| Page 1 of 5: | [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] |
| Index | 41 reviews in total |
10 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
Provocative, but credible, 31 August 2003
Author:
kctexan-1 from Kansas City, MO
After seeing Skipped Parts, and reading all the user reviews, I see why so many are repelled by the movie, but I'm one of the ones fascinated by it. In order to care about a movie, I have to care about at least one character, and in this movie, it definitely was the case, with the Sam Callahan young male part. Although it's true that hardly anyone went through what Sam and his young girlfriend went through, it was captivating to me to see Sam want, so much, to be a real boyfriend to his rather matter-of-fact fellow sexual experimenter. I identified his caring for, and attraction to, girls, with my own young life. As for his mom's character: yes, she was waaayy out there, but I have known women like that, so they *do* exist. I think that, overall, Skipped Parts is one of those movies where you have to give in to the situation a little, and go with it. IF (and this is critical) you have been through at least some of the feelings, if not actual situations, these characters experience, I think you'll agree that the 93 minutes, or so, spent in their world is not wasted time (although I think one time was enough for me...too many other great movies out there to see!).
9 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
I laughed very hard and cried a bit too, this one's a keeper., 10 June 2000
![]()
Author:
RoyBatty-7
Just got back from watching the world premiere of this film at the Seattle International Film Festival. I must say, I enjoyed this movie a great deal. Skipped Parts is a wonder to behold -- outrageously funny, poignant and bold. It never shies away from the tough subjects it covers while at the same time enlightening us with its humor. The acting is top-drawer, Jennifer Jason Leigh is brilliant once again, with standout performances by young Bug Hall and Mischa Barton. I don't want to give any of this one away, but I highly recommend you check it out. A word of caution, if you find sexual banter and activity between 14-year-olds disturbing, do not see this film, it is not for the close-minded. Slated to be released in September 2000.
11 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
Redefining the Family-Skipped Parts a Must See!, 15 December 2002
Author:
Christie (HFenderchick) from Kentucky
Jennifer Jason Leigh knows her stuff. After picking up Skipped Parts off the shelf, my choice based solely on the interest in Jennifer Jason Leigh movies, I was not disappointed by Skipped Parts. A coming of age story of the American family. You can call it dysfunctional but through all of the problems and obstacles this family saw, it seemed to have more love and happiness than the stereotypical suburban, white picket fence family we are so used to seeing in every movie. Jennifer Jason Leigh is spectacular, yet again, and anyone who loves off-beat movies with a heartwarming feeling from a different direction (compared to other movies) this is a must see and ace on my list. Watch it twice then buy it (as I will do shortly)
10 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
read the book instead, 17 August 2001
Author:
akahlgren from Minneapolis, MN
"Skipped Parts" is a watered-down version of Tim Sandlin's novel of the
same
name, the first in a wonderful trilogy about Sam Callahan's and Maury
Pierce's unusual lives. I recommend reading the novel(s), where the two
leads are 12, not 14, in the beginning and where the Wyoming landscape and
Teton Mountains are just as much characters as they are a background for
the
movie.
Not only is the story watered down and written for cheap laughs and tears,
but the pacing is unbearably slow. Jennifer Jason Leigh is clearly not
capable of doing justice to the methodically drunken Lydia Callahan, as her
portrayal is really more of a caricature than a character; and Tim Sandlin
sadly did little justice to his own novel in this screenplay by
down-playing
Sam Callahan's inner life as innocent, hopeful commentator on the action of
the novel/movie. Much of his biting and insightful humor is lost by
removing
Sam's commentary.
Read the book. It'll take more time, but feel hours shorter than this movie
felt.
8 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
refreshingly compassionate perspective on sex, 16 April 2008
![]()
Author:
robertedward from Cedar Rapids, Iowa
I found this film to be a welcome relief from the self-righteous,
hypocritical obsession with sex as evil in our confused society. I'm
sure that viewers aligned with the extreme religious right are aghast
at the sexual frankness of "Skipped Parts". I only wish they were as
upset over the war in Iraq, America's obsession with violence and the
rampant intolerance still pervading the home of the free. Instead, sex
and four-letter words top the list of moral outrages in the minds of
far too many of our number.
