Reviews

I am going to have to say that "Mr. Whitney" was quite the stereotypical dimple of an old movie. What i mean by this is, the sound was horrible, the jokes were old and no longer are considered humorous in this day in age, and the special effects were nil. Yet while "Mr. Whitney" is an OLD film, it did make me smile a few times at its overstuffedness. Lloyd Bridges was the only shining portion of this piece. While the humor in the lead character's mostly grouchiness was not lost on me, it was particularly characteristic that "Mr. Whitney" was easy. All in all, while i do particularly enjoy old masterpieces, this was not one of them.

i would just like to say that i did NOT enjoy this movie at all. Sure, there were some scenes here and there, but the ending, ugh, gag me, please? Paul Rudd gave an excellent performance as a nice sensitive gay man who ends up in between a rock, a hard place, and jennifer aniston's puppy whimpering. The scenes that involved gay men were trite, unrealistic, and portrayed gay men as promiscuous. It engorged me with rage to see this, realize this, and ultimately hate the otherwise great premise of a movie. I thought that Paul Rudd was cute, but not who i would pick for the leading gay role. He tried too hard to act gay that his acting was hard and rough and edgy. All in all, it left a bad taste in my mouth. I don't recommend it to anyone at all.

I am going to have to say that this comedy was not one of the best choices for julia roberts to make. It soiled her image as she did her numerous misdeeds in this "caper" of a romantic comedy. I did not like this film for several reasons, the biggest being the let down of an ending, having endured the previous hour and a half of idiosyncratic situations, the ending just topped it all of as making the movie a huge disappointment. The only shining moments were with the wonderful acting of Rupert Everret as julia robert's gay friend posing as her fiancee. In my opinion he wa robbed of an oscar as he portrayed the gay man as strong and not weak as most hollywood films do. I applaud his acting and he was very exciting to watch. He illicited a strong emotional response from my point view, and that is hard thing to do. The only other ray of sunlight was the scene involving a hairdryer, one of the brides maids, and an ice sculpture of David. I can say that was a believable situation albeit in my eyes at least. All in all, not worth seeing.

I enjoyed watching this movie, but simply because i have been in the same type of situation as presented in the afore mentioned. While it was quite "artistically" done, I failed to see any sequence to its events. It didn't quite *fit* together. While the two actors struggling with their sexual identities really played their parts well, one can almost say that it was all contrived as a scheme rather than genuine "unknown struggles". I would say that the only reason i enjoyed this film is that, i being gay myself, identified with the leads' rejection of such orientation as being his own. I can say i endured watching the whole movie simply because i was watching my own teenage years of confusion through a looking glass. I wouldn't really recommend it for general audiences.