YPF (2007) User Reviews

Young People Passing the Time

[moutonbear25 · 5/10 · 21 June 2008]

Director Martin Guero knows that the title of his first film, YOUNG PEOPLE F#@KING, is brash enough to grab anyone's attention. It could be misconstrued as a title meant to entice lonely, older men to weekend matinees but in an effort to dissuade these "gentlemen", I will tell you the people in question here aren't that young. These particular people are all in their mid to late 20's, all relatively white and all essentially straight. This does not bode well for this self-professed modern exploration of what it means to be a player in their prime in today's supposedly kinky sexual playing field. Still, you can feel Guero smiling from behind the camera, content with himself for telling it like it is. Only Guero's idea of today's sexual experience is so steeped in convention that it is anything but provocative.

To make his film even less reverent, Guero divides his young people into perfectly constructed boxes. These particular groupings are so well established in the public's vernacular that Guero doesn't need to spend any time establishing any actual history in his characters. Who has time for the human touch though when you're talking about humans touching? A couple, two friends, two exes, two people on their first date and two roommates all find themselves in the throws of passion, or at least the throws of pastime, on one very busy night in one undisclosed city. Now, I'm warning you. The following may be too shocking to handle. The couple, well they have gotten bored with their sex life and now barely have any sex at all. The people on their first date are saying a bunch of things just to get into each other's pants. Even the friends are hesitant that if they were to have sex, it might somehow change the friendship they have relied on platonically for years. By reducing his characters to such tired clichés, Guero has crafted a hollow exploration of caricature rather than an actual character study.

Who knew that sex could have such a giant impact on people and relationships? Oh, right, everyone knew that already. Sex is the ultimate complicating factor and the definitive line that only occasionally warrants crossing. Should friends cross it? Should exes? How about strangers? No matter who you are, both alone and together, before you cross it, you will be changed once you do, no matter how many lies you tell yourself to con your mind into making a supposedly sound decision. You take that step, leave the planet for a while if you're lucky and land on your feet if you're even luckier still, a changed person for having taken the risk. Simply put, sex is big. YOUNG PEOPLE F@#KING however, is nowhere near as monumental as that and you'll forget it by the time the condom is off.

some limited comedy

[SnoopyStyle · 5/10 · 31 August 2015]

Five relationships are depicted as they try to have sex. Best Friends Matt and Kristen try to be friends with benefits. The Couple Andrew and Abby are trying get some excitement back into their sex life. The Exes Mia and Eric try an one night stand. The First Date has Jamie bringing his date ladies man Ken back to her apartment. The Roommates has Gord and Inez inviting his tired well-hung roommate Dave to join them.

These are superficially drawn characters. I like the actors which keeps my interest to some extent. However the movie is not that compelling and definitely not as funny as it wants to be. The Roommates section is definitely trying way too hard. The Best Friends and The Couple are the two that has the best comedic potential. Also if each story is expanded, they would probably be the most compelling ones. The concept is highly questionable and the writing needs to be much better. There has to be a connection between the stories other than the stale title cards.

No hidden clues

[yael01 · 5/10 · 16 August 2008]

I was lured into this movie by its promiscuous title, yet was highly reassured that I should avoid judging books by their cover. This time, there are no hidden clues. The title gives it all away. That's all this movie is about. "F*** is just a f***", says one lacking-content character to another. The movie overwhelms the not so innocent viewer with filthy and not so filthy sex from head to toe, hoping that this will prevent him from seeing through the fog of moans and sweat, into the void.

At first, the characters seem promising. The situations are all too familiar and make you feel like it's a real-life tale of love and lust. You become curious, eager to see what happens. What's the end of this version to the story that each and every one of us saw, heard or thought of. Soon the illusion is shattered. The story lines hit a dead end even before the foreplay's over. Every development, minus some mildly surprising yet equally uninteresting kinky stuff, is banal and not fulfilling.

It's funny, at times. You're entertained by the nudity and sex, because that's the lowest common denominator for us humans and our sense of humor. But laughing makes you feel like a 13-year-old watching his first porno. The non-stopping sex and beautiful actresses will keep you watching this movie, but it won't be worth it. Somewhat distinct from the cliché notion of sex, this movie has a promising beginning but a disappointing end. Unlike sex, for this movie the process isn't any good either.

Let me save you some time and money by giving you the Cliff's notes on this one. Sex changes things. And it feels nice. So if you're not too keen about spending an hour and a half watching young people purposelessly f***ing, and you didn't find the punchlines any surprising, maybe you should reconsider watching the movie.

