Powerful

Best movie ever!

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

The first half of "XX/XY" is a labeled as a flashback to 1993, the second half is labeled a flash-forward a few years to the present. The transition between the two time periods is immediately proceeded by a confusingly contrived match cut from bedroom to subway. The subway scene is brief and unnecessary, a less than zero addition that must have looked like a good idea on paper. Unfortunately, once they staged it they felt compelled to use it.Although "XX/XY" is told as a linear story, during post-production they realized that it was too choppy and confusing for straight viewing and elected to label the scene transitions with a lot of on-screen titles. Although viewers will thank them for this last-minute fix, it is like making an explicit admission of writer/director Austin Chick's limitations and/or pre-production laziness. The final cut gives the impression that it wasn't until the actual assembly of this film that Chick gave any thought to the sequence for many of the scenes.The bleak colors, inadequate lighting, and bland production design are depressingly consistent with the tone of the story. Don't expect to find anything uplifting except the Taco ads and the advertising agency parody.Those expecting a script on the intelligence level of "Closer" (a similar premise) will be disappointed despite decent performances from the entire cast. I initially watched from the perspective of a Kathleen Robertson fan and was disappointed with her quite ancillary position in the story relative to Mark Ruffalo and Maya Strange. Although promoted as the story of a "carefree threesome", Robertson's Thea is just a third wheel in the Coles (Ruffalo)-Sam (Stange) relationship. Chick briefly gives Robertson something to do as she breaks Sid (Kel O'Neill), a shy puppy dog boy who she teasingly sleeps with once. But he goes nowhere with this, apparently it is just there to insure viewers dislike all members of the threesome, not just the principal two.If you can manage to tough it out for a while, things get much better in the second half. The "Gatsby" ending is actually very good. Mostly this is because each member of the threesome has paired up in monogamist relationships with very likable people. By this point Coles has become the principal character as Chick begins to explore the mysteries of male discontent. The Coles' characterization is hard to buy into, there is just too much inconsistency as Chick tries to make him both a wimp and a "stick it to the man" rebel (I assume that this inconsistency is supposed to be the whole point for the movie). Although Ruffalo can adequately play either character he cannot perform the impossible and weave these disparate traits into a believable person.The second half shows Coles involved in a long-term relationship with Claire (Petra Wright). Once her character is introduced, Wright proceeds to steal the remainder of the film, not just because she is the film's first well-adjusted character (and arguably most talented performer), but because her part is written so much better than the others. Claire's scene on the pier is the film's best moment and the one thing here that you will want to go back and view multiple times.Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.

What can I say about this XX/XY? It starts off promising with the 90's stuff and raver scenes, but doesn't nearly have enough back story to make us really give a care about the three main characters. The lady who plays Sam is an alright actress, I think she's one of the highlights. Also, it's refreshing to see Mark Ruffalo clean shaved. He looks good in this, but alas, his acting is pretty lazy and not up to his usual standard. Thea is played by Kathleen Robertson, and at least she tries. The dialogue in this film is the most wooden I've heard in a non porno. It doesn't come off as sincere, and the acting is lacklustre. Mark Ruffalo doesn't deserve such a bad movie. He's probably the redeeming quality about this. But even Mark Ruffalo can't save this relationship drama that plays out more like a movie of the week than an indie film. Awkward sex scenes, awkward dialogue, style over substance. Pass.

