Nobody Walks

The first clue is the runtime of 1 hour and 22 minutes. In a time when Hollywood stretches the limits of audiences' attention spans to their fullest 3 hour seated capacity, "nobody walks" writes its epitaph with (and within) its short start to finish as it starts quickly and runs out of gas just as so. While a specific length is not a necessity, this film is ambitious in its grand plans and yet negligent on its delivery. "Nobody walks"'s quest is to tackle one of modern human life's most specific challenges: monogamy; and more importantly: the desire to stray from it; and that desire in general. Its most profound assertion is that no relationship is sacred, as not even the boundaries of our most official are safe from the powers of lust. It goes even further into suggesting that all relationships are laced with and perhaps built upon this sexual wanting. The movie is passionate about its agenda. So much so; that it beleaguers each of its eight characters with this primal condition. Unfortunately, though all the characters suffer, no one is cured, no one is diagnosed, no one can even admit they have a problem, until the film is over. Ironically, much like a failing marriage, the film cannot deal with the conflict that it has created, so it just doesn't. In the very few scenes with perfunctory attempts, it falls short; as the acting and screen writing remain under equipped to deal with the subject that "nobody walks" promises to celebrate. Functionally anorectic, the film suffers classically from a case of biting off more than it can chew, as the story neither swallows its attempt, nor takes any other bites at all. The characters take no time to introduce themselves before beginning their preconceived flaws, almost as if it wasn't supposed to happen to them at all. And just as soon as they are done, with no question or contrition, they all quit and the credits roll. Perhaps, the film, in its greatest irresponsibility, fails most disappointingly as it never explains why, some characters, though all innately feral in carnality, find vaccination in the last moments of temptation and are spared of their supposed dubious inevitability, and yet others are curiously stricken and never recover. Time management seems to be the success and failure of many films and "nobody walks", though quick in its sprint, might have been better served with a slow jog, or even a more calculated stroll.

I found this film to be initially intriguing but ultimately disappointing. And while the cast is attractive, and the direction is passable, it's the story that falls short. "Who cares?" is the reaction I would expect many people to have upon completing this (thankfully) short, arthouse type movie.

As a man, I was put off by the depiction of my gender here... virtually every man, from cheating spouse to pedophile teacher to lecherous patient to moronic ex-husband to shag-expecting seat-mate on a flight... is presented as either a "dog" or a jerk, and this is just wholly unrealistic. Can't a "strong woman" movie exist without casting every male as a hormone-driven slob, an idiot, or an evil czar to be toppled?

The story goes nowhere, driven there by semi-interesting people doing nothing of note. In the end, it's basically a character study about people that are hard to relate to, and becomes essentially a waste of talent and energy. Not worth your time.

Given the screenplay was co-written by Lena Dunham, creator and breakout star of HBO's "Girls", I was hoping this 2012 indie relationship drama would resonate strongly like Lisa Cholodenko's acclaimed Los Angeles-set films ("Laurel Canyon", "The Kids Are All Right"), especially with such a smart cast of actors. However, something feels amiss in director Ry Russo-Young's coolish approach to a familiar story of adulterous deception and family dysfunction. The pacing feels glacial, and the characters are just not that involving emotionally. Perhaps that was the intention in showing the shallow nature of the lifestyle being portrayed, but it rubs off on the film's inertia leaving it feeling quite flat. The setting is LA's funky-chic Silver Lake neighborhood where sound engineer Peter lives with his psychotherapist wife Julie along with their young son and her teenaged daughter from a previous marriage, Kolt. They epitomize the laid-back, everything's-cool attitudes one associates with affluent Southern Californians.

Enter Martine, a New York acquaintance of Julie's college friend who happens to be an attractive 23-year-old experimental filmmaker. She has agreed to work as Peter's assistant in exchange for him helping out on her latest project, an arty video installation revolving around close- ups of ants. How Martine emotionally invades the family is the crux of the story, and to the credit of Russo-Young and Dunham, she never comes across as an unrepentant interloper like more commercially driven exploitative films have done in the past. It's just that the plot pretty much goes the way you would expect it would go from the outset, although the characters carry decidedly ambiguous natures that make some of the story turns feel more complex than they really need to be. For instance, the inevitable tryst between Martine and Peter lacks believable passion because it feels almost matter-of-fact. In hindsight, I feel like it should have been the driving force in pushing each character toward self-examination.

The cast is not really at fault here as the acting, for the most part, is sensitive and assured. Olivia Thirlby (the best friend in "Juno") provides the requisite gamine quality needed to make Martine credible as an object of obsession even if her character remains a cipher throughout. The always becalming Rosemarie DeWitt ("Rachel Getting Married") delivers a thoughtful balancing act between earth mother and jealous wife as Julie. John Krasinski has a bit harder time escaping his amiable good-guy image from "The Office" and "Away We Go", but he does provide some surprisingly heated moments as Peter that make you wonder if he could do a greater variety of roles on screen. As the constantly yearning Kolt, India Ennenga appears to be channeling early Claire Danes, but she makes the character's unrequited love palpable. In smaller parts, Justin Kirk as a horned-up Hollywood screenwriter and Julie's attentive patient and Dylan McDermott as her self-possessed ex- husband bring much needed alpha energy to the proceedings. A late meltdown scene with Kolt's smarmy Italian tutor (Emanuele Secci) feels very out of place. Lethargic viewing.

You know when someone is telling you a story and you're kinda into it, wondering when it's gonna get good, and then they just stop talking? And you're just like "uhh, you're done?"

That is what this film is. Not gonna lie, I was above averagely interested in the plot, and was interested in the film mainly because I wanted to see one of my favorite actors try to play someone other than Jim Halpert. It may take John Krasinski a bit of work to be able to drop his "Jim" persona, of which I didn't see much in this film, so good job there.

I would like to commend the young actress who took on this film and turned it into something that wasn't a complete waste of time. I would never be interested in watching this film again, but I won't say it was an offense to the film world.

Overall, just skip it. You don't get any insight into life, you don't come away with anything, you don't really care about the characters, but if you have or had a life that was plagued with promiscuity, you might be able to relate, but also may be repulsed by some of the characters.

Just saw this movie today and was a little disappointed with it. The acting is decent enough, the dialogue is not terrible (except for one scene, which will be obvious), the characters were interesting. It was all enough to make me engrossed in the film, but it doesn't seem to go anywhere. I kept waiting for the sh** to hit the fan and it never did.

Sorry to say that the story seemed a little under-developed to me. The stakes never seemed high enough to make you really worried for any of the characters. And what was supposed to be the climax of the film is really just a tiny spurt of nothing.

I hope the writer continues to develop further, as she obviously has the ability to create unique and interesting characters, but she just needs to learn to do more with those characters. She certainly had the time to do so in this film, as the running time is short and there were definitely sub-plots that could've been cut out entirely (the Italian teacher for instance)