"Town and Country" is a critically panned but mildly amusing flick which tells of the marital misadventures of two of middle aged couples (Hawn/Sanders, Keaton/Beatty) who split up over reasons of fidelity. The flick is top heavy with talent on the audience side of the lens with no evidence of same in screenplay and direction. Fraught with meandering repartee, comedic situation which come off like bad improv, a jerky flow, lack of cohesion, no center of gravity, etc. "T&C" isn't as awful as it is an underachiever. Okay for hard up sofa spuds.

This is as bad as you've heard. Insultingly stupid. I really only watched it to see Josh Hartnett, who mercifully was spared a lot of the embarrassment.

Then again, there is so much to be embarrassed about, so much to go around, he could have taken some on to ease the burden for all the 'adults' who are on display dishonoring their craft.

Diane Keaton should have the most explaining to do, as she sleep-walks through her part. She also has some difficult-to-hear dialogue, some of it involving husband Warren's endowment.

No, scratch that...Charlton Heston, as a character who has no business in the movie in the first place, has the most to explain. The scene where he threatens a party with a gun made the NRA also require an explanation.

No, wait... the trio of Jenna Elfman, Andie McDowell and Nastassia Kinski, as the women in Warren's life..they appear at will or when the situation calls for something illogical to happen.

I guess I should settle this by giving the award to Warren, who still has 'Ishtar' to apologize for. Its obvious in some ways its his movie, as the majority of the cast has worked with or for him before. What a great friend you are, Warren! Good thing for us you're not an agent, then good actors would do garbage like this more often.

1/10, needless to say. Avoid the pain.

This thing was beyond crap, and I don't use that word often. I had heard it was bad, so I rented it for dud night, and called my sister to come watch it, because we need to bounce our comments off each other. Well, she left halfway through, vowing to watch Lord of The Rings, to try to cleanse her brain. I'm going to use a toilet brush on mine.

I should have known it wasn't an ordinary bad movie in the first scene. There's Grampa, aka Warren Beatty, sitting in a bed, trying to cover his wrinkled shoulders with the sheet. Talk about stomach-turning. That's the plot in a nutshell, old Warren pretending it's 1966 when swingers like him hopped on the nearest woman as regularly as they hopped on a plane.

Seriously, there is no plot. Every washed-up actor or actress in Hollywood is invited to drop by to make an ass of him (or her) self, including Charleton Heston, who must have already been in the grip of his recently-announced Alzheimer's Disease. I know rents are high in Los Angeles, but how badly do these people need money? And did any of them even get any? This stinker can't have made a nickel.

I can't summarize this mess because there was no rhyme or reason anywhere. I can't describe the wild over-acting, except to call it amateur night. All I can do is recommend that nobody, and I mean nobody, watch this thing. Don't inadvertently let your dog or cat see it. It's so bad you can't even make fun of it. That's how bad it is.

Warren Beatty is one of those Hollywood icons that has had an inconsistant career. For every Bonnie and Clyde he has made, he has also made Ishtar (which I think is better than this movie). This movie is by far his worst. It feels like a desperate attempt by Beatty to make him feel young by having him sleep around with so many women. The whole cast feels lost in this movie. The characters are all unlikable, especially Beatty's. Why would I sit through a "comedy" where we don't want to be around these people? The usually charming Goldie Hawn and Diane Keaton are rather shrill in this movie. I say read articles about this movie's troubled production. I think that story would be up there with the story of "Heaven's Gate," "Ishtar," "Bonfire of the Vanities," and "Waterworld" as the behind the scenes story is more interesting than the movie itself.

"Town & Country" is a comedy that is neither amusing nor funny. With more than its share of ineptly written dialog and clumsily staged scenes, it is atrocious. "Town & Country" is suppose to be a humorous look at the upper middle class and the sexual misadventures of two "happily" married couples. There are too many superfluous scenes that should have been edited out of the movie because they go nowhere. Then there are the sequences in which one immediately knows what will happen, but seem to be interminably stretched out as aggravating time filler.

If Warren Beatty wanted to look like a nincompoop, he has succeeded. "Town & Country" feels like a retread of past comedies, but very poorly imitated. As the jilted spouses, Diane Keaton and Goldie Hawn come off fine. Andie MacDowell's character manages to pad at least another twenty minutes to the film. She displays the amazing eyesight of an eagle because, while riding in a ski lift, she can spot Warren Beatty's character from at least thirty feet away when he is dressed as a fly fisherman with a floppy hat covering all of his hair and obscuring his face, reminiscent of Jack Lemmon in "Grumpy Old Men."

