New Year's Eve, 1981, the Lower East Side. Monica's having a party, but as late as 9, no one's there. She stews (and drinks). Folks are on their way, all looking for love, sex, or both. En route, paths cross, gambits misfire: a performance artist, her boyfriend until today and his long-time pal Lucy, two Long Island high-school girls, two punk rockers, a bartender, a Scottish painter who's lousy in bed, a pretty face named Jack who runs when women say they love him, his cute but clumsy date Cindy, two trendy vamps, a loquacious cabby, the man-crazed Hillary, and Elvis Costello. Nearly everybody smokes, and nearly everybody scores. And all get who and what they deserve.Written by
Christina Ricci said in an interview that while shooting in the East Village, the landlord of one of the buildings they shot in front of did not want the building featured in the movie, because she was personally against smoking, due to her father dying of lung cancer. She orchestrated several antics to sabotage shooting, including hanging a "NO SMOKING" sign in one of the windows, covering posts on the street with aluminum foil, and singing "Row Row Row Your Boat" during filming. She even almost punched out an extra for stepping onto the stoop during a shot, and walked towards camera with the "NO SMOKING" sign while singing. See more »
When Val and Stephie cross from Avenue A to Avenue B they are on Avenue B and 9th. There is no 9th Street between A and B. Tompkins Square Park covers A to B between 7th and 10th Streets. See more »
You let somebody move in with you, you make all these little compromises to smooth things along, and the next thing you know, you're on some macrobiotic diet and you're listening to Joni Mitchell.
See more »
At the end of credits Disco Cabie can be heard saying, "If you only remember one thing I've said, remember this; James Brown is the baddest motherf@cker in show business." See more »
A workprint copy exists, which does add some extra footage See more »
This movie had a lot of bad things said about it upon its release, but my girlfriend dragged me to it anyway. I didn't really like it, but after extended conversation, we realized exactly what we were dealing with.
And that is, a movie before its time. Most all cinema, both in and out of Hollywood, is brought to us by upper-class white males, complete with their beliefs, morals, what have you. One would argue, then, that even if a film came from someone who was not an upper-class white male would still have to work within that system, probably even being influenced by it, in order to get a film made.
Note, then, that this film was written by a woman, and directed by a woman. The characters in it are not testoserone-driven or in any way the pumped-up dumbed-down characters we have seen in recent decades. They are sensitive, but open to communication, a little irrational at times, but still human. They are characters from the female mind, a female psychology, and have very feminine ways in interacting with each other.
Then note that is was probably marketed by the same male-dominated Hollywood.
This is, of course, mostly backed up with the amount of psychology classes I have taken, but the simple version is that when this movie was new, I discussed it with many of my friends. All of the men either had no desire to see it, or hated it. Every single one of the women thought it was excellent.
Granted, this is a common rationale used by people who think themselves movie critics, but just you try seeing with a member of the opposite sex, and see how your opinions differ.
This is the first movie of a New Hollywood, tho it will certainly not be remmebered as such. Check it out and see what I mean.
14 of 27 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this