Enjoyable

[IndyMansOldAccount · 22 July 2008]

This film isn't the standard comedy about average teens to young adults trying to get off, this is about young adults that have the same sort of mishaps and adventures exploring the different types of sex, yes believe it or not there are different types; whether it be about being in love, to a one night stand, two friends helping each-other out or just two ex-partners filling in.

Be it a rough topic to display on screen seen it's pretty full of sex at every angle, which is besides the point, the point is that it's about the deeper meaning, what do we discover about each-other in bed, what was there before and what's there now. The writing is spot on, the scenes aren't as you'd expect, the characters question themselves and their abilities in or out of the sack. An odd experience on screen, but a funny one.

Verdict: 90 minutes of sex on screen, could the internet provide better? Doubtful. This is sexual comedy at it's best, thinking that makes it a new genre of film-making to consider. 7.5/10.

Young People Fu©king Boring

[rgcustomer · 7/10 · 17 March 2009]

For me, this film was like a slowed-down, un-funny, post-graduate extended version of an episode of MTV's "Undressed (1999)".

So that's why I think the title is incomplete. Surely they left off the fourth word "Boring".

The title "Young People Fu©king" is actually more appropriate to "9 Songs (2004)" which I found to be a movie with some honesty and heart, and avoiding the cinematic prudery that dominates this film. A film premiere in 2007 can show full frontal. But maybe not if it's funded in part by a socially conservative government.

I found it difficult to keep track of which couple was which. "The Couple" and "Roommates" were pretty easy to keep track of, but the rest of them just blurred together. Would it have killed the people who cast this film to choose some different skin tones at least? Would it have killed the editor to show the couples in the same order each time? (Maybe they did, but it didn't seem that way to me) I can't say I will remember much about this film next week, which is a shame for something that comes at you with such a provocative title.

While it's not a bad film (for that see "Thrill of the Kill (2006) (TV)") this film isn't exactly going to save Canadian cinema.

Young people old habits

[batudingin · 7/10 · 30 April 2010]

It is like everybody loves Raymond, the next step forward. Though I would rather watch a series of this on HBO but this is fun. It is a bit annoying to switch the nudity bar on and off. But this is not porn, it is a bad medicine pill with sugar coating. The sephia tone is wonderful. The comedy mix with drama seems a little pushy at times, but still doesn't buoy the boat off track. The pacing is too fast for my liking, but fast food is the best American cuisine. Got to admire the direction since it manages to cover multiple scenes better than other films. The casting is fantastic, the chemistry is not always there, but individually, all involved are committed. It is a grand education for those still in prude phase with sex. And for relationship with that matter. The ending strikes you with a harsh whip though, highlighting the dialog is better than sex itself. One mere thing, the chapter factor is an annoyance. Overall it is a fun movie, one can state the movie is a transition from porn addicts to become dialog enthusiast.

Exactly what the title indicates.

[lewiskendell · 6/10 · 29 January 2016]

Y.P.F. is...difficult to review. The tag line is, "Sex without complications?....yeah, right." This pretty much describes the movie as well as it can be described. Five different pairings at different stages of the relationship spectrum all go to bed, and we see what the results are of their hanky-panky.

There are some really diverse situations here, from two ex-lovers who want to spend another night together, to a guy who wants his roommate to have sex with his girlfriend while he watches. Complicated doesn't begin to describe some of the things that unfold. Some of it is funny, some of it is painful, and some of it is very uncomfortable.

My constant thought throughout the film was that the basic concept was cool, but it would all work so much better as a genuine documentary. And no, that's not an excuse to see people actually having sex. Real life always trumps fiction, and Y.P.F. is a perfect example of that. Its scripted scenes and dialogue only offer an imitation of what these situations would REALLY be like.

Blah-Blah-Blah! Yak-Yak-Yak! Yawn-Yawn-Yawn!

[strong-122-478885 · 4/10 · 5 March 2014]

Like, would you really be interested in watching this film if the young people fukking in it were ugly, grossly over-weight, had pimples on their asses, had skin diseases, had bad teeth, etc., etc.?.... Why, of course, you wouldn't!

Young People Fukking is a perfect example of a mediocre movie marketed to completely cash in on the controversy that it generated by having a title with the word "Fukking" in it.

Without its profane, little title this film, in all of its obvious contrivances and predictability, would've most likely been ignored and forgotten, for the most part, upon its release.

But, the truth is, once the word "fukking" was worked into its title that pretty much guaranteed this film's immediate success and attention whether it rightfully deserved that notice, or not. And, naturally, its producers were very aware of this and their gamble paid off quite prosperously in both publicity and dollars.

