Greenes Please don't spend money on this.

SteinMo What a freaking movie. So many twists and turns. Absolutely intense from start to finish.

Aiden Melton The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Maleeha Vincent It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

SnoopyStyle Christine Jesperson (Miranda July) is a video artist desperate to get her work in Nancy Herrington (Tracy Wright)'s show. Richard Swersey (John Hawkes) is a recently separated shoe salesman with sons Peter and Robby. One day, Christine is driving her "Eldercab" to take Michael to buy shoes and Richard talks her into buying a pair herself. They begin a long hesitant romance. Meanwhile everybody they know is searching for connections in odd ways. Peter becomes entangled in Heather and Rebecca's sexual curiosity with Richard's boss Andrew. Robby gets into an internet sexual liaison with an unknown figure who turns out to be someone they know. Sylvie with her hope chest is infatuated with Peter.The two girls are the most shocking. Robby is the scariest. Peter and Sylvie are the most touching. With all these kids dealing with these adult situations, the leads' romance actually seems tame by comparison. It's odd that the central characters don't measure up to their costars but that's the case here. It's quirky and offbeat but I wouldn't call it charming. The movie threatens to go dark with the kiddie material but it backs off before it goes overboard. Miranda July and John Hawkes are doing some interesting acting. They are endearing in their own sections.

Muri da I like well made films and the introduction to this one, although slight dull seemed intriguing. However, it failed to ignite and like a car with a broken engine it needed a strong push, which it failed to receive. The scenarios throughout, touching on the subject of Pedophilia and the dangerous curious minds of lonely children were weak, this movie failed to make a proper statement in every area, it's like the writer had intention to create a meaningful scenario and then got way too stoned that they couldn't be bothered to follow through. This film was way too long and too much time was spent on the troubled female character who was recording and sent her work to an artist.I don't think this film was a realistic portrayal or an artistic one of any community, it truly was the same all the way through, with nothing groundbreaking taking place, it was all just ideas bundled together that never went anywhere, somewhere someone had intention but the paper plane just kept flying in circles.--------Not worth viewing if you actually care to watch thought- provoking artistic films ----- this film is the most pretentious i've seen recently

hellraiser7 Whenever were alone we always seem to construct a little world for ourselves as sort of a safety zone from what's around us but as the old saying goes no man is an island, we can never be a whole person unless there is another presence to fill that empty space in our lives let alone share our world with us to make it complete.The name of the game in the film is about connection and as the title suggests it's about more than just two people but about other couples involved which all parallel one another. This whole film I can't honestly say takes place int he real world but seems to be one foot in the fantasy world due to the quirky nature of it. The whole film plays out like a surrealist painting certain things that happen around them are strange in a way but so are the characters themselves sometimes all have some strange unique quality to them, they all have something in common their all living in their own little world in a way are are lonely but are all human and just struggling to break free to connect. These characters through their conversations truly understand one another and make sufficient progress.I'll admit the only flaw with the film had to be the one subplot involving those two teenage girls and Richard's friend with that whole internet stalker scandal doesn't work and felt completely out of place, I honestly felt the film could have done without it.This film is all told mainly in three stories that sand out and revolve around the theme: 1. The Performance Artist Christine Jesperson (Miranda July) and Richard Swersey (John Hawkes). Richard as we see is a recently divorced single dad who is struggling to get over it, let alone the fact his self centered ex wife cheated on him and made him feel like crap. His hand injury from a magic trick gone wrong reflects this internal damage he carries. We feel pathos for this guy and most of all understand him, he's funny, strange in a good way, responsible, loves his kids, and is just trying to get back on track when he forms a bond with Christine. She is an eccentric performance artist who is lonely and is pretty content with what she has but as we see in her eyes as well as what she says in the performance art she constructs, she needs someone to make her soul whole. Despite little time both characters spend with one antoher they understand each other and are by first meeting subconsciously already in love with one another. In one memorable scene both walk while talking about relationships, how it could last for the longest time possible but could end if your not looking at the sidewalk your walking on and the direction and length it goes. This is not a foreshadowing it's a common truth were seeing. Another stand out moment for her character was when she see the ex at the department store once again make Richard feel like crap for no reason, once he's gone Christine then gives the ex one of the products in the store a picture frame that when you press a button says I love you. Christine says this "May'be you should've press the button more." I felt in that moment she stated the general reason to why most people divorce or some divulge into the amoral cheating is simply because they've forgotten their love for the other or didn't work hard enough to keep that love alive.2. Richard's older son Peter Swersey (Miles Thompson) and a girl Sylvie (Carlie Westerman) who is at least about 3 or 4 years younger than him. Like most people at different ages their relationship is that common bridging the gap foundation. Both enjoy each other's company, Sylvie is wise beyond her years as she shows Peter her chest for things that she hopes to give to her future husband and daughters/sons (could be Peter in the future as time goes by). There's even one scene where their bondage is challenged when one day he expresses doubt in their interaction due to their age and of communications; he then encounters two teenage girls about his age, interacts with them as well as engages in some risky activities with them. But as we see this goes nowhere and these girls are not very nice and rather immature toward him; you can tell from his eyes he'd rather spend time with Sylvie again because their relationship seems to make the most progress as well as interesting. I feel this is another common truth about love presented if your going to have another in your life, have someone that's like a best friend to you.3. The younger brother Robby Swersey (Brandon Radcliff) as well as the art director have this online chat relationship. At first for Brandon it's a prank but we see it turns to more. In a strange way what is good about their relationship is both of them are giving each other an idea which carries hope for the future for both of them. For Brandon that he's capable of getting a beautiful woman in his life and actually engage in a deep intimate connection with her. For the art director to actually be able to have someone to love again and not be lonely anymore.We all live in our own little worlds but it doesn't mean we can't share it with another person, because it's truly people who make the world go round.Rating: 4 stars

Framescourer A thin film bulked out with portentous, indie-sensibility design, music and open acting... I don't know the term I'm after, but it's that manner of acting which allows the audience to simply insert whatever they want to make of it. There's a fair bit of dead-pan staring, put it that way.It helps to pass the time of this otherwise pretty trying film that director Miranda July has hired John Hawkes as her leading man and that she herself is an attractive, sympathetic figure. The rest of the cast have their idiosyncrasies. But these are all amplified in substitution for character, relationships and narrative, just as the small episodes which make up the film are concentrated on in isolation to the detraction of the whole.I saw the film with a short introduction narrated by July herself. Her suggestion that a feature could be three of her half-hour shorts stuck together tells you much of what you need to know about this film before watching it. 3/10