psycho-sexual point of view, and we are just invited to laugh along with then without knowing who they are, why they are there, or what they want beyond the Women's Weekly dream…spare me!! It is a nice little effort from a novice director, cheaply done, and Frances O'Connor is always good to look at, but really…who cares about these dills and their little koffee-klatch? Not even some gratuitous nudity would have saved this one in my books.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed