Metascore
60

Mixed or average reviews - based on 10 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 10
  2. Negative: 0 out of 10
  1. 75
    Masterson, like many actors, is an assured director even in her debut; working with her brother Pete as cinematographer, she creates a spell and a tenderness and pushes exactly as far as this story should go.
  2. 75
    With so much junk cluttering movie houses, it is a shame that it took two years for this sweet, intelligent drama to get a release before heading for DVD.
  3. Reviewed by: Michael Esposito
    75
    In her first feature film, Masterson creates a slice of life that is very believable (especially if you've ever seen "The Jerry Springer Show") and often endearing.
  4. Reviewed by: Ronnie Scheib
    70
    A vibrant, unpretentious small-town tale.
  5. The story is certainly predictable, but it contains just enough conflict and drama to engage the viewer.
  6. Reviewed by: Aaron Hillis
    60
    There's no kind of wonderful in Mary Stuart Masterson's directorial debut, yet however slight her ensemble drama--about two distressed families in the Rockwellian framings of time-forgotten rural America--maybe, it's at least convincing in its genuine sweetness.
  7. Superior acting elevates a small, overcrowded ensemble piece set in rural upstate New York into something a little deeper and truer than the mawkish disease-of-the-week movie it threatens to become.
  8. This is not, frankly, a movie you'll remember long after you see it. But it has just enough moments of genuine intimacy to indicate that Masterson ought to give directing another try.
  9. Reviewed by: Gary Goldstein
    50
    A bland ensemble drama with an unremarkable script that somehow inspired actress Mary Stuart Masterson to make her feature-directing debut. The material doesn't serve her well -- and vice versa.
  10. Jayce Bartok--who plays Stanford's irresponsible musician brother--wrote the screenplay, whose central story of doomed young love gets lost amid the overplotting.
User Score
5.6

Mixed or average reviews- based on 12 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2 out of 5
  2. Negative: 2 out of 5
  1. May 8, 2012
    10
    Kind of strange movie, with a lot of dull charakters, but Kristen Stewart is just great in it, she "carries it out of the darkness into the light" ;)
  2. javads
    May 16, 2009
    8
    This movie was wonderful. I really liked it , i was kind of immersed in the storyline, three different love stories related to three This movie was wonderful. I really liked it , i was kind of immersed in the storyline, three different love stories related to three different life periods. the all cast was amazing, especially Kristen Stewart and Aaron Stanford. Full Review »
  3. MM
    Apr 21, 2009
    0
    The WORST movie I've seen in a long time! We laughed all the way through it and it's not a comedy. The eating scenes ... I mean ALL The WORST movie I've seen in a long time! We laughed all the way through it and it's not a comedy. The eating scenes ... I mean ALL scenes were eating scenes and were just nauseating. Bruce Dern even dropped scrambled eggs out of his mouth while talking at breakfast. Everything was awkward - the camera angles were terrible during the "love" scene. The "meat" references were plentiful and we even thought some savvy film crew member added some secret "getting your meat on" messages via refrigerator magnets at the end of the movie. YUCK! The whole movie was terrible and grossed me out! Note: You don't need eating or nauseating awkward sex scenes in EVERY scene if you have a plot to the movie! I can't think of one redeeming feature of this movie, except we got to laugh in derision throughout. Laughing is good for you, they say. Full Review »