Women vs. Men

"Women vs Men" is an uninspired regurgitation of all the same old trite and tired battle of the sexes stuff with a few new buzz words pounded into the pathetically flat script to give it a contempo edge. With a svelte Lahti and a bearded Metegna as the lead couple in the war, you'd expect this tv fare to be a shoe-in. Instead it plays out like one long and incredibly boring drone of endless banter. Simply awful. PU! Yuck! (D)

Never having heard of this film before, I saw the DVD at the video store and rented it on the strength of the cast, particularly, Reiser and Mantegna. I was amazed by the intelligence in the writing for these characters and their wives, Headly and Lahti, respectively. The pacing of the dialog and the chemistry of the characters flows like a Neil Simon play, a West Wing episode, or Mad About You. The two couples find themselves facing self-revelation after twenty years of marriage. It is a rite of passage that lies somewhere between middle-age crisis and incontinence (as Reiser's character, Bruce, discovers when he finds there are no books written for this crossroads in life). The honesty is hilarious. Pastorelli's character, Nick, is poignantly funny with his harmless, yet blatantly effective seduction prowess. I'm glad this was a two day rental, because I had to see it again. This would make a great stage play.

A movie that tries to explain why people do what they do. People don't realize what their part is in what their spouses do. While you need to own your actions...there are still other forces at play...and the loss of pure intimacy (not sex) and flirting and "the dance"...something we all actually crave. Its funny with a message.

I'm a bit thrown by the fact that the one person who truly hated this film (George) is the main review that shows up when you come to IMDb. The general consensus is that this wasn't a bad film and, in fact, it was the opposite. As a person who doesn't typically flock with the masses, I still have to admit they are right and George could not possibly be more wrong.

The movie played out like a stage production; it was dialogue driven and mostly played in a couple interior sets between the four main characters and two major supporting cast members. If you are adverse to dialogue driven movies or need a movie where one side is clearly superior to the other, this is not the film for you. The writer has an even hand and incisive dialogue evenly distributed to both the male and female side of the subject of this film- marriage. Through a series of well crafted discussions, film dissects the subject, studies it, picks at all of it's corners and (gasp) actually encourages self-examination. I challenge any married person not to see at least one fault from these characters in him- or herself. Do some of the situations and conversations come out as over-the-top? Sure. Are the characters, at times, TOO eloquent? I suppose that could be argued (one could also argue that they are not, however, given the fact that they all are highly educated and it's not hidden in the exposition). Is the movie banter-driven at times? Yep. It is often reliant on banter. None of this makes it any less fun and thought-provoking to someone who might enjoy laughing at the navel examination that relationships can become. There is a lot of- as someone put it- "psycho-babble", but it makes SENSE given the fact that one of the main characters IS A RELATIONSHIP THERAPIST and another character is her husband of over twenty years and the film's premise is a moment that may end all of the relationships involved. If there was no "psycho-babble", it would be unrealistic. Any marred person who has ever worked in any form of therapy or management has resorted to methods you use at work in heavy arguments at home. It just happens. These methods become part of you, tools you can count on. It would be ludicrous to expect otherwise and is equally ludicrous to criticize the movie on that basis. My wife and I truly enjoyed this movie, despite moments that came out as way over the top (there are some scoffable moments involving Nick for example). It was warm and funny and- for once- written for literate adults who enjoy theatre as much as they enjoy film. Ignore the criticism if you need these qualities once in a while. You'll be glad you did.

Okay, whoever the George was that trashed this movie is an idiot. It is a good movie, and Glenne Headly is amazing. Anyone should see it. It was well directed and has quality acting, unlike the trashy porn films George usually views. People, spread the love; watch the film.