Good movies do not have to be about pleasant subjects, many excellent films are about depressing subjects or have sad endings. Neil Labute's first two movies are definitely not happy, and delve deeply into the dark side of modern human existence. They both address the same issue, human dysfunction and evil amidst the bounty of white collar America. In "Your Friends and Neighbors", Labute has us eavesdrop on two Yuppie couples and their friends. For various reasons (mostly of a sexual nature), the couplings are disintegrating, and we're treated to listening in on the action; in bedrooms, in restaurants, and in steam rooms. Labute writes excellent dialogue and the movie is well acted. Unfortunately, "Your Friends and Neighbors" lacks the dramatic punch of his first film. We just watch as the characters screw up their lives, and the lives of their supposed friends and loved-ones. Afterwards you just want to take a shower. A toss-up to grade; if it sounds interesting rent it.
124 Reviews
With the friends like Mary, Barry, Terri, Cheri, Cary and Jerry
Galina_movie_fan13 June 2006
"Your Friends and Neighbors" (1998) is the second film by director/writer Neil LaBute and it tells the story of three couples and their complicated friendships and relationships. I've seen it more than once during the last couple of days - and I found it incredibly clever written, well acted (especially by Jason Patric and Catherine Keener - their only scene together was the second best in the movie - so dynamic and tight) and skillfully directed. LaBute certainly has a very unique sense of humor and he knows well the history of cinema. To give all characters the names that rhyme - Mary, Barry, Terri, Cheri, Cary and Jerry - was a clever idea - the characters are interchangeable in their relationships and it does not matter really, who is with whom - Mary with Barry or with Cary or Jerry or Barry with Barry, and Cheri with Terri or Jerry? The important thing is that they are selfish and often unpleasant and despicable people who are not happy with themselves and can't make happy their spouses or partners. Another interesting trick - the repeating scene in the Art gallery that starts with exactly the same words for each character but leads to different developments. I mentioned that LaBute knows his movies. Have you noticed the poster from Goddard's Le Mépris, (1963) aka "Contempt" with Brigitte Bardot? "Contempt" features one of the most fascinating and longest scenes of a breakup ever filmed. The breakup scene between Terri (Catherine Keener) and Jerry (Ben Stiller) started like in "Contempt" but it only lasted a few minutes and it was a good scene. Actually, I loved all scenes with Catherine Keener and if I have to choose one character that I liked, it would be Terry. Seems that Charlie Kaufman might have seen LaBute's movie because Terry and Maxine from "Being John Malkovich" have a lot in common. I was actually waiting for Terry to say to Jerry, "The thing is if you ever get me, you would not know what to do with me".
Jason Patric was a revelation - I don't know him very well but I remember that he gave a very good performance in "Narc". As for the scene in a steam room, it is not just the best of the film; it is one of the best scenes - monologues ever. I know not many would agree with me but the scene is as powerful, unforgettable and strangely erotic as the monologue in Bergman's "Persona". LaBute's writing, his camera, and mesmerizing performance by Patric made this scene an instant classic.
The film is not perfect and sometimes it drags but overall I found it interesting and enjoyable. You don't have to like the characters in order to like and appreciate the film. Sadly, the beautiful, sensual and talented Nastassja Kinski (Cherri) does not have much to play while Ben Stiller does and I am not his fan - even in this film.
LaBute's usage of "Metallica"s "Enter Sandman" (performed by Apocalyptica) during the opening and the closing credits instantly pulled me in and Bryony Atkinson's song "My Hollow" is terrific.
Jason Patric was a revelation - I don't know him very well but I remember that he gave a very good performance in "Narc". As for the scene in a steam room, it is not just the best of the film; it is one of the best scenes - monologues ever. I know not many would agree with me but the scene is as powerful, unforgettable and strangely erotic as the monologue in Bergman's "Persona". LaBute's writing, his camera, and mesmerizing performance by Patric made this scene an instant classic.
The film is not perfect and sometimes it drags but overall I found it interesting and enjoyable. You don't have to like the characters in order to like and appreciate the film. Sadly, the beautiful, sensual and talented Nastassja Kinski (Cherri) does not have much to play while Ben Stiller does and I am not his fan - even in this film.
LaBute's usage of "Metallica"s "Enter Sandman" (performed by Apocalyptica) during the opening and the closing credits instantly pulled me in and Bryony Atkinson's song "My Hollow" is terrific.
Um, Mr. LaBute...er, I'm afraid we won't be able to make your soiree.
=G=3 May 2002
"Your Friends and Neighbors" is one of those movies which sports a good cast, is well produced, and has few flaws with one HUGE exception. It sucks. Supposed to be a provocative misanthropic study of the politics of sex among three guys and three gals, the characters are obvious fabrications who are doing the director's bidding, behaving in silly and unnatural ways so as to make the flick work...more or less. Some young adults may find a modicum of entertainment in this film. However, those who have been there, done that, will likely find the flick a fraudulent dissertation and much ado about nothing.
A great film about really bad people.
ellisonharlan22 September 2005
This is basically the filmed dissatisfaction of upper-class yuppie life. These are people who have everything but seem to live in a swamp of self loathing and hateful arrogance and selfishness. Their tart, affective interplay is like watching a game of mumbletypeg, but with words. These are the kind of people you would not want to live next door to, but these are the people who usually seem to win in our society, sad as that is to ponder.
Jason Patric plays the single most evil person in movie history. His 'shower scene' is sick, twisted, but oddly humorous. You hate yourself for laughing, which is the point. In that way you understand how these people are born. They are us.
This is arrogant mall culture, the kind of American decadence the Soviets warned us about. At least they were right about that.
The film is about how creeps become dissatisfied at their own creepiness. Great dialog, the ending makes complete, yet sad, sense. Our world is mad, and we need to change it, before it eats us whole.
Jason Patric plays the single most evil person in movie history. His 'shower scene' is sick, twisted, but oddly humorous. You hate yourself for laughing, which is the point. In that way you understand how these people are born. They are us.
This is arrogant mall culture, the kind of American decadence the Soviets warned us about. At least they were right about that.
The film is about how creeps become dissatisfied at their own creepiness. Great dialog, the ending makes complete, yet sad, sense. Our world is mad, and we need to change it, before it eats us whole.
Jason Patric gives an Oscar worthy performance.
David-2409 April 2001
In this fairly ordinary film the pace drags and the characters get tedious. But there are moments of pure gold, and I enjoyed the frank and explicit sex discussions. But the real gold is JASON PATRIC. Not only does he look great, as always, but he plays the most horrible person I have ever seen in any film. Without a single redeeming feature he swaggers cockily through the film and, somehow, is utterly charming. Ah, the attraction of the devil! His long speech in which he describes his best sexual experience is worth sitting through the rest of the film for - it is both brilliantly acted and written, and I'm sure will become a regular "party piece" for auditioning actors. And that scene in the book-store. Wow! Congrats Jason, I'm glad you did receive some award attention for this role - you should have won an Oscar!
It's good, but should it have been a play rather than a film?
ian_harris19 May 2003
In the last three years or so we have had three memorable nights of theatre at the Almeida in London in the capable hands of Neil La Bute: Bash, The Distance From Here and especially The Shape of Things. We were very much looking forward to this film.
No surprise, then, that Your Friends and Neighbors (sic) has horrible people, sexual violence, nihilism and a fine, well-chosen cast.
The IMDB jury seems split on whether this is a fine film or a dreadful film; on balance in my view it is a fine film. However, there is little filmic about it and one wonders whether it should have been a play rather than a film.
Of course there's no money in theatre and Neil La Bute has to pay the gas bill sometimes, but I'm not sure this piece is as strong on film as it could be on stage. In that regard, it reminds me of Mamet's Sexual Perversity in Chicago / About Last Night - except I really didn't like that film whereas Your Friends and Neighbors kept our attention throughout and got us talking at length afterwards.
We thought it was well worth seeing.
No surprise, then, that Your Friends and Neighbors (sic) has horrible people, sexual violence, nihilism and a fine, well-chosen cast.
The IMDB jury seems split on whether this is a fine film or a dreadful film; on balance in my view it is a fine film. However, there is little filmic about it and one wonders whether it should have been a play rather than a film.
Of course there's no money in theatre and Neil La Bute has to pay the gas bill sometimes, but I'm not sure this piece is as strong on film as it could be on stage. In that regard, it reminds me of Mamet's Sexual Perversity in Chicago / About Last Night - except I really didn't like that film whereas Your Friends and Neighbors kept our attention throughout and got us talking at length afterwards.
We thought it was well worth seeing.
a cutting look at sexuality in relationships in which what is not said is just as important as what is said
fookoo2 September 2003
The subject is sex in relationships. "Your Friends & Neighbors" is a film that one either loves or hates. There is no middle ground. It is an actor's movie and one with strong performances. With the vast majority of movies, the viewer is searching for some form of on-screen identification so that one can feel some degree of comfort. This is one of the aspects of "Your Friends & Neighbors" that makes it so unsettling because there is none. There are no heroes or heroines. From the opening scene, the character portrayal and developments are brutal. As the audience, we see everything. There are no pets or children present to soften it. It is an entirely dialogue driven movie that succeeds or fails dependent upon the screen performances of the six principals.
The character delineations are sharp and crisp, whether one likes the character or not. It would give away too much of the film to describe each character. But each and every performance is first rate. Nastassja Kinski finally has a role in which she can show some of her acting skills. Even though her part lacks depth, there is an on-screen sparkle that is delightful to watch.
Because of its subject matter, this is a movie for mature audiences and more than deserves an R rating but not for the usual reasons of sexual depiction or extreme violence - initially it had an NC-17 rating. Most viewers in their 20's can simply not relate to what is happening on-screen. Forget it, if you are a teenager. To appreciate this movie, one must have experienced some part(s) of it on a very personal level.
The character delineations are sharp and crisp, whether one likes the character or not. It would give away too much of the film to describe each character. But each and every performance is first rate. Nastassja Kinski finally has a role in which she can show some of her acting skills. Even though her part lacks depth, there is an on-screen sparkle that is delightful to watch.
Because of its subject matter, this is a movie for mature audiences and more than deserves an R rating but not for the usual reasons of sexual depiction or extreme violence - initially it had an NC-17 rating. Most viewers in their 20's can simply not relate to what is happening on-screen. Forget it, if you are a teenager. To appreciate this movie, one must have experienced some part(s) of it on a very personal level.
Oh look how clever I am!
dowellinprovo27 July 1999
I don't think I have ever seen a movie that tried so hard to show the audience how clever it was. From the cute little trick of never using the character's names (the terms "he" "she" "him" "her" "the wife" are used instead) to the trite and unimaginative repeating art gallery scene, this film bends over backwards to appear "intelligent". The contrived David Mamet-slash-Woody Allenesque dialogue doesn't help either.
Perhaps what turned me against this movie the most is that there is not one character that you could have any sympathy for. By the time Jason Patrick makes his "shocking" sauna confession I moved from not caring about the characters to an out and out disdain. Not only are these people totally self absorbed and warped, they are also quite boring. I give thanks that the characters in "Your Friends and Neighbors" are neither of mine.
Perhaps what turned me against this movie the most is that there is not one character that you could have any sympathy for. By the time Jason Patrick makes his "shocking" sauna confession I moved from not caring about the characters to an out and out disdain. Not only are these people totally self absorbed and warped, they are also quite boring. I give thanks that the characters in "Your Friends and Neighbors" are neither of mine.
Not a great movie, but it draws us in with its subtle power and intrigue. ***1/2 (out of four)
Movie-1223 August 2001
YOUR FRIENDS & NEIGHBORS / (1998) ***1/2 (out of four)
"Your Friends & Neighbors" is not really a film about sex, although every single scene, in some form or another, depicts its characters' obsessions with sexuality. The sex is not the subject of the film, but rather a medium for the characters to display various forms of behavior. Through eight very different characters, we realize the differences of behaviors, personalities, attitudes, and various degrees of selfishness. Although wealthy and classy, none of the characters are role model citizens. This is a tricky film to watch, never particularly entertaining, but often curiously involving. The sexual content and strong language will turn many audiences off, but this movie does have a solid understanding of itself, and I honor its art.
Neil Lebute is clearly more interested in the characters' sex lives than in a clear, concise story. Ben Stiller and Catherine Keener play partners. They have good friends, another couple played by Amy Brenneman and Aaron Eckhart. Stiller and Brenneman have an affair. Keener has issues with her partner's verbal expressions during sex-she finds a mate in a female artist's assistant played by Nastassja Kinski. Eckhart is his own favorite sexual partner. Jason Patrick plays a cruel, arrogant womanizer who forces his will on others. Eventually, the characters' selfishness destroys their own relationships. We become infatuated with these circumstances.
Many of the scenes contain a strange, subtle power of intrigue. One of my selection of scenes takes place in an art gallery, where the various characters chat with Nastassja Kinski's character. They have the same conversations, but the scenes end differently. Another fantastic scene is where the three men relax in a steam room and discuss their favorite sexual encounters. Jason Patrick's explanation packs a powerful, disturbing punch. Although these scenes do not necessarily construct a story, that's not a problem. The focus here is the vivid dialogue, the aggressive behavior, and the keen direction. This isn't a movie about a story. It's a movie about behavior.
The characters talk about sex constantly-whether it's in the supermarket, the basketball court, in bed, an art gallery, public restaurants, gym showers, their homes, business places, steam rooms, and more. The movie lacks passion to share with the audience, but we can tell Lebute is passionate about writing these characters. There is constantly an uneasy tension between most of them; they form no chemistry or charisma. He isolates them in their own world so that we can watch the interaction, not the romance.
"Your Friends & Neighbors" initially received an NC-17 rating by the MPAA. It contains very little nudity, no violence, and only a few scenes of actual sex. It received an R on appeal, but perhaps we should examine the association's motives for the higher rating. The discussions of sex in this movie are more vivid, more disturbing, more vivid than any actual act of sex. In a way, the MPAA honored the movie's power. They proved that Neil Lebute's social drama is certainly not for all audiences, and it's not really a great movie, but we should strongly respect the angle and courage.
"Your Friends & Neighbors" is not really a film about sex, although every single scene, in some form or another, depicts its characters' obsessions with sexuality. The sex is not the subject of the film, but rather a medium for the characters to display various forms of behavior. Through eight very different characters, we realize the differences of behaviors, personalities, attitudes, and various degrees of selfishness. Although wealthy and classy, none of the characters are role model citizens. This is a tricky film to watch, never particularly entertaining, but often curiously involving. The sexual content and strong language will turn many audiences off, but this movie does have a solid understanding of itself, and I honor its art.
Neil Lebute is clearly more interested in the characters' sex lives than in a clear, concise story. Ben Stiller and Catherine Keener play partners. They have good friends, another couple played by Amy Brenneman and Aaron Eckhart. Stiller and Brenneman have an affair. Keener has issues with her partner's verbal expressions during sex-she finds a mate in a female artist's assistant played by Nastassja Kinski. Eckhart is his own favorite sexual partner. Jason Patrick plays a cruel, arrogant womanizer who forces his will on others. Eventually, the characters' selfishness destroys their own relationships. We become infatuated with these circumstances.
Many of the scenes contain a strange, subtle power of intrigue. One of my selection of scenes takes place in an art gallery, where the various characters chat with Nastassja Kinski's character. They have the same conversations, but the scenes end differently. Another fantastic scene is where the three men relax in a steam room and discuss their favorite sexual encounters. Jason Patrick's explanation packs a powerful, disturbing punch. Although these scenes do not necessarily construct a story, that's not a problem. The focus here is the vivid dialogue, the aggressive behavior, and the keen direction. This isn't a movie about a story. It's a movie about behavior.
The characters talk about sex constantly-whether it's in the supermarket, the basketball court, in bed, an art gallery, public restaurants, gym showers, their homes, business places, steam rooms, and more. The movie lacks passion to share with the audience, but we can tell Lebute is passionate about writing these characters. There is constantly an uneasy tension between most of them; they form no chemistry or charisma. He isolates them in their own world so that we can watch the interaction, not the romance.
"Your Friends & Neighbors" initially received an NC-17 rating by the MPAA. It contains very little nudity, no violence, and only a few scenes of actual sex. It received an R on appeal, but perhaps we should examine the association's motives for the higher rating. The discussions of sex in this movie are more vivid, more disturbing, more vivid than any actual act of sex. In a way, the MPAA honored the movie's power. They proved that Neil Lebute's social drama is certainly not for all audiences, and it's not really a great movie, but we should strongly respect the angle and courage.
not bad
nick-2821 September 1999
What we need are new young writers and directors and actors who are not going to do things the good old (Hollywood) way, who are going to explore new areas, expand boundaries, and continue to expand the art of the cinema, not just make the same old movies over and over again. This film takes so many chances it was at first slapped with an NC-17 rating. It has its flaws, but still is a pleasure to watch.
Abomination!!!
flare120 September 2000
I picked up this film, because it was rated as a comedy over here in Finland. On the cover it said "Hysterically funny". Imagine my surprise.
Now, I know we Finns are not considered the most jolly of the people of the world, but this cannot under any circumstances be considered a comedy, even here. In fact, even if this was a documentary, it would still be frightfully boring. I cannot recall even smiling during the "experience".
Now, I know we Finns are not considered the most jolly of the people of the world, but this cannot under any circumstances be considered a comedy, even here. In fact, even if this was a documentary, it would still be frightfully boring. I cannot recall even smiling during the "experience".
Extremely underrated film
Snoopymichele14 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
CONTAINS SPOILERS THROUGHOUT The first time I saw this film, I came away not liking it. It was disturbing, heavy, and none of the characters were very likable. But through the years I have seen it a few more times, and it has grown on me considerably.
I must be honest here-I saw it only because it had Jason Patric and Aaron Eckhart (two actors that I can truly say I became a fan of from seeing them in their earliest roles-Lost Boys for Patric and In The Company of Men for Eckhart), and they delivered on their performances. Patric's character is one of the most twisted and narcissistic characters in cinema history, but he brings a vulnerability and a likability to the screen, and it's hard to hate him. You want to know where he's coming from, and you get a glimpse after he describes a brutal sexual encounter in which he attacks a classmate, and then says it's the best sex he ever had. Even though it is an ensemble cast, Patric owns the film. Eckhart, in a 360 turn from his character in the aforementioned In The Company of Men, plays a nerdy, emotionally distant husband who can't enjoy sex with anyone but himself. Amy Brenneman, as a neglected housewife who has an (almost) affair with Ben Stiller's character does a good job, but you never see it coming when she ends up with Patric, and it makes no sense. The always brilliant Catherine Keener puts in another deadpan performance, this time as the bitchy artist type who decides she prefers a woman (the luminous Nastasja Kinski) over Stiller. She does get hers in the end, after she snottily rejects Patric's character and he puts her in her place. Ben Stiller, who most of the time annoys me with his constant mugging and nervous jittery energy, fits in well with the cast, and you end up feeling sorry for his character. He means well, he just seeks out the wrong women.
The movie is talky, but the conversations are riveting. You want to hear more, and learn more about what makes these characters tick. Overall, I give the movie an 8 out of 10.
I must be honest here-I saw it only because it had Jason Patric and Aaron Eckhart (two actors that I can truly say I became a fan of from seeing them in their earliest roles-Lost Boys for Patric and In The Company of Men for Eckhart), and they delivered on their performances. Patric's character is one of the most twisted and narcissistic characters in cinema history, but he brings a vulnerability and a likability to the screen, and it's hard to hate him. You want to know where he's coming from, and you get a glimpse after he describes a brutal sexual encounter in which he attacks a classmate, and then says it's the best sex he ever had. Even though it is an ensemble cast, Patric owns the film. Eckhart, in a 360 turn from his character in the aforementioned In The Company of Men, plays a nerdy, emotionally distant husband who can't enjoy sex with anyone but himself. Amy Brenneman, as a neglected housewife who has an (almost) affair with Ben Stiller's character does a good job, but you never see it coming when she ends up with Patric, and it makes no sense. The always brilliant Catherine Keener puts in another deadpan performance, this time as the bitchy artist type who decides she prefers a woman (the luminous Nastasja Kinski) over Stiller. She does get hers in the end, after she snottily rejects Patric's character and he puts her in her place. Ben Stiller, who most of the time annoys me with his constant mugging and nervous jittery energy, fits in well with the cast, and you end up feeling sorry for his character. He means well, he just seeks out the wrong women.
The movie is talky, but the conversations are riveting. You want to hear more, and learn more about what makes these characters tick. Overall, I give the movie an 8 out of 10.
In The Company of Lies and Voyeurism...
Don-10230 March 1999
Voyeurism is something we all have probably dabbled in at some time. Whether through eves-dropping, or like Jimmy Stewart in REAR WINDOW. Neil LaBute, director of YOUR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS, certainly likes voyeurism, and puts the viewer through an almost agonizing voyeuristic trip into sex, lies, and infidelity. A woman must have really hurt this guy at some point in his life because I have never seen two films where men discuss women with such contempt and disgust. IN THE COMPANY OF MEN, his first film in 1997, starred Aaron Eckhart, who hates women so much, he plots to destroy the life of a deaf woman with the help of a "friend". He knows he is charming and he knows he can do it. The truth is no one in both films are friends and with FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS, LaBute eerily puts us in the middle of conversations we are not meant to hear. They are always sexual in content and the men always come off despicable. You feel for the poor women in the film. But even they are not innocent.
I'm not sure what it is about the film that appealed to me. It must be intrigue. Although no character is very likeable (except for Mary, played by Amy Brenneman), you keep watching the games unfurl. The 'plot' of IN THE COMPANY OF MEN was the plot itself, to lower and shatter a woman's self-esteem. Eckhart, who was so ruthless and reprehensible in that picture, is barely noticeable in YOUR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS. LaBute puts a mustache and weight on him, otherwise you would immediately connect the two different characters. This works to open up the door for devil #2 of his films, played by Jason Patric. Guess what? The guy can act, just one note, but it works. His creepiness fills the movie and may even serve as LaBute's alter ego. This is a very personal film.
YOUR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS is hard to discuss unless you have seen it. It is purely situational and its a voyeur's delight. The conversations may take place in the light of day, but some hit you like a ton of bricks. An example: "I need you to think of me as a penis. I'll think of you as one big vagina." Just a taste of what to expect: hard-hitting, depressing, realistic, everyday immorality in the lives of 6 New Yorkers who really don't like each other very much. This is a companion piece to IN THE COMPANY OF MEN. The films together would make quite a film festival for depressed males aged 26 to 40, are angry with women, and have nothing better to do. Don't ask me why but I give it a:
RATING: 7 of 10
I'm not sure what it is about the film that appealed to me. It must be intrigue. Although no character is very likeable (except for Mary, played by Amy Brenneman), you keep watching the games unfurl. The 'plot' of IN THE COMPANY OF MEN was the plot itself, to lower and shatter a woman's self-esteem. Eckhart, who was so ruthless and reprehensible in that picture, is barely noticeable in YOUR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS. LaBute puts a mustache and weight on him, otherwise you would immediately connect the two different characters. This works to open up the door for devil #2 of his films, played by Jason Patric. Guess what? The guy can act, just one note, but it works. His creepiness fills the movie and may even serve as LaBute's alter ego. This is a very personal film.
YOUR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS is hard to discuss unless you have seen it. It is purely situational and its a voyeur's delight. The conversations may take place in the light of day, but some hit you like a ton of bricks. An example: "I need you to think of me as a penis. I'll think of you as one big vagina." Just a taste of what to expect: hard-hitting, depressing, realistic, everyday immorality in the lives of 6 New Yorkers who really don't like each other very much. This is a companion piece to IN THE COMPANY OF MEN. The films together would make quite a film festival for depressed males aged 26 to 40, are angry with women, and have nothing better to do. Don't ask me why but I give it a:
RATING: 7 of 10
How many ways can a movie fail?
Blackfly2 April 1999
Your Friends and Neighbors failed in just about every way a movie can fail. The characters were uninteresting and obnoxious. Normally I can deal with a movie in which I dislike every one of the characters, but in this case I just wanted them all to die. I know that sounds harsh, but you'll feel that way too if you have to sit through the thing. There's nothing wrong with the characters being outright malicious, or even spineless (though I don't think the characters were intended to be portrayed so), but what I can't stand is two dimensional characters. I don't know if it was the bad acting or bad writing which was responsible for this, but certainly this movie had an abundance of both. Well, when all else fails, enjoy the dialog right? This brings me to my other big problem with this movie. Basically it was very frank sex discussion mixed in with dialog that could have been written by just about any 8th grader. Grown people just do not go around talking like horny junior highschoolers. As a matter of fact, grown people do not go around acting like horny junior highschoolers either. The movie was entirely too long and had way too much dead space. The script was terrible, the characters were terrible, the dialog was terrible, the plot only served to hilight the complete lack of substance to the movie, and I just wanted it to end. If you ever find yourself faced with a choice between Chinese water torture or Your Friends and Neighbors, I strongly urge you not to pick the movie.
Entertaining if bleak with a slightly depressing moral
bob the moo12 March 2003
Jerry lives with Terri but Terri is irritated by everything he does especially the way he talks during sex and needs to analyse everything. They are friends with Barry and Mary who have sexual problems as Mary is rarely roused for sex. Jerry makes a move to meet up with Mary to have sex behind Barry's back. Meanwhile Cheri works at an art gallery and picks up people there and Jerry and Barry's friend Cary lives his sex life devoid of any care or consideration for anyone else.
I have previously seen In the Company Of Men so I was prepared for the sort of view point the director seems to take regarding the nature of men and women but even then, this is still a pretty depressing look at relationships. Our characters are barely even given names, certainly no last names, and they are rarely used when you listen. More than that the names are pretty typical the sort of names you might make up if you were put on the spot, like John Smith. The point being that these characters are not supposed to be fictional but more `everyman' characters. However is this what everyone is like? does everyone have major relationship issues and try to have affairs with their best friends etc? Do people really have stories of male rape as their best sexual experience? I doubt it this is a real condensing of the whole human experience into a handful of characters.
It works quite well because it is very frank and this kept my interest. Not shocking but I did want to keep watching because the dialogue was good. Sadly I could have cared less about the actual lives before me. As a plot I didn't get involved partly because it was so fake feeling it was obvious from day 1 that LaBute was not going to give us the luxury of even one mildly messed up relationship, no it was obvious that everything that could fail would. The dialogue does save the film as it is well written and darkly funny, however it just wasn't enough of a story instead it was rather smugly self aware.
The cast do well with the dialogue and the film is staged more like a play than a roaming film, with mostly static interior shots used. Stiller is good but doesn't excel himself. Eckhart shows how good an actor he is by playing a character so the opposite of his character in LaBute's previous film and playing it well. Patric steals the show but his character is the least developed. He is the funny one and is like Eckhart's character in `In the Company Of Men' in that he is selfish and cruel to women. However his character seems to be LaBute's ideal in this piece as he is the only one who seems to get what he wants is this the moral of the film? The female characters are weaker as you'd expect. Brenneman cuts a pathetic character and simply mops around a lot. Kinski is given little to do although Keener has a stronger part to play.
Overall I enjoyed this because it was full of good dialogue that keeps you listening because of how very frank it is. However that doesn't mean that the story or film is involving and it does feel a little distant and not based in any life I've ever lived. A bit too cruel, harsh and dark but it just about gets by on those credentials but the music of Metallica played on violin is worth watching the credits for!
I have previously seen In the Company Of Men so I was prepared for the sort of view point the director seems to take regarding the nature of men and women but even then, this is still a pretty depressing look at relationships. Our characters are barely even given names, certainly no last names, and they are rarely used when you listen. More than that the names are pretty typical the sort of names you might make up if you were put on the spot, like John Smith. The point being that these characters are not supposed to be fictional but more `everyman' characters. However is this what everyone is like? does everyone have major relationship issues and try to have affairs with their best friends etc? Do people really have stories of male rape as their best sexual experience? I doubt it this is a real condensing of the whole human experience into a handful of characters.
It works quite well because it is very frank and this kept my interest. Not shocking but I did want to keep watching because the dialogue was good. Sadly I could have cared less about the actual lives before me. As a plot I didn't get involved partly because it was so fake feeling it was obvious from day 1 that LaBute was not going to give us the luxury of even one mildly messed up relationship, no it was obvious that everything that could fail would. The dialogue does save the film as it is well written and darkly funny, however it just wasn't enough of a story instead it was rather smugly self aware.
The cast do well with the dialogue and the film is staged more like a play than a roaming film, with mostly static interior shots used. Stiller is good but doesn't excel himself. Eckhart shows how good an actor he is by playing a character so the opposite of his character in LaBute's previous film and playing it well. Patric steals the show but his character is the least developed. He is the funny one and is like Eckhart's character in `In the Company Of Men' in that he is selfish and cruel to women. However his character seems to be LaBute's ideal in this piece as he is the only one who seems to get what he wants is this the moral of the film? The female characters are weaker as you'd expect. Brenneman cuts a pathetic character and simply mops around a lot. Kinski is given little to do although Keener has a stronger part to play.
Overall I enjoyed this because it was full of good dialogue that keeps you listening because of how very frank it is. However that doesn't mean that the story or film is involving and it does feel a little distant and not based in any life I've ever lived. A bit too cruel, harsh and dark but it just about gets by on those credentials but the music of Metallica played on violin is worth watching the credits for!
Nicely Adult in good sense
sludgehound5 April 2003
Dialogue driven, inter relationships among the chattering classes/ Anything that opens with credits over Alex Katz paintings of the upper middle class party style..... Let's get it on is the mantra. Want that ya got it. Bit peek a boo quality. Well filmed but looking for the heart of it.
Whose friends? Whose neighbors?
spinnicks26 April 2005
If all our relationships are like the ones in this film, we might as well give up. In "Your Friends and Neighbors" we are introduced to a group of upwardly mobile urbanites who run around a lot but haven't learned how to play well with others. Frustrated desire and strained hopefulness shove the characters around as if some socio-sexual Grinch were gumming up their lives. Watching this movie, you may be tempted to ask if this is the way the world turns or if it is merely the way writer-director Neil LaBute likes to pretend it turns. Produced with an abundance of cool, the film strikes an odd balance between surface and structure. By using a naturalistic veneer, LaBute invites us to accept the characters as if they had been lifted straight from the apartment next door. "Wow," we might say, "So this is real life as it is lived by real people in today's world!" Beneath the surface, however, things look different. If you peel back the actors' performances, you may find yourself staring at some carefully skewed scaffolding. You may even conclude that this picture is more the product of the director's artful calculations than of keen observation into the way people live. Of course there's nothing wrong with a director's offering a vision. Most good directors do. And if you like LaBute's work, you probably won't notice him just off-screen, fussing with his blueprints. An example: an important clue to verisimilitude in fiction is the way characters speak. Here they are presented as intelligent young professionals, yet they turn out to be astonishingly inarticulate types who say things like "I just
I don't know what to say
I mean
it just makes me feel
even if you
because
" After a while this dialog comes off like an acting-class exercise, and while the fractured syntax may be central to LaBute's approach, it can get tedious. One exception stands out: Midway through the film, the stutter-speech is interrupted by a remarkable monologue delivered by Jason Patric. Except for this burst of eloquence, however, we find ourselves listening to people who struggle to express themselves as they stumble through days and nights trying and failing to connect with others who are similarly afflicted. (That's the whole point, you say? Well
I mean
it's just
yeah
right.) There are places in this movie where a certain amount of cuteness can be forgivenas when a patch of dialog recurs several times in the mouths of different charactersand there are other clever touches here and there. But the best reason for watching "Your Friends and Neighbors" is not the director's vision (assuming he has one) but the performances. The six principal actors make the most of their roles, and it is fun to watch a frenetically unfulfilled Ben Stiller, a romantically perplexed Amy Brenneman, a terminally self-satisfied Jason Patric, a mad but sad Catherine Keener, a well-meaning but clueless Aaron Eckhart and an attractively vapid Nastassja Kinsky wander through a maze thatunfortunately for their charactersleads nowhere.
My Good Points & Bad Points
Mickey Knox17 August 2001
This movie was strange. Strange not because of its story or acting, but because it has moments when it's absolutely great and moments when you have no idea what do the director wants.
There are many things i liked about this movie. Examples? The name of the characters. Really inspired and funny. Some of the dialogues... you'll laugh out loud. Some scenes: the ones envolving Nastassia Kinski, the scene at the art gallery that keeps repeating, the homosexual story of one guy. The soundtrack, featuring Metallica songs performed by Apocaliptica. Very good stuff.
But there are also bad things. There are moments during the movie when you have no idea what does the movie want, what's its purpose. There are totally unappropriate scenes and some unexplainable things.
But overall it's a good movie. The rating in here is perfect: 6.5 out of 10.
There are many things i liked about this movie. Examples? The name of the characters. Really inspired and funny. Some of the dialogues... you'll laugh out loud. Some scenes: the ones envolving Nastassia Kinski, the scene at the art gallery that keeps repeating, the homosexual story of one guy. The soundtrack, featuring Metallica songs performed by Apocaliptica. Very good stuff.
But there are also bad things. There are moments during the movie when you have no idea what does the movie want, what's its purpose. There are totally unappropriate scenes and some unexplainable things.
But overall it's a good movie. The rating in here is perfect: 6.5 out of 10.
Even A Great Cast Can't Save This One
jhclues12 September 2000
Take a story about two couples, one married, one living together, an obnoxious, egotistical misogynist, and a nondescript lesbian, then get six actors with varying degrees of charismatic screen presence to play them, and you have `Your Friends & Neighbors,' written and directed by Neil LaBute. The story centers around six malcontents who interact, mainly, it would seem, for nothing more than to fuel their own desolate existences. The scenes are actually a series of conversations between various combinations of the six people involved here: Barry (Aaron Eckhart) is married to Mary (Amy Brenneman); their marriage is neither happy nor unhappy, apparently, but sexually unsatisfying to both. Jerry (Ben Stiller) lives with Terri (Catherine Keener), but the relationship seems to be in limbo somewhere, and sexually dysfunctional. Cary (Jason Patrick) is a friend of Barry and Jerry, holds women, in general, in low esteem, is probably a latent homosexual (he confides that the `best he's ever had' was a locker room incident with a guy named Tim), and has an abusive nature (he tells of appropriating some hospital stationary and sending a letter to a woman who had dumped him, informing her that her name appears on the list of former partners of a patient who has tested HIV positive). Cheri (Nastassja Kinski) is a lesbian who works in an art gallery, who eventually forms an intimate relationship with Terri. The conversations, apparently meant to be `frank' and `meaningful' discussions of dysfunctional relationships, sexual inadequacy, impotence, preferences and `best of' revelations, comes across as just so much vapid, infantile prattle. There's not a sympathetic character in the bunch, which makes it hard to identify with any of them, or with anything they have to say. A more self-centered bunch you'll never meet; they should all have IT'S ALL ABOUT ME! tattooed on their foreheads. It plays like a version of the television show `Seinfeld.' without the key ingredient that made that show so great, the humor. LaBute just takes himself, and his material, too seriously; his point of view is subjective, and the presentation is totally devoid of humor and nothing less than unimaginative. And what he's done with his actors is inexcusable; he's managed to strip them of their personalities and the qualities that make them distinct, which is to say that he's taken away from them the tools with which they ply their craft.
Despite what LaBute has done, there are still some decent performances here (hence the two-star rating), Jason Patrick's being the most notable; that he can come across so thoroughly repugnant is a credit to his ability as an artist. Keener, as well, does a good job, making Terri, and her concerns, believable. Amy Brenneman plays Mary with a subtle introspection that works well for the character, and Ben Stiller is solid, albeit unlikable, as Jerry. The problem with `Your Friends & Neighbors' is that, in the end, it all seems so meaningless; it's like spending time with dull, witless, uninteresting people (and how cute, their names all rhyme). There's not a memorable scene (or anything you'd want to remember) in the entire movie, and when it's over, you'll most likely find yourself asking, What am I doing here? And that's one, I'm afraid, I can't answer for you. I rate this one 1/10.
Despite what LaBute has done, there are still some decent performances here (hence the two-star rating), Jason Patrick's being the most notable; that he can come across so thoroughly repugnant is a credit to his ability as an artist. Keener, as well, does a good job, making Terri, and her concerns, believable. Amy Brenneman plays Mary with a subtle introspection that works well for the character, and Ben Stiller is solid, albeit unlikable, as Jerry. The problem with `Your Friends & Neighbors' is that, in the end, it all seems so meaningless; it's like spending time with dull, witless, uninteresting people (and how cute, their names all rhyme). There's not a memorable scene (or anything you'd want to remember) in the entire movie, and when it's over, you'll most likely find yourself asking, What am I doing here? And that's one, I'm afraid, I can't answer for you. I rate this one 1/10.
Distaste for the human condition, all brought to us by Neil LaBute
Agent1013 August 2002
With a better cast and an even more disturbing group of characters, Neil LaBute failed to disappoint in his sophomore effort. Laced with dark dialogue and realistic reactions conducive to the actions of the characters, this film actually surpasses In The Company of Men in regards to the evil that is known as the human condition. With some great performances by the likes of Jason Patric, Catherine Keener, Ben Stiller, Amy Brenneman and Aaron Eckhart, this film really sucks you into this unsatisfied world of betrayal and sex. A film only Todd Solondtz couldn't have made (if anyone else could have made it).
If these were your friends...
quin19746 February 2001
what does that tell you about yourself. That is I think what this movie is trying to tell us. But this is not what it tells us at all.
Two couples and two singles constantly talk about their relationships with the other sex and the same sex as well. This is all well and fine, but Labute just takes it a tad too far. The talking in this movie suffocates any plot from developing and subsequently smothers the entire movie.
The acting is all above average. Keener is good as the girlfriend turning dyke overnight and Brenneman is fine as the wife who has a little affair with Keener's boyfriend. Jason Patric is just too obnoxious to watch and be convincing. Eckhart does not show a glimpse of the talent he displayed in the role he performed in Labute's former picture In The Company Of Men (1997). And Kinski is there just for show, she contributes just nearly nothing to the story. Then there is Stiller who, wearing an absolutely hideous goatee, is just pathetic in this role, I could not stand his whining about everything.
