Completely atrocious !!!
-
FlyingToTheMoon — 11 years ago(June 22, 2014 07:54 AM)
Hi Matthew, Just wanted to say that this is the first time on IMDB where I've seen a director/producer reply to a poster's critique of a film. Very thoughtful response from you. It's too bad they never came back to reply.
Is a sequel still in the works? -
mvance-1 — 15 years ago(March 20, 2011 10:18 PM)
I caught the vanishing end of this film the other night on EPIX3, about a minute before the credits began to roll, and I'm just asking if the young woman driving alone into the Big City was Elizabeth Berridge's character? I've enjoyed her work all the way back to THE FUNHOUSE and find her to be a criminally underappreciated performer. Plus, she's cute as a button.
Don't take this the wrong way, but I'm sort of glad to have missed Rae's rape scenes. It's probably the antebellum chauvinism, I know, but I really really don't care for rape depictions even in fictional pieces. But that's my problem, not yours. Steve V. -
chas437 — 13 years ago(October 12, 2012 08:49 AM)
Well, The OP is right about onr thing, this film was/is atrocious. It was a commercial and critical disaster. I'm sure this is a film Sandra Bullock wishes would disappear. It was a probable career for Rae Dawn Chong, who never got a major role after this.
-
soap_luvr-2 — 11 years ago(April 23, 2014 12:44 PM)
Shame on you!!!! Your name should be "dirt BAG" instead of dirtbunny. I can't believe that you would write something like that. Of course, when you're hiding behind a name on a computer, I guess this is what happens.
I Love.ME!!!! -
FlyingToTheMoon — 11 years ago(June 22, 2014 07:58 AM)
Shame on you!!!! Your name should be "dirt BAG" instead of dirtbunny. I can't believe that you would write something like that. Of course, when you're hiding behind a name on a computer, I guess this is what happens.
Agreed, that was a disgusting and very offensive reply. -
saneman1 — 12 years ago(July 25, 2013 10:42 AM)
I didnt' see the racial aspect of that portrayal. I just think the characters were just boring and unlikable. I can handle unlikable, but boring is inexcusable. Maybe if I caught it early in the 90s, I would not have hated it as much. But with much better indie movies that followed this movie in the 90s, there is absolutely no reason for this movie to have a sequel.
I hate to burst the bubble of the director because he seems really earnest, but there is absolutely no way Sandra Bullock would do this sequel. About as much chance of her doing a Fire on the Amazon sequel.
Movies like Dazed and Confused or a Whit Stillman movie made around the same time period seemed to have aged a lot better.
Thisa movie actually has more of a TV mvie than an early 90s indie movie feel. -
chas437 — 12 years ago(September 17, 2013 08:35 AM)
Yeah, not much point in a sequel, when nobody knows the original exists. Would the original ever have been seen had not Bullock become a star?
Fire on the Amazon, LMAO!
"For dark is the suede that mows like a harvest" -
radargirl-1 — 10 years ago(June 09, 2015 03:28 AM)
There are so many things wrong with your post that I can't even and begin to explain. Did you watch the movie? I guess will just mention a few things
That couple was not married they were engaged.
Sandra not only pay for her rent paid for her friends rent.
friend came up to MJ when she was crying at the end of tried to comfort her.
MJ was sleeping with her supposed friends boyfriend and he was a total jerk to both of them.
Sandra comfort of her afterwards they all did
The girl was never in the hospital her friend Mario was the one who died