User Score
4.0 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 10 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 10
  2. Negative: 5 out of 10

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    10 out of 10
    Rate this:
    out of 10
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  3. Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000

  1. JacobH.
    Mar 6, 2008
    5
    This movie was sort of funny. but not that funny. What they need to add at the beginning of this film is an episode of the Anime show "Poo Boy".
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  2. DanielS.
    Jan 8, 2008
    1
    Unappealing characters indulging in boorish conversations and anemic erotic escapades, simply dreadful.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  3. belledujour
    Dec 2, 2007
    0
    So bad i walked out after half an hour -- which i dont think i've done in the past 10 years. they need to pay YOU to watch this. awful script.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  4. [Anonymous]
    Jan 4, 2009
    8
    this was the kind of film that makes you think while you are watching it. you apply it to your own life and don't really pay attention to the film because you are too busy thinking. it was good.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  5. JoshH.
    Jan 30, 2008
    0
    Bad? Yeah, really bad! The creators, directors, producers or whoever holds any amount of responsibilty to the making of this crapfest should be ashamed and have their careers ended. I mean, even when you watch the worst written and cost efficient special effects horror flick in existence, for example as bad, at least you get some sense of what the people involved were going for. As far as this one goes though... if I even got it slightly I wouldn't be taking the time to write this review. As far as Culkin goes... if he's been waiting in the Hollywood shadows for the right role to revive his movie career he shoulda kept waiting. This one definately didn't make him look good, even though in all reality, when a movie comes out like this one it's not the actors faults involved. They put their trust into some so-called movie producers and directors to pull out a good movie making everyone involved look somewhat respectable and get their trust shoved up their butt. All in all, if 0 wasn't the lowest score possible I would have scored it in the negatives. I would rather search for mouse tirds in a black pepper shaker with boxing gloves on then to have to sit through this pile of crap ever again! Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  6. worstmovieIeverseen
    Aug 16, 2009
    0
    It was waste of time. Never been so disappointed...... Don't waste your time.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  7. KeithM.
    Aug 25, 2008
    0
    Heard of the phrase "Beginner's luck?" Well, it doesn't apply to this feature, because the director didn't do a really nice job at directing his first film.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
Metascore
tbd

No score yet - based on 3 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 3
  2. Negative: 0 out of 3
  1. Reviewed by: Stephen Farber
    50
    It never hits any erotic sparks, and the aftermath is distinctly anticlimactic. Breakfast is handsomely shot; the settings are minimalist but well chosen. An old, rather questionable maxim says that sex sells. Not in this wan rendition.
  2. Reviewed by: Sam Sweet
    50
    Suffering from what could be called Garden State syndrome, Sex and Breakfast demands that we empathize with the anguish of straight, white, financially privileged young people and their significantly hot significant others.
  3. Reviewed by: John Anderson
    40
    What tyro helmer Miles Brandman serves up is a tortured talkfest with a premise far less ripe than its title.