Review of XX/XY (2002) by Dane G — 28 May 2006

STANDARDIZED MOVIE EVALUATION.

(comments may contain spoilers).

I. CONTENT (out of 3 stars plus bonus, composite of sub-criteria bellow): --->1.5 <---.

I. PHILOSOPHICAL/PSYCHOLOGICAL DEPTH (out of 2 stars, where very shallow = 0; shallow = 0.25 or 0.5; somewhat deep = 0.75 or 1.0; deep = 1.25 or 1.5; very deep = 1.75 or 2.0).

---> 1.0 <---.

I've watch this movie right after watching "Closer" and while I found quite a few similarities, like "sexual intrigues among two couples", "no sympathetic characters", "daring leap of times ("Closer's" leap of time were more daring)", "no character achieves true happiness" and "inconclusive ending".

However I found the tensions developed in "XX/XY" as somewhat cliched, wishy-washy and non-engaging. While in "Closer" those tensions were much well-defined and dramatic. While "XX/XY" strive for realistic depiction of relationship's, I found "Closer" not only more real but more existing and dramatic. The filmmaker doesn't has to compromise realism with dramatization, in fact the most real things can be the most dramatic (only watch "Open Water" to convince yourself).

Another thing that I found quite cheesy, is the introduction of the "filmmaker" profession; a stranger who requested money back from the filmmaker for the movie who watched; and the discussion about a movie of the filmmaker who got unfairly poor reviews by a "Time" reviewer. Are all themes really used up, and there is nothing more to make a movie then a movie about a moviemaker?! Is the director of this movie so unsure about his movie that he feared people requesting money back after watching it or poor reviews from movie critics? So he tackled this issues upfront, in hope people will be nice to his movie.

Ii. SCREENPLAY ORIGINALITY (out of 1 star, where very banal = 0; banal = 0.25; somewhat original = 0.5; original = 0.75; very original = 1.0):

--->0.5<---.

While the ?love genre? is rarely original, this movie not an exception.

+ BONUS FOR CONTAINING CONTROVERSIAL & UNPOPULAR TOPICS (up to 0.5 star, where controversial topics = 0.25; unpopular and taboo topics = 0.5).

II. PRODUCTION (out of 2 stars plus bonus, composite of sub-criteria bellow):

---> 1.5 <---.

Iii. ACTING (out of 1 star, where very ineffective = 0; ineffective = 0.25; somewhat effective = 0.5; effective = 0.75; very effective = 1.0):

---> 0.75 <---.

Acting is fairly effective.

Iv. PRESENTATION (out of 1 star, where very ineffective = 0; ineffective = 0.25; somewhat effective = 0.5; effective = 0.75; very effective = 1.0):

---> 0.75 <---.

Presentation is effective.

+ BONUS FOR PRODUCING ON LOW BUDGET (up to 0.5 stars, where up to one million dollars budget = 0.25; up to half a million dollars budget = 0.5).

TOTAL STAR RATING:

---> 3.0<---.

GRADE & RECOMMENDATION (above 5.0 = A+," Very Good Movie, Highly Recommend"; 5.0 & 4.75 = A," Very Good Movie, Highly Recommend"; 4.5 = A-, " Very Good Movie, Highly Recommend"; 4.25 = B+, "Good Movie, Recommend"; 4.0 & 3.75 = B, "Good Movie, Recommend"; 3.5 = B - "Good Movie, Recommend"; 3.25 = = C+, "Fair Movie" ; 3.0 & 2.75 = C, "Fair Movie"; 2.5 = C-, "Fair Movie"; 2.25 = D+, "Poor Movie"; 2.0 & 1.75 = D, "Poor Movie"; 1.5 = D-, "Poor Movie"; bellow 1.5 = F, "Very Poor Movie") :

---> C, ?Fair Movie" <---.

BALANCED MPAA RATING (not biased in favor of violence and against sexuality, where G = no violence, no sexuality; PG = OK slight violence, OK slight sexuality; PG-13 = OK moderate violence, OK moderate sexuality; R = OK explicit violence, OK explicit sexuality; NC-17 = OK extreme violence, OK extreme sexuality).

--->PG-13 for moderate sexuality <---.