Nastassja Kinski, as a cellist having an affair with Beatty, received sixth billing and more than holds her own and is one of the few bright spots of this film. The opening scene has Warren Beatty watching her play the cello with her completely naked. He simultaneously confesses in a voice over that he is not interested in classical music and that he is making a mistake. The initial shot of Nastassja is from behind her in which we see two musical clefts symmetrically painted onto her naked back - except that this is a credited cello body double. The closing credits list the actors in order of appearance so that Nastassja Kinski is listed second after Warren Beatty - very clever on her part.

"Town & Country" was a box office dud that can best be appreciated if one is drunk.

It seems that the people behind this drudge of movie took all their cues from Woody Allen's movies during the 1990s. What I mean is, "Town & Country" is about a bunch of rich New Yorkers cheating on each other. I'm sure that everyone involved in it must be embarrassed beyond redemption for having gotten involved in it (and I don't just mean because of its abysmal performance at the box office). The only good character is Charlton Heston, basically spoofing himself. And how could a great screenwriter like Buck Henry have written this? He should have known MUCH better, given that he wrote "The Graduate".

All in all, terrible. Fortunately, the cast members have all done good work since. At least I think that they all have.

I remembered seeing the advertisement for this movie at my local theater when it came out. But I was unaware of the nightmare it was to film it & release it; all I did know was that it was in & out of the theater faster than COOL AS ICE. I had no idea this movie even existed until I read James Robert Parish's book FIASCO, which has a chapter on the making of TOWN & COUNTRY...and which, rest assured, is more funny & believable than what shows up on the screen.

After searching relatively high & low to find this movie (it was released on DVD, but logically, stores do not exactly keep a copy on hand), I watched it knowing about its history & that chances are, I would likely want to throw things at the screen. I am glad to say I made it through the first viewing alive, but will start by saying that no, this movie is not a winner in the slightest. Yet is it an all-around creative bomb? Not so fast.

Starting to film without a complete script was the oldest mistake in the book & they made it. Yet while it may have been a patchwork effort without much rhyme or reason, some lines were funny & rather inspired (most of them coming from Garry Shandling, who almost walks away with the movie, such as it is). Maybe having mature, veteran actors mouth some of the more scatological dialogue (as if this was supposed to be a senior's version of American PIE) was not wise, but that is often funny to watch in itself. Diane Keaton's line near the end, "Is there any women in this room you haven't slept with?", could easily be what audiences have been wondering for years.

The only thing the script missed was continuity & structure, and all that showed on the screen, resulting in a film that looked & acted choppy, with many characters played by big names being reduced to glorified cameos, making you wonder if there is a lot left on the cutting room floor (but we cannot blame the editor for all that, seeing as how they did not have much to work with).

The producers should have been well aware that working with Warren Beatty, a famously noncommittal perfectionist, was not going to be clear sailing. Part of (if not all) the script problems can be laid at his door, since he kept insisting on changes to the dialogue, taking up time & (most obviously) money. And of course, Warren was in his early 60s when he made this movie, playing the same old Casanova he always did. Audiences, most especially the young people who make up a large part of who goes to the movies, are not going to buy that anymore, or are unwilling to try. The studio should have saw this in the beginning & realized the chances of a box office success were slim to none, and thus rein in the budget before it went haywire.

After reading Parish's book & seeing just how things went bad with TOWN & COUNTRY, I rather think a movie about the making of a movie like TOWN & COUNTRY would have been better (and with all the same actors). What went on behind the scenes was funny & screwball in itself, and most of all, it was not even scripted at all. There was potential for a movie like TOWN & COUNTRY, but if a script had been agreed on before the cameras started rolling, then the financial fallout would not have been so large. As it remains now, it is one of the biggest box-office duds in Hollywood history, and the chances of it ever turning a profit are almost nonexistent (just think about inflation).

Final thoughts: For what it was worth, the actors gave it their best shot with this movie, never once placing tongue firmly in cheek with their parts (though, by all accounts, that would have improved things). I am not sure if anyone of them knew they were making something special.

