Monkey Love (2002)

An L.A. college student becomes romantically involved with her two oldest friends.

Director:

Mark Stratton

Writer:

Dave Eisenstark

Stars:

Jeremy Renner, Seamus Dever, Amy Stewart

Cast

Cast overview, first billed only:
Jeremy Renner	...	Dil Stephanowski
Seamus Dever	...	Aaron Miles (as Séamus Dever)
Amy Stewart	...	Amy Roe
Mary Margaret Robinson	...	Mary Roe
Jesse Vint	...	Les Roe
Neala Cohen	...	Brie Bednick
Eve Brenner	...	Uncle Vid
Oleg Vidov	...	Professor Dworkin
Marion Calvert	...	Granny Dworkin
William Sanderson	...	Bradley Chalmers
Hope A. Hacker	...	Homelss Woman 1
Woong-ki Min	...	Mishnu (as Bianco Min)
Alesha Rucci	...	Giggling Blonde (as Alesha Clarke)
Kyra Gordon	...	Ginger
Ronnie Walsh	...	Ralph

Storyline

An L.A. college student becomes romantically involved with her two oldest friends.

---

Plot Keywords:

college student | mechanic | vow of silence | marriage proposal | voice over narration | 

---

Taglines:

It's a chick flick and a dick flick!

---

Genres:

Comedy | Romance

---

Motion Picture Rating (MPAA)

Rated R for pervasive language, and strong sexual content including dialogue

Details

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Release Date:

12 June 2002 (USA)

Company Credits

Production Co:

20 Max Films, Bigmaster+

Technical Specs

Runtime:

96 min

Color:

Color

Did You Know?

Connections

Features The End of St. Petersburg (1927)

---

Soundtracks

"Vasquez Shuffle"
Words & music by Marlene Hajdu
© 2002 McCormick's Last Chance Publishing, ASCAP
Guitar: Gregory Clyde Beck
Drums: Ed Ponder
Vocal: Marlene Hajdu
Producer: Marlene Hajdu

User Reviews

Not too impressed

I found the box made the film more appealing than it actually is. The script is interesting if not resembling that of a soap opera.

Despite a hard attempt to watch this film, I eventually ended up discarding it for few reasons; It feels like a long soap opera with static, repetitive shots in over-lit sets (or what look like sets), and it's visually dull. Examples being that the colours often seem saturated and dull, while all possibilities for visually boosting the appeal of the film are ignored - even something as simple as altering the depth of field, which is almost always infinite and again, dull.

The sound is well recorded, crisp and clear but again lacking a certain something.

Above all, this feels very much like a student film: undeveloped, simple and shallow on many accounts. The writing, however, could possibly be the saving grace of the film were to be backed up with equally appealing direction, lighting, sound and editing.

This does appear to be a film made in the youth of the said director's career which could explain why it is how it is.

Despite my negative views, I can say that there are no, or not many errors with boom shadows, editing errors, continuity errors in the shots, narrative or lighting and it's obvious much care has been taken to avoid such issues.

As a film that has been placed in the genre of comedy, I feel it has been misplaced. This is a very performance orientated piece which would sit neatly in the genre of drama or docu-drama along side a short such as 'Tape'. With this possibility in mind, it could still be seen as a comedy from a narrative perspective.

I do feel though, that this film could be very useful in a learning environment as something for beginner to intermediate film students to critique as a piece that's not too complex in an particular way, as something at a quality to aim for when producing their first short.

I hope this is a useful review, and that I haven't overlooked the direction the makers were approaching this project from.