"Skipped Parts" is a compassionate view of outside-the-mainstream
people at odds with the establishment. Granted, unprotected sex among
teenagers is impractical and unwise, but hardly a reason to despise and
condemn. Especially by those who have, as do some of the characters in
the film, plenty of skeletons in their own closets.
Well-written, well-acted and well-directed, "Skipped Parts" is a moral
film in which the highest virtues are kindness, forgiveness, and love.
5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Offensive to the Religious Right?, 16 May 2006
![]()
Author:
jonmeta from Zaragoza, Spain
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Phrases like "this movie will drive the Religious Right nuts" get a lot
of mileage. A number of reviewers have said it about "Skipped Parts".
So I'm wondering what the Religious Right really would think of this
film if they examined it seriously.
First, the storyline suggests that sex education for kids is not a good
thing and may have unwanted consequences. The women who give the
advice, Lydia and Delores, are pretty unsympathetic characters when
they're talking to the adolescents. Are we meant to applaud the way
they give explicit details (complete with taco shell, like a silly
pantomime of a sex ed class) to 14-year-olds, while withholding the key
point of where this might lead? I don't think so, because their
recklessness is part of a commonplace theme that runs through the film
- the kids are more sensible than the adults - and also because we're
shown those consequences later. Lydia and Delores might as well give
Sam and Maurey a hand grenade and tell them to play carefully. So score
a point for Religious Right family values here.
Second, the film doesn't take the view of abortion that the Religious
Right might expect from so called "Hollywood liberals". It doesn't
present it as a quick and relatively painless way out of a jam, nor
does it do any pulpit pounding about the dark days before Roe v Wade.
The film could have made Lydia and Delores into proto-feminist heroes,
enlightened before their time, but it didn't. In the story, there are
two consequences of visiting the abortion clinic and neither one is a
guilt free abortion. So score some big points for "family values".
Third, the film ends by affirming the stereotypical woman-man-girl-boy
family: the waitress, the Indian, the cheerleader, and the precocious
young narrator. Sure, the narrator and the cheerleader have a baby, and
the waitress is a grandmother before she's thirty. But unless the
Religious Right has recently come out against grandchildren being
raised by multi- generational families, I fail to see the problem.
So what's there to offend the RR, other than the portrayal of Wyoming
natives as rodeo loving illiterates? (And that's only offensive
probably -if you're from Wyoming.) Well, there's the scene where the
two young teens face each other in their underwear, saying something
like, "I think this is how it's done." It was uncomfortable and
strange. But a lot of reviewers found it creepy, and I'm sure not all
are card-carrying members of the 700 Club. And it doesn't change the
fundamental themes of the story outlined above.
Lydia's loose morals and rebelliousness are sure to offend the
Religious Right, right? Yes, because her actions are *meant* to be
offensive: her irresponsible talk, her rambling, self- indulgent
rudeness to the welcome lady, her inability to do a stick of work, her
cruelty to a man who's much too good for her. The RR is offended and so
is everyone else. So maybe, in the movies, actions shouldn't always be
judged desirable if they offend conservative Christians. Even the RR is
sometimes offended by what's actually offensive.
But I digress. The good news is that, as in all traditional morality
tales, Lydia comes round in the end. She gets a job, declares
independence (rather than just rebellion) from her father, and settles
down with a man who loves her. Sure, she's white and he's Native
American, but not even the film's illiterate Wyomians are offended by
that.
That leaves just one theme that seems custom made to offend
conservative religious types. The film threatens to undermine parental
authority and traditional family values by making the kids more
sensible and moral than the adults. In fact, the grown ups are mostly
first class hypocrites, as revealed especially in the confrontation at
the abortion clinic. Sam, on the other hand, is an example of
responsibility and kindness. But wait. I think I've read that somewhere
before. Something about religious leaders being blind Pharisees and
children being the kingdom of heaven. Yes, that definitely sounds like
a deliberate attempt to offend the Religious Right.