A good portion of the script was actually funny, but whenever it tried to get serious & make some kind of statement about infidelity & morality, it went downhill from there. Even the much-bandied-about ending is so artificial & predictable, you can see it coming from a mile away. More of a cop-out & a feeling of "Let's just finish this thing already!"

Most of the people involved in making this movie have survived professionally, but only time will tell how Warren Beatty fares (that is, if he makes another movie again). Hopefully, the TOWN & COUNTRY incident awoke him to the fact he needs to finally revise (or abandon altogether) his stock character if he ever wants to work regularly & be taken seriously again.

Just a terrible mess of a movie that has only the most tenacious plot line running through it. Stories are picked up and dropped willy nilly adding up to pretty much nothing. This notorious flop reportedly cost many, many millions of dollars but they certainly don't show on screen. Diane Keaton and Goldie Hawn try to do something with their parts although they are ill served by the script. Everybody else goes down with the ship, poor Charlton Heston and Marian Seldes are made ridiculous in yet another totally needless subplot. A perfect example of a director and studio lucky enough to gather a great group of talent and then squander them totally.

This movie was BAD!! It had a totally incoherent plot that was doomed right from the get-go. The movie felt so choppy and badly edited (considering it was re-edited and rewrote many times). Characters went from one place to another without any reason. I mean, one minute Porter was in bed with a lady (he met just a few "movie minutes" ago)and then he was back home again. I couldn't understand what the hell was going on in the movie most of the time. The only saving grace that kept me from totally tuning this film out was when Jenna Elfman came on screen but her role was so miscast and she didn't fit in at all with the dumb story. This movie made little sense and was way too serious to be considered a comedy. There wasn't much at all funny about this. I probably laughed maybe twice, and they weren't even good laughs either. Town and Country spent 3 years gathering dust on the shelf before it was pulled down and finally finished, and the result was this fiasco. There was a great cast of actors and actresses who all had successful careers before this film; three of them won Oscars. Now after this film, some of these people are struggling to find work such as Warren Beatty who hasn't been in a film since this one. Others have been more lucky such as Diane Keaton and Elfman and the director managed to stay a float as he did some other films that weren't exactly home runs (Hannah Montana: The Movie), but fared far better than T & C.

The only thing I got out of this movie: A man cheats on his wife, pays the consequences, another man does the same thing, then comes out as gay, and a man comes in with a shotgun. Oh, and the polar bear scene that was rather strange and kind of funny. The movie's dumb, cheesy ending didn't give me any bit of hope that I would like to come back and give this film another shot to try to make some sense out of it. I kept on checking the time to see when this train wreck would end. It really did feel like the cast and crew had to find a way to end the nightmare so the ending it was.

I expected this movie to be a disaster based on what I read about it being one of the biggest box office flops in American film history and reading reviews. It exceeded my expectations.

You have to wonder what combination of roofies and blackmail

New Line's former kingpin Michael DeLuca used to lure Warren

Beatty into this grotesque travesty of a Philip Barry comedy. TOWN

& COUNTRY is one of those rare movies that preoccupy you for

their entire running time with questions bearing in no way on the

story onscreen. Questions like: How did this get greenlit? Why

would someone send a comedy into production with no script?

Why would someone let a comedy finish production with no script?

Did these very gifted people (there are good, hard-working, clean

and industrious performances from Beatty, Diane Keaton, Goldie

Hawn, Jenna Elfman and Nastassja Kinski) think this was funny

when they read it? When they were shooting it? Did the crew just

kind of stand there in stony silence?

Considering the combined ages of the cast, and the movie's

splashy failure in an era where teen mediocrities rule the earth,

and the movie's damage to the career of its director, Peter

Chelsom, a talented man who's not to blame, the whole thing

provokes, not bitchy snickers, but a sigh of profound sadness.

If you like watching Warren in a wrinkled skin costume with harshly penciled eyebrows and tinted hair, then watch this movie. If you would rather remember him in his youth and glory, pick up the film "Roman Spring of Mrs. Stone" and luxuriate in his former beauty. It's sad when people age and refuse to accept who they are. Grandparent material, all of them! These people are probably typical of the wealthy, vapid folk who do populate T& C magazine, but they are boring without any help from the script. What a waste. If you paid good money to see this at the cinema, poor you! If you heard the news that Beatty and Keaton have lost their pizazz ages ago and smartly didn't go to this film, good for you!

