If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Absolutely the worst movie.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Screenwriter Larry Kreton adapts Fresh Horses, originally a play, for the big screen. Perhaps it was the desire to recreate something via casting decisions with the Pretty in Pink duo, McCarthy and Ringwald re-teaming for similar roles, or just in the failure of this particular play to translate so neatly to film, but something was missing that makes Fresh Horses instantly forgettable.McCarthy never seems to offer much emotion, even in the roles intended to be more romantic. He's just the inert character with some pre-determined purpose that has to be filled for two hours or so. Here, he plays Matt Larkin, the college preppy who breaks off his engagement when he falls for the mostly unsympathetic Jewel (Ringwald, written to be an almost complete dimwit), a girl who is essentially his opposite and fits the "broken home" stereotype that he feels obliged to rescue. Of course, despite urgings from his best friend Tipton (Ben Stiller in a role probably better suited for Paul Rieser) to quit playing it safe all the time and live a little, his friends are suspicious of Matt's new love interest.The movie might disappoint those looking for something similar to McCarthy and Ringwald's previous romantic pairing in Pretty in Pink, since there is so little sincerity and direction. And, neither of the leads are particularly likable - from beginning to end, Matt can't seem to decide for himself what he wants or has the guts to act on it; and Ringwald's character, too, is at times so ignorant and so shady. It doesn't exactly make for a particularly interesting love story.

The title is derived from a line in the movie relating to getting a fresh horse under you when the one you are riding is worn out. It is a reference to getting a new girlfriend when you get tired of the one you have been with.Andrew McCarthy is 20-something Engineering student Matt Larkin in Cincinnatti. He has just become engaged to a wealthy but otherwise rather dull girl in a reception that looks like a big deal for the family. His good buddy is Ben Stiller as Tipton who gets Matt to go to this house out in the country where a lady informally has people over for relaxation, food, and drinks. There Matt encounters Molly Ringwald as Jewel, an intelligent but undereducated young lady who tells him she is 20, but some rumors later say she is only 16. Other rumors say she is married. Matt has an instant attraction to Jewel.I believe this movie was billed as a followup to "Pretty in Pink", a 1986 movie with the two main actors here. Both McCarthy and Ringwall impress me more than I thought they would, each created good characters in what turned out to be, for me, a rather ordinary movie.Viggo Mortensen, already about 30, has a small but important role as Green.SPOILERS. Meeting Jewel made Matt realize that he didn't really want to marry the girl he was with, and she did not take the breakup very well. It turned out that Jewel really was married, to Green, she says as a way to get away from her stepfather. Matt goes overboard to help Jewel get out of her situation, but it is never clear that Jewel was being honest with him. After Jewel ultimately rejects Matt's love, he graduates and goes off to graduate school "up north." They have a chance encounter a year later, at an outdoor event at night, Jewel is with a new guy who seems very nice, she moves close to Matt and whispers in his ear, "Thank you" .

"When you become our age, it's harder and harder to make friends" says Tipton as he loyally stands by Matt. Jeez, with friends like that, it's no wonder this lame movie got made - no one was brave enough to tell any of the cast how bad it was. Didn't any of them watch the dailies? So, maybe at some point in his career Andrew managed to rustle up major chemistry, but in this movie, he manages to deliver the eternal best friend chemistry instead of the lost in lust type. He's very likable, but I don't think that's what we were going for, and he is just miscast. And Molly delivered some of her lines like she was reading them for the first time from the teleprompter ("I'm used" she says in the same tone she would use to announce "pink is my color") instead of part innocent/part femme fatale. I don't think either of them was getting the coaching they needed.The tension between the college and the surroundings was interesting for a while, but difficult to fathom. There aren't many universities that I can think of (maybe it's a Midwest thing?) that are so close to the swamps of Deliverance.When this movie came out, I really wanted to see it, because I loved St. Elmo's Fire. I wasn't able to because of school and work. I'm glad I missed it and saw it on cable, although I wasted quite some time waiting for the good part...waiting, waiting, waiting. Maybe there was a good story there at some point, but it didn't show up on the screen.

I saw this movie in the theater when it first came out. I was in love with Ringwald at the time as she was(and is still if the laws of physics still apply) about 5 years older than me. I really liked it then, and have been trying to get this on DVD for years.I was afraid that the film wouldn't be as good as I remembered, and it wasn't in the WAY that I remembered, but it was BETTER in ways that I didn't have the experience or maturity to appreciate at the time.While aspects of the film are dated, namely the syrupy, St. Elmo's Fire-ish theme song in the opening/closing credits, it held up surprisingly well. The only thing that keeps me from giving this higher marks is the unfortunate 80's gloss that works so well for the John Hughes films, but keeps this one from transcending the rat-pack genre.If this film were made today, it would never be filmed or sold as a "box-office" film, but would rather go through Sundance, IFC, etc., and the style would be more raw, more gritty. By and large though, that just didn't happen with "Teen Stars" in the 80's, and I'm amazed they got this film made at all! Also, for the people who don't seem to get the "Fresh Horses" reference, my take on it is not definitive, but there is a line where Ben Stiller is talking to Matt (McCarthy) and says something to the effect of letting a tired horse go, and getting a "fresh horse" in reference to dropping Jewel.It seemed to me that the metaphor was that while the characters all cared about each other, each relationship("horse") had more selfish/cynical motivations behind them. In effect, the relationships were being used to move themselves from one-point to another towards their goals/desires, whether or not they themselves understood or acknowledged them.Ringwald uses McCarthy to get out of her marriage, McCarthy uses Ringwald to get out of his engagement, Stiller seems to use his friendship with McCarthy to avoid growing up and getting serious, McCarthy seems to be trying to fulfill an image of himself as a white-knight, though he finds that he doesn't have the character, he also seems to need the superiority he feels over Jewel due to her lack of education and so on....Unfortunately for most(it seems!), the movie required you to do a little thinking, and probably drew the wrong crowd due to its co-stars, who were maybe expecting Pretty in Pink II, or Pretty In Pink "for adults", but I do not agree with that view of the movie.If you haven't seen it, give it a shot. Just go in with a blank slate and take it as it comes....