If there's one thing I've learned from life (among the millions of other things, I mean) is that, by god, relationships are really hard. And you know what I've learned from movies that pertains to relationships? That they're really damn hard. Especially if your relationship happens to be a "Threesome" that just brings you "Closer" to the brink of insanity...This film stars Mark Ruffalo as a guy with, let's call it, "emotional problems." The story focuses on Ruffalo and a three-way relationship he had with two women in his college days. Eventually, his relationship with the two ladies becomes complicated with "feelings" and "emotions" and stuff and falls all apart. Years later, he runs into the one of his old sex-buddies--the one he was closer to--and eventually the three of them becomes friends again. Sort of. Everyone is in separate relationships by this time, so the idea of jump-starting old feelings and relationships becomes complicated. Well, then, of course, all kinds of craziness ensues--and I'll leave that up to you to see for yourself.Here's the breakdown:The Good:--The acting is great--especially from Mark Ruffalo.--Good music.--Good character development.--Interesting story.Didn't Hurt It, Didn't Help:--Decent cinematography.--Decent atmosphere--although "lonely"--as it focuses on Mark Ruffalo's character, we get the feeling that he's really unsatisfied with his life.--Character development rather uneven from the college days to the later days.The Bad:--The characters are pretty self-centered. Empathy doesn't exist here.--The film has kind of a negative tone, all-around, and the ending feels kind of unsatisfying--it didn't go out with a bang of any kind--more like a whimper. It worked alright for the story, but wasn't very strong.The Ugly:--Mark Ruffalo's hairy ass.Memorable Scene:--When Mark Ruffalo is approached by a "fan" who saw the film he made--and he tells Ruffalo what he actually thought of the film.Acting: 9/10 Story: 8/10 Atmosphere: 7/10 Cinematography: 7/10 Character Development: 8/10 Special Effects/Make-up: 0/10 (none) Nudity/Sexuality: 3/10 (decent sex scene in the beginning, one scene later) Violence/Gore: 0/10 (none) Dialogue: 8/10 Music: 8/10 (average for the time) Writing: 8/10 Direction: 8/10Cheesiness: 1/10 Crappiness: 0/10Overall: 8/10This is a far more somber and serious film than "Threesome" and doesn't quite have the character development of "Closer." If you like either or both of these films, you'll likely enjoy "XX/XY," and like I said, only the ending is kind of a let-down. It's somewhat slower-moving that those other two.www.ResidentHazard.com

Please have mercy on us. Another newbie, would-be writer-director, possibly just out of film school, dumps another one of these on us.Lord love a duck. But not a turkey. Pa-leeeeze!!!!!! It seems like the massive hoard of wanna-bees graduating in mass from film schools in every state and small town think that they have to do a meaningful film about the human condition, which to them obviously means the romantic and sexual and relationship trials and tribulations and complications of, of course, themselves.Apparently, they just don't realize that nobody cares about this except . . . themselves. Those younger than 20-something couldn't care less, and those older than that have already been through it and don't really care to watch for an hour and a half or more some newbie film school grad's self-absorbed, personal version of it. Even most other 20-somethings are yawning and watching other films that are professional and fun.Oh, well, if you like it, you like it. I don't. I find it to be another example of why recent film schools grads seem to be able to do nothing else except something self-absorbed like this. Try getting some real life experience before attempting to make films for anyone except yourself. The fact that one of the characters is a wanna-bee film writer/filmmaker shows you the extremely limited range of life experience of the would-be writer/director of this self-absorbed and boring-to-anyone-else 20-something project.Just another one on the massive pile. Should we just shoot these egotistical children constantly graduating from film school with nothing but fame and fortune and pretension in their limited imaginations? Or should we just wait until mommy and daddy's patience and/or money runs out and they end up in a tiny cubicle in an office, under constant stress, and continually whining and unhappy, 40 hours a week for the rest of their pompous lives? Oh, well, I won't worry about it. When mommy and daddy's money or patience runs out, reality will hit them in the head. Then, after years of struggling and suffering and hopelessness, maybe, just maybe, they'll finally have something to write about and film. But even then, they still might not have any talent.Gawd, but this was boring. Boring story, boring characters, and poorly executed. And totally self-absorbed. Get years and years of life experience before you try again. Please. But you will still need talent, and I didn't see any here.Sorry. For everyone involved in this supposed film and for everyone who tried to watch it. There are so many good films in the archives, and more added each year, that I don't recommend bothering to watch this one, unless you are this kid's parents. And then I highly recommend it, so that they will know to immediately cut this kid's free money off, so that he will be forced to get a job and deal with real life.1 out of 10, and only because the actors tried real hard to produce their horrible acting. 0 out of 10 for the writing and directing. And I've worked in the film business for years, and the TV and the music industries, too. But even just as a film consumer, it was horrible. The one reason that it is of any note at all is as a classic example of the phenomenon of recent film school graduate self-absorption and pretension to fame and fortune and talent.