A Pyromaniac's Love Story
April. 28,1995A pastry boy and the son of a hair-piece mogul become involved in an arson scandal. Sergio is offered a bribe in exchange for taking the blame for the fire that destroys his workplace. Garet, the real arsonist, is apalled that someone else would try to take credit for his act of love. Before long, Sergio and Garet become entangled in a zany love-quadrangle involving Hattie and Stephanie. Written by Brian Whiting
Similar titles
Reviews
Slow pace in the most part of the movie.
best movie i've ever seen.
This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.
The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;
Normally I don't enjoy very much romantic comedies, but personally I found this movie to be a decent watch.Even when its title could make anyone think that "A Pyromaniac's Love Story" is some kind of black comedy, it is actually a sweet (maybe too sweet for my taste) tale that without being nothing too great or memorable, manages to be reasonably entertaining, despite having the most common clichés of the genre and completely predictable ending.Like in many other romantic comedies, the characters and plot from this movie are quite unrealistic and completely unbelievable, but since this movie doesn't take itself very seriously, I think I could give it a free pass in that aspect.If anything, "A Pyromaniac's Love Story" is mostly a harmless experience that won't change anybody's life, but it won't hurt either.6/10
The title is the funniest thing about "A Pyromaniac's Love Story", this so-called romantic "comedy" has a lot more romance than comedy. The movie starts out as another tale of unrequited love as Sergio (John Leguizamo) explains in voice-over that he has long been in love with Hattie (Sadie Frost), the waitress daughter of a diner owner who thinks of him as just a friend.Although Sergio and Hattie are the movie's core romantic couple, there are two minor romances going on at the same time. The gimmick of "A Pyromaniac's Love Story" is a series of mix-ups involving all three couples. The confusion could be easily cleared up if the persons in each couple bothered to communicate with each other. This might be very funny if the script was well written and clever, but instead it is one of those movie situations which is only credible if you believe that all the characters are morons. So you have a decent love story with good messages about communicating and taking risks to declare your love, buried under a lot of poorly written slop."A Pyromaniac's Love Story" tries to be offbeat and whimsical in the style of "Benny and Joon" and although the two scores are almost identical it is never able to achieve the same effect. In part this is because William Baldwin's over-the-top performance is joltingly out of place in relation to how understated everything else is, and Sergio has more screen time with him than with Hattie. A poor choice because Sadie Frost is the strongest member of the cast and has good chemistry with Leguizamo.If you are looking for a way to make this movie interesting, I suggest that you watch it along with "Bram Stoker's Dracula" which was made 2 years earlier. In that film Frost (who is British) gave a great over-the-top performance as Lucy, a flirty and glamorous London socialite. Yet she is absolutely authentic as an earthy American waitress in "A Pyromaniac's Love Story" (accent, mannerisms, look). You would never guess that it could be the same actress. Frost is one of those talents who you wish had been given more opportunities.Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.
Not having any idea what this film was about, but based on the fact that John Leguizamo was appearing in it, we decided to watch it. Well, it turned out not to be the wisest decision. In fact, as another commentary in this forum puts it, we felt embarrassed for the actors that participated in this movie.While the film is by no means horrible, it doesn't make sense at all. The over the top performance by William Baldwin doesn't help the situation either. John Leguizamo is a multi-talented actor who deserved better. The basic problem it seems to be the film was a project that started with good intentions in making a little comedy and the people in charge ran out of ideas along the way. The result is an uneven film.
This was an attempt toward a romantic comedy, and one which did not work. Although the film was cast in an interesting manner, the dismal script betrayed the best efforts of all. The director's fey mannerisms may have succeeded if he had adopted a point of view. It was embarrassing to watch William Baldwin and, in particular, Armin Muller-Stahl.