5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Very Good, Very funny, film, 3 July 2001
Author:
(fpf@dp.net) from Pennsylvania
I saw the trailer for this film a few times when I was renting some movies and I thought it looked very funny. Then today I saw it at the video store. I picked it up and watched it and loved it. I thought Jennifer Jason Leigh was so hilarious in this movie and she truly stood out as Lydia, Sam's mouthy, slutty mother. Another acting standout was Bug Hall, Mischa Barton and Angela Featherstone. I thought they played there part perfectly, especially the young leads and Leigh. I was also suprised to see Drew Barrymore in a very small role as "Dream Girl". Although it deals with pregnancy and sex with 14 year olds...I still found it very entertaining and if you want to see some very good acting and a good comedy, i recommend this movie very highly. 10/10
11 out of 17 people found the following review useful:
Absolutley Great, 3 January 2003
![]()
Author:
marius_nicolescu from Constanta, Romania
It was one of the best movies I have ever seen, it just made me feel like I did when I was 14. It musn't be spoilt with more than 4 rows. It's just great!!! A must see movie for every one of you who wants to go back to his youth (if he ever had one)
6 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
A fine coming of age-story, although sometimes a bit far-fetched, 11 July 2005
![]()
Author:
Philip Van der Veken from Tessenderlo, Belgium
As a kid, every adult has had a time in his life that he or she was
fascinated by the world of the grown-ups, but didn't know much about
it. As an adolescent kid you want to know more about love and sex, but
the path to adulthood can be a bumpy road. That's also the reason why
there have been made so many coming of age-movies. Not all of them were
very successful, but some of them sure are worth a watch, like for
instance this "Skipped Parts".
When in 1963, a young woman and her 14-year old son Sam from an unknown
man, are expelled from North Carolina by her powerful father who runs
for governor, they end up in a small town in Wyoming. Here she
continues her irresponsible life of partying and having fun, while her
son discovers that the biggest part of his new school is made up by
retards who don't seem to know what a book looks like from the inside.
There is especially one girl, called Maury, who he can't stand at
first, but who he gradually starts to like more and more. When she asks
him to help her experiment with sex, they get very close and with the
help of his mother they get a pretty good idea of what sex is like. But
despite the fact that his mother told them to stop as soon as Maury has
had her first period, they are too late and pregnancy is the result.
While facing the consequences of their experiments and with
grandfather's dictatorial shadow over them, Sam and Maury get help from
Hank Elkrunner, a Blackfoot Indian who has become Lydia's newest
boyfriend...
I guess that it needs some imagination to believe that all what is
happening in this movie could actually be true. I'm not saying that it
isn't possible, but sometimes it all feels a bit far-fetched.
Nevertheless, this is still a very interesting movie and certainly one
of the better coming of age-stories that I have ever seen. Especially
thanks to the underlying story line of the double moral (sex outside
marriage didn't exist, but abortion clinics were available, the
totalitarian patriarch who wanted to keep his influence on his family,
but didn't want them near him...) and the fine acting in this movie,
this is a lot better than average. It's sure worth watching and I gave
it a rating of 7/10 which is far from bad for this kind of movies.
3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
"the waltons meet the age of aquarius", 12 June 2002
Author:
(mgresk@hotmail.com) from wheaton illinois
this is a quirky, entertaining flick. set against the backdrop of small town america 1963, it's a different 'coming of age' movie. goofy, drunken , obsessive adults and saner, wiser children attempt to sort through family roles and societal situations -- bigotry, sexual awakening, family structures, morality, abortion, gender roles --- this movie has got it all. it is, alternately, funny, sad, depressing & invigorating, but always entertaining. a great rent!
| Page 1 of 5: | [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] |
| Plot summary | Amazon.com summary | Ratings |
| Awards | External reviews | Parents Guide |
| Plot keywords | Main details | Your user reviews |
| Your vote history |