SnoopyStyle Allegra (Elizabeth Reaser) gets caught dating both Grace (Gretchen Mol) and Philip (Justin Kirk). The movie flashes back to the time when she's dating Samantha (Julianne Nicholson). She's a Puccini opera loving New York writer. Her ex Nell (Tina Benko) and Vivian (Kate Simses) are advancing in their relationship. Samantha hates opera, questions her lesbianism, and breaks up with Allegra to go back to her former boyfriend Jeff. As Allegra resigns herself to be alone, she meets first Philip and then Grace. She sleeps with Philip. Then she sleeps with Grace without knowing that they're actually in a stale long-term relationship together.It's a quirky little rom-com. I love all the actors although Reaser may not be up to being a manic comedic lead. She's not quite big enough to fill the character's shoes. There are some light humorous moments that are kinda funny. The laughs are never big enough to rise up to hilarious. There is a little bit of an interesting take on lesbian relationship struggles. The irreverent tone adds up to a cute but strictly small little indie.

CoenHead Yes, we get it. Lesbianism is in. It's way cool and hip.Thing is, it doesn't make for good movies. And when an entire film is centered upon a self-absorbed lesbian's facile and pointless introspection on her lesbianism, it takes the reasonably intelligent viewer about fifteen seconds to know that spending even another fifteen seconds upon the movie is fifteen seconds wasted. The characters are the typical Manhattanite stereotypes, are acted amateurishly, and aren't the least bit interesting.Rubbish - pretentious and insulting rubbish. Steer way clear unless you like to watch trash films just for the sake of watching trash films.

plex Don't get the point of this film or if it even makes any point. It just sort of plods around without any foundation or pace. None of the characters are likable, they're all dishonest with themselves and each other, and selfish. You get the idea they will end up alone and you don't care. Poorly acted with very limited emotional reactions covered by a veneer of self- importance, self-cool, self- righteousness, and displaced awe we are supposed to feel because they are bisexual(maybe) AND New Yorkers, AND educated. The film is all too self aware of itself and the writer/director self-gratifies with small genitalia. I watched this film because I have seen most of the players in other things I liked, ironically they were better scripted and directed in TV shows. The film's climax is that it has no climax, you see it coming a mile away and has all the energy and appeal of a televised senior golf tournament. Its billed as a comedy and a romance but neither of those genres were evident to me. How and why sushi chefs would know or care about the intimate details of customers they have no apparent connection with is a complete mystery to me. How & why the character are always bumping into each other, or espying the other in NYC was lamely explained using some old Freud comment about peripheral awareness. Watch only if you like selected players and you are amused by the cliché'd script penned by a lesbian who completely negates men and understands even less about the man-woman dynamic.

gfvaughn To me this is a decently made digitally-recorded film. It looks better than many low budget features. Photography and sound is generally good except for interior lighting that in places seems a little too flat for my taste. Yes, it follows in the "screwball comedy" tradition to some extent. Occasionally, early directorial efforts attempt to bring in more themes than they can successfully integrate fully. The operatic theme and title wanders off and gets lost somewhere about halfway through. Two sushi chef characters are funny and provide more zest and unity end-to-end than the operatic theme. Various other minor characters who speak just a few words all enhance the story as well and keep it moving. Dialog relies on psycho-babble for exposition. This does not necessarily detract if the audience can understand it. But the thought that this might be lifted from Woody Allen never occurred to me while watching the film first without, then with, the commentary. Any resemblance this film may bear to certain W.A. hallmarks as others have suggested is coincidental. This isn't a mere goofy / silly wisecracking comedy, either. It has gender identity issues that inevitably darken the mood for the major part of its potential audience. This core aspect of the narrative reduces the film to a subculture where it needs to succeed within a limited cult following to become commercially successful. Several comments in the narrative reemphasize the writer-director's gender orientation and politics. Given key career and relationship choices that most of the lead female characters make during their arc, it's questionable whether this film is going to engage a lot of general public sympathy. Nevertheless, plentiful relationship dynamics such as basic ability to communicate apply to all romantic relationships. The outcome here is more positive and carries with it greater depth that gives this film its charm.