Lack of good storyline.
Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.
It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.
I'm going to start by being honest with you. This film leapt at me from the shelves due to its title, as it would to most adolescent males. However if you're reading this expecting this to be some kind of vulgar comedy porno, then don't worry because its not, its far from it.The concept of this film is beautiful, focusing on seven different couples engaged in seven contrasting forms of relationships. The setting is Hampstead Heath park in North London, with the whole story being focused on one day in this location. The storyline is not complex, nor is it particularly special. Don't expect any gargantuan revelations, but rather wait for some pleasant twists to make you smile. What this film may lack in depth, it certainly makes up for in charm.I think its important to remember that this film is more of a short, quirky study of relationships, to be taken seriously and not so seriously simultaneously. It contains a star- studded cast containing Ewan McGregor (Trainspotting), Andrew Lincoln (Love Actually) and Eilleen Atkins (Cranford) amongst others. The performances range in quality, although none of the cast members really get enough time to really develop their characters (which is what makes this film so interesting).My main criticism of this film is that I think seven couples is arguably too many, with me thinking that only 5 of the couples are really significant to the plot. This would've given the film makers a few extra minutes per couple to develop their characters a little more. Overall however, this film impresses. It couldn't really score higher due its lack of depth, but its quirky charm and heart- warming glow is its redeeming factor.74/100
This film attempts to cash in on the success of Richard Curtis movies, particularly "Love Actually" (which I loved) - a series of disparate scenes following the love lives of various couples. It's a great idea poorly executed. The script tries to be a little too clever and simply doesn't resonate. Most of the acting is stilted which is more a reflection on the director than the actors.The version I saw (on a plane) was called "Scenes from a Park", which is a more appropriate title as not all the scenes were of a 'sexual nature'.I was so looking forward to this movie, but ultimately it is disappointing. Don't bother.
I loved this movie so much I bought the DVD. It's a gem. I'm not surprised a lot of the actors did this film for almost no money - the script is that good.You can make an analogy to books - this is not a novel but a book of short stories. I personally love short stories - you can almost always flesh out the characters in your imagination and make your own ending. I thought this movie was brilliant - great script and absolutely superb acting. It was a joy to watch from start to finish. This is what acting is all about, this is what movies should be about - not blue screens, endless explosions and CGI characters.
There is nothing mean spirited or evil about this movie. It's just terribly dull. Dull is the photography--- the film stock appears old and faded and washed-out. Maybe it was even 16mm blown up to 35mm, dunno. Dull is the script, which is tedious and 'Jules Pfeiffer'-ish. That is, kind of 1960s bossa-nova cocktail party cool. Like our beatnik grandparents might have spoken if they were trying to appear really straight. The 'slice-of-life' characters were mostly annoying. True, they were real to life, but hey, if I wanted to see truly ordinary people doing really mundane and ordinary things, I'd just watch myself. I wouldn't trapse all the way down to a cinema and blow five quid, and an evening, watching someone else do it.I expected a funny, bright rom-com. What I got was more like what two intelligent and moderately talented 19 or 20 year-olds might have produced on their first day with a new video camera.I gave this a 4 out 10, because it appears that someone tried, at least.