This movie cannot stand in the shadow of the incredibly biting satire In The Company Of Men (ITCOM). It is never fair to compare a second movie with a debut, but I have to do it here. The talking in ITCOM was for a purpose, you had to have a stomach for it, but it was all for a cause: gives these characters a way to express their maleness and feel like they amount to something. In YF&N the characters seem to be constantly talking about nothing, nothing, nothing and nothing.
The production values were okay, nothing that really jumped off the screen at me. This is mediocre attempt by Labute to rehash his first feature. I would say better luck next time, but Nurse Betty wasn't that good either. It's incredible that people can be this much obsessed with sex at all.
6/10
Two couples and two singles constantly talk about their relationships with the other sex and the same sex as well. This is all well and fine, but Labute just takes it a tad too far. The talking in this movie suffocates any plot from developing and subsequently smothers the entire movie.
The acting is all above average. Keener is good as the girlfriend turning dyke overnight and Brenneman is fine as the wife who has a little affair with Keener's boyfriend. Jason Patric is just too obnoxious to watch and be convincing. Eckhart does not show a glimpse of the talent he displayed in the role he performed in Labute's former picture In The Company Of Men (1997). And Kinski is there just for show, she contributes just nearly nothing to the story. Then there is Stiller who, wearing an absolutely hideous goatee, is just pathetic in this role, I could not stand his whining about everything.
This movie cannot stand in the shadow of the incredibly biting satire In The Company Of Men (ITCOM). It is never fair to compare a second movie with a debut, but I have to do it here. The talking in ITCOM was for a purpose, you had to have a stomach for it, but it was all for a cause: gives these characters a way to express their maleness and feel like they amount to something. In YF&N the characters seem to be constantly talking about nothing, nothing, nothing and nothing.
The production values were okay, nothing that really jumped off the screen at me. This is mediocre attempt by Labute to rehash his first feature. I would say better luck next time, but Nurse Betty wasn't that good either. It's incredible that people can be this much obsessed with sex at all.
6/10
A sad movie about unhappy people
pianzola2 January 2008
In the first minutes of this film one of the main characters played by Ben Stiller explain to his audience, a class of students: " Its all about f-( censored )". And unfortunately the hole film is build on this simple and stupid sentence. If there is nothing else in a relationship then this no wonder the characters are so disappointed and unhappy. Dear Writer / director, believe me, there is much more in the world then this. Open your eyes and your heart and you'll find it everywhere!
I bought this film because of his excellent cast. Catherine Keener, Jason Patric, Amy Brenneman, and many others I have seen in other movies. But, even a great cast can not help.
I bought this film because of his excellent cast. Catherine Keener, Jason Patric, Amy Brenneman, and many others I have seen in other movies. But, even a great cast can not help.
Unflinching
ebrown211231 August 2003
Neil LaBute is one of my favorite filmmakers of recent years, and this film is one of his best. He creates distinctive characters, some selfish, some self-loathing, and lets them develop in sometimes unexpected ways. The writing is satirical at times, but that's fine - it's never forced. The directions in which these characters go ultimately feel like natural progressions. Sometimes you can't believe what you're seeing and hearing, but it all fits. The cast is up to the challenges of the material - especially Jason Patric, who gives his best performance in years.
Interesting, but with occasional character development problems
NJCondon14 September 1998
"Your Friends & Neighbors" is about six people whose personalities range from somewhat superficial and self-absorbed down to frighteningly narcissistic. I've seen movies featuring unsympathetic lead characters before, but I don't ever recall seeing a film where the director seems to actively despise each and every one of his characters so much. A great deal of what goes on in this film is very funny and quite fascinating, if more than a little uncomfortable sometimes. (One scene features what I think must be the longest awkward silence in recent moviemaking.) Too often , though, the characters' motivations are left entirely unclear to the audience, and they seem to be pulled about by unseen motivations. This seems to be the result of too heavy a hand on the part of the writer /director Neil LaBute, who apparently is out not only to make us hate the characters, but to be confused by them and alienated from them as well. On the whole, though, the interesting and funny parts made up for a lot of the things that I never properly understood about the characters, making the movie worth seeing.
Overall Rating: 7 (out of 10), or 3 stars (out of 4)
Overall Rating: 7 (out of 10), or 3 stars (out of 4)
A Confusing, Hopeless Movie
Shtein28 March 1999
I had very high expections for this movie before I saw it. It looked like it was going to be a very funny black comedy. Unfortunately, this movie falls far short of my expectations. First of all, this movie really wasn't funny. Sometimes there are movies that you don't laugh at but still think are quite funny, e.g. Grosse Point Blank, but this movie really doesn't have that quality.
The only response I really had to this movie was confusion. It lacked direction and there seemed to be no point to the story. I couldn't identify with any of the characters, and thus was not very interested in what happened to them. Almost all of the characters are just terrible people that have absolutely no redeeming qualities. The movie could have been funny if bad things happened to these people or they changed their ways, but the movie was just about how terrible these people are.
Before the movie ended, I turned the movie off. It couldn't hold my attention. What happened to all the characters really was of no interest to me.
The only response I really had to this movie was confusion. It lacked direction and there seemed to be no point to the story. I couldn't identify with any of the characters, and thus was not very interested in what happened to them. Almost all of the characters are just terrible people that have absolutely no redeeming qualities. The movie could have been funny if bad things happened to these people or they changed their ways, but the movie was just about how terrible these people are.
Before the movie ended, I turned the movie off. It couldn't hold my attention. What happened to all the characters really was of no interest to me.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