I wish I could get my money back. None of the characters in this movie were likable, or redeemable. There wasn't even any fun to be had. The acting was terrible, clumsy, and purposeless. The movie went nowhere. I came out shaking my head, stunned at how low these actors would go for money.

Very disappointing considering the top level cast and the high budget! Probably the worst movie of the year that I have or will see. No consistency to the story line; too many unexplained holes in the plot; the film is just an excuse to show wealthy New Yorkers in their high price life style.

The last 1/3 of the film went downhill. Gary Shandling had the only funny one-liners. That whole Charlton Heston business was ghastly! And why do film makers have to portray so many women screaming and running around acting bitchy in films?

And the Natasha character who didn't shut up and listen was very nerve racking. It's an insult to the intelligence of the average intelligent woman to watch those twits behave that way. The average man doesn't accept that behavior why should the audience?

Warren Beatty as a stumbling, bumbling, unfaithful husband--a well-to-do architect who can't even climb onto a roof without falling off. Married to fabric designer Diane Keaton for 25 years, Beatty has a fling with his best friend's soon-to-be ex-wife while carrying on a breezy affair with a pretty cellist. While on a fishing vacation with buddy Garry Shandling, he comes close to sleeping with two other eccentric females out for a good time. Though co-written by crack comedy vet Buck Henry, "Town & Country" is slow and stupid. The skittering sort of geniality which comes with watching an all-star cast in a big-budget production is enough to hold interest for awhile, but the characters don't take shape and the jokes never materialize. The sub-plot with flirtatious Andie MacDowell bringing Beatty home to meet her bombastic parents is bad enough to stop the picture dead in its tracks, and it really never recovers from this gaping pothole. Shandling does some nice underplaying, Goldie Hawn is attractive, and Beatty has one or two amusing moments of comic confusion. Otherwise, this troubled concoction sinks like a ship of fools. *1/2 from ****

I so wanted to like this movie. I love every person in the movie but for some reason even the star power that appeared in this movie couldn't save it. The plot was non-existent, the story line was weak and the acting stunk. I waited and waited for Goldie or Warren to save it but they just seemed to be acting in giant bowls of jello. The harder they tried the slower it got. And eventually they just sunk.

Considering the deadly reviews this got and the long delay in its release i was expecting a real bomb. So I started watching it with a little trepidation. As it was I was pleasantly surprised. I laughed more during this movie than I have at a lot of other recent comedies. The cast was quite good. Beatty,Keaton,Hawn etc go through the paces like the pros they are. If ultimately it didn't add up to much well you could say that about every other movie released these days. I particularly enjoyed Charlton Heston as an overbearing father of a woman(Andie McDowell) who gets fixated with Beatty. I'd like to have been on the set listening to the conversations between the liberal Beatty and coservative Heston. I'm not sure what the delay in its release was all about but obviously something went wrong. I think Beatty basically disowned it. Still its a decent lightweight comedy. Doesn't wear out its welcome and provided a decent evening's entertainment. Something Scary Movie 2 and its ilk doesn't provide.Anyway it worked for me.

Fun, fun movie! I went on opening weekend to see it, and I was the only person in the theatre. That's a shame, because this was worth seeing. The underlying theme is infidelity, but it is done in a very comical sense, with some very good middle-aged actors. You won't be disappointed if you see this…..plus, I believe this will be the only time you will see Warren Beatty in a polar bear suit! B

I was markedly disappointed seeing the poor marks for this film in imdb.com. It is certainly worth more than 4 out of 10 stars. I would rate it an 8 or 9 out of ten.

Some of the situations are laugh-out-loud funny, and the general demented nature of the film make it funny all over. While the film does tend to not take affairs in marriage seriously enough, it is somewhat redeemed by the attempt at a heartfelt ending. Besides, despite the fact that what is going on is atrocious (as far as infidelity) it is terribly amusing.

Kudos to Charlton Heston, whose character's role, along with that of his character's wife, makes one of the funniest couples I've seen on film.

I've read mean reviews proclaiming that this film is only for rich people with no sense of humor. I have a decent sense of humor (good enough to know that most of the non-"Naked Gun" Leslie Nielsen movies weren't very funny), I'm certainly not rich, and I loved this movie. My girlfriend and I both thought it was the best comedy of the year so far.

We're seeing Bridget Jones's Diary this weekend and, from what I've read, it may end up with top honors, but in the meantime this is the funniest film I've seen all year.

