|Index||10 reviews in total|
6 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
I liked the movie a lot with a few reservations., 24 August 2002
Author: Norman Smith from Anaheim, California
My first impression watching Monkey Love was that the characters were shallow. Based mostly on excessive use of the "F" word, which is a little hard on my sensibilities. Ten minutes into the movie, I was hooked on the frustrations and feelings of young single people trying to cope with mixed emotions. There are a couple of insane characters in the movie and cuts to silent films, leading to a surreal emotional state in the middle of the show. I found the ending completely satisfying. Overall, I liked the film and came away well entertained and felt good.
9 out of 15 people found the following review useful:
A fun night at the movies, 7 August 2002
Author: tedlsf from San Francisco
Monkey Love is a well crafted story about a young girl coming to grips with life as an adult. Actually, it's a funny, interesting, even quirky story about compelling people and their romances. The writing and directing are first rate, and performances by Amy Stewart, Jeremy Renner and Seamus Dever reveal new talent bound for bigger things. What a great way to enjoy a night at the movies...making Monkey Love. Even the music is not the usual collection of the first 8 bars of current pop hits. Enjoy.
3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Not too impressed, 13 December 2005
Author: loopycooper from United States
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.
3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
How does this happen?, 21 August 2005
Author: wheeler-16 from United States
This movie is so bad I can hardly contain myself. I feel like less of a
person for watching the whole thing.
The performances appeared atrociously bad because of the student-project feel that oozes from the inexplicable, horrible choice of shooting to VIDEO(!!!!) instead of film, and more so because of the follow-up stinky editing. Sudden bursts of emotion seemed totally out of place. The story flow was totally disjointed. I could not care about the characters at all. I hated them for being in such a bad movie. The movie didn't know if it was quirky or funny or serious or romantic. The ending was jaw-droppingly shallow.
The car kidnap/ fight scene was comically bad. I mean, downright funny bad. I watched the scene again to see if I had just seen what I thought I did. It was even worse the second time around.
I could go on and on. This movie stinks. Bad.
Some serious questions: How do movies like this get made? It's like seeing a misused apostrophe on a neon sign. How can anybody be involved in something like this and not know how awful it is going to turn out?
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Cute, funny, and overall a decent movie.., 28 July 2008
Author: fear_N_loathing from Canada
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This was a cute little flick to watch. I don't see why it's rated as
low as it is. I thought it deserved a pass in my books! Of course when
you first being to watch it the "soap opera-ish" camera is a little bit
of a setback, but once you forget about that tiny detail and focus a
bit more heavily on the movie aspect, the film's adorable aspects shine
The acting was quite good, and I did end up chuckling a bit in several scenes ^_^ and the overall storyline wasn't too bad. There was funny dialogue and humorous situations.
I gave the film a 6 out of 10, mostly because it was actually quite good and left somewhat of an impact. But I did have some minor issues regarding character motives: just a bit of an issue with Amy's motives for wanting to ditch her friends, and then the fact that she was depressed afterwards... that didn't make much sense, and also the random psycho scythe father guy. (was he really needed? XD)
8 out of 15 people found the following review useful:
This was Horrible., 25 July 2003
How can anyone say this film is good? It's not even film. It's video. And it sucked. The acting. Directing. Lighting. Everything. No wonder it doesn't have distribution. Everyone...please don't listen to the hype-machine written here, because it's most likely written by crew members from the film. They are lies. This movie screams of student film! DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE!
Well..., 1 April 2013
Author: kelseyvsy from United States
This film was... Different. The way it was shot was boring and even annoying. The lines were cliché, or even one step above of that, because it was truly awful. I didn't get how her relationship with her parents pertained to the story. But I love love love Jeremy Renner and Seamus Dever... So I was completely willing to overlook this because it was their early works and they are both onto bigger and better things. Not decent, not OK, but it was there, so I watched it. Probably, most defiantly, won't watch it again. There are better Jeremy Renner films that he did before his "big break", like Dahmer or Neo Ned. And watch Seamus on Castle. Much better options than this. So I give this four stars, two stars for Jeremy, and two more for Seamus.
1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
4 Reviews?, 15 September 2005
Author: Mel Jones from United States
I really wondered how this got made. The real genius here is the person that designed the DVD case. The producers owe all there money to this person. The Video would have been Awful but the writing got better. First video? What happened here, couldn't afford to do the transfer? The acting was questionable at best. The Girl (Amy Stewart)is cute, but in the beginning of the movie she had a whole different look. She got much better looking as the film went on. The one guy (Jeremy Renner) had this weird Corey Haim look but only if Corey Haim tried to look like James Dean. The sex scenes were videoed so bad, I wondered if the director ever saw a sex scene in a movie before.
2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Good Acting, Bad Movie, 1 December 2011
Author: suzy-reynolds from United States
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The acting was actually pretty good.
But, the movie sucked donkey balls.
And let's be honest, who just watched this to see gorgeous Jeremy Renner back in the day?
But yeah, it's a total student film. The camera quality is awful and editing is terrible. Whoever cast the actors did a good job, though.
I have no idea who that girl was. Pretty forgettable.
And Jeremy looks bangin'. As always.
And Aron was cute, in a nerdy sort of way.
And that's all that really matters.
1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
I want my $1.93 back., 22 July 2005
Author: nightowl4 from United States
I could not bring myself to sit through the entire 135 minutes. My wife
and I were both bored soon after the film started. The acting was over
dramatic and unrealistic. Perhaps the fight scene was supposed to be
funny as well as the behavior of Amy's parents. The Amy's performance
was satisfactory but her two friends over reacted in many of the scenes
which made it unbelievable.
Where other films were shot on a dolly this film was hand held. DVD sound quality was acceptable and even. The cinematography was clear and sharp. Continuity was acceptable. It reminds me of the student films created in a 8mm cinematography class I took 30 years ago. The story could have been told in 30 minutes.
|Ratings||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|