| When Will I Be Loved | | Cast : | Neve Campbell, Fred Weller | | Director : | James Toback | | Studio : | Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer | | Format : | Color, Closed-captioned, Widescreen | | Released Date : | September 10, 2004 | | DVD Released Date : | June 07, 2005 | | Language : | English (Dubbed), English (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled) | | Audience Rating : | R (Restricted) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON |
Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | July 31, 2005 | | Summary | Could have been a good movie | Content
 | This movie begans with great promise and quickly dissolves into a incoherent, poorly edited mess. Spoiled rich girl uses her sexuality to get a job, scam an old man out of money and then frames another man for the his death. Pretty much a movie by the numbers. Acting is so so at best and richly deserved to go straight to video rental. Not worth adding to your home collection unless you enjoying seeing Neve Campbell nude. |
| Rating | | | Date | July 07, 2005 | | Summary | Preposterous and Absurd | Content
| This film was hailed by some critics as high art. Artsy fartsy and pretentious perhaps, but art it is not. Roger Ebert called it a masterpiece. The reviews that this film received are astonishing, for this is one truly atrocious film. The plot, for starters, is preposterous. The main character is also unbelievable, and is the film's main failing. It attempts to build up Neve Campbell as possessing an almost dangerous sexual power, and it utterly, disastrously fails. If a film maker wants to establish such an elusive quality for any character, much more is necessary than showing the character showering nude, masturbating, getting hit on by men, etc. The main character's setup in this film has quite the opposite effect of the one intended. Stunning? Alluring? Sexy? Even dangerously so? Not quite. Seeing Campbell make out with another woman then turn into a small child when speaking to her mother is far from sexy. Campbell's character simply comes of as histrionic, immature, and ridiculous...even boring. That a successful and guarded businessman would let a tramp like Campbell's character in so close is utterly absurd. Furthermore, nudity can be wonderful in a film, but it cannot disguise the absolute absence of any real plot. On a side note, some films do not attempt to be anything more than exploitation flics, showing sex and nudity for the sake of it. I see nothing wrong with this. These films can be very entertaining--but they don't pretend to be anything more than what they are. This film, however, is stuck. It pretends to be artsy, but is not; it pretends to have substance, but has none; it attempts to drown us in style, yet hasn't any. Furthermore, the sex and nudity in this film are not of the type to entertain us on their own. This film simply fails: It's BORING. The proceedings are further marred by what is possibly one of the worst soundtracks in film history. I wanted to pull at my hair every time the film cut from classical to hip hop back to classical. Thumbs way down! Save your money and perhaps even more importantly, your time! |
| Rating | | | Date | June 17, 2005 | | Summary | Art! Ha! | Content
| Why is it that such horrible movies always get great reviews from people who think they are art. This isn't art. It's just a bad movie. A woman of such high quality as Neve Cambell's character would never lower herself to the idiot of a boyfriend she gets stuck with in this movie. And I really doubt such a powerful businessman would let a street hustle get that close to him. If he wanted to meet the girl he would have done it himself or had one of his flunkies find her.
And the whole scene with that teacher was just a waste of film. Why would she want to work with him? He's an idiot and so are all the people they run into on the street. All that scene does is show that while she has a boyfriend she is more than willing to cheat on him.
Now the nude scene. While a naked beautiful woman is always a wonderful thing to see, it serves no purpose. If you want to show her strength and power that certainly is not the way to do it. I can point out hundreds of movies that show strong powerful women who never take their cloths off for the camera. Let's face it, nudity in a movie shows only one thing, a naked body. Trying to say this is art just points out the lack of talent on the part of the writer and director.
And any movie that brings in Mike Tyson is just a fools movie.
The only thing that saves this from being pure trash is the fact that Neve Cambell is such a great actress. To bad she made the same mistake as so many other young actresses that try to get out of a mold they are stuck in by takeing off their clothes. Nudity has its place in movies but that alone does not make you a serious actress. Most go downhill for this point into a string of B movies. Only a few have ever made it back to real films. I hope she makes better choices in the future. |
| Rating | | | Date | May 07, 2005 | | Summary | See Neve nude! | Content
| Those who are waiting to see Neve Campbell naked (and you know who you are!) won't have to wait long in this flick. The opening scene shows her showering. The bad news is that, while you get about a half dozen angles of her posterior, they show little else. However, it is STILL Neve Campbell we're talking about here.
Also, while Campbell is beautiful, she does not exactly possess a swimsuit model's body. Seeing her nude was therefore not quite as exciting as I thought it would be. But, nevertheless, it IS Neve Campbell. It's especially nice to see her as I recall her saying after making WILD THINGS that she would never do a nude scene that showed anything. Looks like she's expanding her horizons, and that's always a good thing!
As for the film itself, it is so-so. For what it is, it is OK. There seems to be a message in there somewhere, but I'm not sure what it is. About the only thing for sure is that Campbell's character is very devious and insidious......much like her loser boyfriend.
If you're looking for a sexy / erotic thriller, there are better films out there (UNFAITHFUL and ORIGINAL SIN come to mind). However, if you want a film that you don't have to take too seriously, this one is do-able. |
| Rating | | | Date | April 17, 2005 | | Summary | NOT Exciting, NOT Arousing, NOT A Good Movie | Content
| Neve's nude scenes are coy and uninteresting. Neve's love scenes are veiled and unconvincing. To be frank, she's not even beautiful.
It's basically a sequel to "Wild Things," but maybe 1/20th as good as "Wild Things." |
|
|
|
|