Spoilers herein.

I often seem to be liking and disliking films contrary to the general public. This one gets a pretty bad rap from the critics, partly because of its troubled delay. Just as the publicity machine talks us into believing films are good (like the muddled `Spider-man'), they need and love stories when they can convince us the opposite.

Yes, all these actors are second-raters. Yes, the script starts at TeeVee level and wanders, giving us episodically-linked skits. Yes, everyone is old, even the here-luscious Kinski. Yes, the template is centuries-old and predictable. Yes, the dialog lacks zing and compared to Farrellys (for instance) it lacks edge. But except for the age, the same can be said of the execrable but much-celebrated `Tenenbaums.'

The difference is that although the studio has sliced and diced this, there are still some funny bits. Very funny bits, like the polar bear/ Monroe oral sex scene. Very appealing segments like the exuberant Kinski announcing her pregnancy. Some lowkey setups like Master Beatty walking through his house and hearing each of his children, then the help furiously screwing, then all the men come out to the kitchen. Beatty's timing is great: he has the ability to coordinate his movements with his comic reactions. Its natural and effective.

Obviously, the project has suffered from different cores being swapped in and out. The now watered down scenes in front of the lawyer are an example. They were designed to be like the author/advisor role in `You Can Count on Me.' But there is one core, now muted, that I really liked, the metaphor of building and relationship. It was horribly crude and bungled with `Life as a House,' `Til There was You,' and others. But there are some signs here of a potentially successful project.

Porter is an architect. Though most of this is cut, he is designing the `Design Center' that will honor his wife. This is just as the country house which he designed and built and she `decorated.' The awry weathervane of that house is an obvious if heavy symbol. When Mona decides to build her own new life, she aptly chooses a decayed plantation house, while Griffin chooses a cabin. Griffin by the way is a supplier of `furnishings.' There's lots of going to and from these houses and the design center, which must have originally carried meaning.

A central quote early on: `like old buildings and new relationships.' The cheating husband is thrown out the window.

The metaphor carries to the `house' of ourselves -- lots of costumes: the polar bear, the transvestite, the stained jacket. Even the sex between dolls and the cello tattoo. Listing these things doesn't at all mean they were used well. They aren't, but clearly someone had some interesting ambitions.

It was a fun little movie. Should it have cost 90 million dollars? No. Does that affect your viewing pleasure? Yes. It's hard not to think of the enormous money these talented people are getting for slumming through a harmless light film. Goldie Hawn does that "Giggle" that she's been doing for 40 years, and it's starting to wear thin. Diane Keaton is daffy. Warren is charming. But all in all, not a bad attempt at a film.

TOWN & COUNTRY / (2001) **1/2 (out of four)

By Blake French: After being rescheduled more times than you can count on one hand, finally "Town & Country" hits theaters. With more production problems than my neighbor's dog has flees, I was not expecting the film to be of any extraordinary quality. It isn't. I did, considering the respectable cast and crew, expect to laugh. I did, but not enough. This is the kind of comedy where we laugh when the jokes are presented, but there are not enough of them. Therefore, we want more, but the movie never delivers-leaving us with a feeling of disappointment. With a budget of over 90 million and shooting dates that range over three years, this film should have been the pearl of the ocean. Although "Town & Country" has its moments of hilarity, insight, and interest, the film as a whole does not quite work.

"Town & Country" stars Warren Beatty, whose previous satire "Bulworth" offered more biting comedy than this film multiplied by three. He plays Porter Stoddard, an acclaimed New York architect, who is having an affair with a beautiful, married musician (Nastassja Kinski). Porter has a wealthy lifestyle and a loving wife, Ellie (Diane Keaton), who suspects nothing from her husband for 25 years. The Stoddard's have a close-nit friendship with another couple, Mona (Goldie Hawn), and Griffin (Garry Shandling from "What Planet Are You From?"). Griffin is also committing adultery, but his wife discovers his betrayal and immediately dumps him-even though she is not exactly faithful herself.

The setup is basically just a clothesline from which other related situations evolve. Although often interesting, adultery isn't enough to develop a story over 100 minutes in length. The movie begins well (after some painful music during the opening credits) but stumbles very early, with its characters wandering from scene to scene with nothing much to do or say. Then the story becomes redundant, with Porter making the same mistakes repeatedly. But surprisingly, there is very little tension involved with the plot, simply because we do not care about the characters. There is just not enough at stake here. There are a few hilarious scenes that transpire when the characters attempt to cover up their deceitful decisions, and the actors are consistently fun to watch, with likable chemistry and energy. The cast does a great job with their charismatic and entertaining performances, making this movie relatively easy to watch. But even they can't bring enough life into this otherwise desperate, deprived material.

"Town & Country" is clearly trying to say that people can engage in adultery without much effort or thought, but it is not fulfilling or constructive. During the film's closing minutes, Porter explains, in a scene much too obvious for its own good, that sex has not filled the emptiness inside him. We never believe that Porter felt such loneliness, however, for several reasons:

1) Warren Beatty does not do a convincing job at executing his character's emotions. All of the characters feel very external. We seldom feel anything for any of them.

2) The story runs into a particularly noticeable series of problems during its last third. When it should be calming down, focusing in on the character's emotional areas, it does exactly the opposite: introduces new events completely unrelated to the material before. We also meet numerous characters that only distract us from the movie's theme. There is some funny material within these segments of the movie, but for the most part, these sequences really detour the plot.

"Town & Country" isn't as bad as many people are saying. It is just a disappointment considering the ample potential. With 90 million dollars, over three years, and names like Warren Beatty, Diane Keaton, Goldie Hawn, Garry Shandling, Andie MacDowell, and Charlton Heston, we come to expect a whole lot more. I have seen special effects laden action thrillers made for half the cost of "Town & Country" and much less talent, but so much more was projected on the screen. The only thing this production does with its talent and money is prove that raunchy sex comedies can be made with older generations too.

I can't wait til this one comes out on videotape so I can watch it again and again. I'm sure others feel that way because I heard some of the folks who had left early (apparently to beat traffic or to save some money on an expensive babysitter--I can relate!) express their opinion that it should have gone straight to video. I couldn't agree more. What a delight.

First of all, kudos to Mr. Beatty. He delivers a clinic on acting. In the scenes where is he caught with his pants down (sometimes literally--OOPS, Spoiler!), the expression of humiliation on his face is so real, one could almost feel as though he's really embarrassed to be in this movie. Of course, anyone who's seen him in "Love Affair" or "Dick Tracy" know that nothing embarrasses the WB.

Thumbs up also to Goldie Hawn and Diane Keaton. In an era when every other movie contains endless scenes of nubile teens wearing next to nothing (or NOTHING!), it's a true joy to see women whom you'd prefer keep their clothes on. Good move, gals!

Lastly, let me see that, as a comedy aficionado and one who's a real fan of humorous dialogue, too many times I've attended films where the actors' lines are drowned out by the raucous laughter of the audience. I was happy to observe that in "Town & Country," even during the funniest scenes, the theater was dead quiet. So that all the lines could be heard and savored. Whether that speaks more to the audience or the quality of the movie, I'll leave that for you to decide.

All in all, T&C is a unique movie-going experience with a brilliant cast. How I wish I could have been at THAT premiere!

One look at the "if you like this title, we also recommend..." section of IMDb says it all. Pretty spot on, too. (I'll save you having to jump back a screen: it's Home Alone 2.)

If you like your films contrived, poorly edited, clunky, and with no discernible direction, you've found your Mecca. If, like me, you instead prefer a viable attempt at acting, some sense of plot, and characters that you care a whit about, you'll probably want to avoid this pile of dung.

I went with no expectations, as this was very low-key in the advertising sense (and now I know why), and left without $9. The funny thing is, my gut was telling me the whole time to just go see "Memento" again...

(Note to self: listen to gut.)

Does anyone really care about Warren Beatty any more? Did anyone ever? If so, why? Ditto x2 for Garry Shandling, who may have the most screen-unfriendly mug this side of Marty Feldman (whom I enjoy immensely, but is no Adonis: let's call a spade a spade here...)

The now infamous hold-ups, countless edits, etc. go a long way toward explaining why this film is just so God-awfully DISJOINTED.

Cuts between scenes just do not make any sense whatsoever.

Oh, I could go on and on...

I'm still trying to decide which is the worst film yet this year, and it's either this or "Center of the World."

Watched it and liked it... We enjoyed the situations and corrective actions the characters made. Having been younger once, I can see why a lot of people don't like the actions taken. But having friends who are divorced and having children expressing themselves, we liked the movie. We just told the kids to skip it.