For a film that was (in accordance with its title) supposed to be about (what else, but) young people fukking, I can't believe how deary and non-erotic it made the act of fornication appear.

In my opinion, out of all the limb-entwining that took place amongst the 11 people (male & female) represented in this film, there honestly wasn't a single good fukk in the whole lot. I'm not kidding! Not only that, but this film totally cheated the viewer when it came to showing the splendid beauty of bare flesh.

I think that this film really needs to be remade in an x-rated version so at least the viewer will clearly understand what the word "fukking" is all about. And, I'm sorry, but, from where I was sitting there were just way too many head-shots taken of the characters while they were in the act of copulation, or else, they were conveniently wrapped up in the bedsheets during intercourse. (ho-hum!)

And besides all of that - I ask you - Do young people fukking really talk as much as these actors did while doing "it"?. 'Cause, let me tell ya, I was getting pretty sick & tired of all the tedious conversations that were taking place (before, during & after sex) throughout this film's 90-minute running time.

And, with that all in mind, I'd certainly say that "Young People Fukking" delivered some pretty dismal returns on a title that I'd say was blatant false advertising. Yeah. This film was nothing but a total rip-off as far as I'm concerned.

And, finally - Didn't anybody in this movie have any concerns about STD's or unwanted pregnancies? Like, wasn't this movie supposed to be about modern-day attitudes towards sex? Has nothing changed in all of these years? Is it still all just cum & go!?

Well... Wham! Bam! Thank you, mam, to you, too!

Notes from 2007 TIFF

[riid · 8/10 · 8 September 2007]

I saw this film at the 2007 Toronto International Film Festival.

The first feature film from director/co-writer Martin Gero and actor/co-writer Aaron Abrams, Young People F--- (censored since IMDb won't let me put the actual word in) is exactly as the title implies, with five completely unrelated story lines about people having sex. There is the ex-boyfriend and girlfriend, reuniting for an evening out just as friends; the best friends who see each other as a convenient way to relieve their pent up lust without having to turn to some random, poorly chosen pickup; the couple, whose love life in the bedroom has lost its spark; the first date, with a player trying to get lucky with a woman he just met; and the roommates, one of who tries to draw the other into a threesome with his girlfriend. The characters run the gamut of emotions; some are insecure, some are over-confident; some have baggage in their relationship, some want to be intimate, and others just want to screw. Intercut amongst one another, each story proceeds from a prelude through to foreplay, to the act itself, to an interlude, and finally down to the climax and its denouement. In the end, the stories are full of both beginnings and endings for all of the characters.

The film definitely lives up to its title, but in a humorous, warm, and personal way. While there's stuff there that might make your grandmother blush, don't go in thinking you're going to get some sort of hard-core film or some generic teen sex comedy. It was easy to warm up to the characters and get a sense of their history and who they are without a lot of obvious exposition. The actors were good across the board, although Josh Dean's character was a bit too nerdly earnest for my taste. While you may not leave with any great, deep universal truths answered, the film got a lot of laughs and was enjoyable throughout, and hopefully it won't suffer for its title once it gets released.

Adequate time filler

[RogerB-P3RV3 · 6/10 · 24 February 2020]

Too slight to be taken seriously, the performances helps in this tale of five couples discovering love through superfluous sex encounter. Most of the characters are bland except for Kristin Booth (Abby) who wants to do "it" to her hubby and Ennis Esmer, a willing voyeur in girlfriend's cuckolding with a room-mate. Adequate time filler.

not so young neurotic (unlikable) people screwing

[movieman_kev · 3/10 · 23 October 2008]

Five couples traverse the pitfalls and prose of the contemporary sexual adventure scene in this slice-of-(sex)life dramady that on a whole goes nowhere. Most of the couples are rather bland, neurotic, and/or (in the case of the married couple & the exes) highly annoying. For a film with such a provocative title and subject matter, the movie is surprisingly and inoffensive. Even the few instances where a laugh can be found don't make thee watching experience worthwhile. This film approaches Woody Allen territory, but lacks the wit and style to pull it off.

Eye Candy: Natalie Lisinska & Carly Pope show their tits; Sonja Bennet provides the T&A

My Grade: D

DVD Extras: Just the theatrical trailer for this film and trailers for "Stuck" & "the night of the white pants". It's a pretty bare bones release

A hilariously sweet and touching must-see film

[DonFishies · 8/10 · 28 June 2008]

Going into a movie called Young People F**king, there is not much one can expect outside of what the title is selling. Yeah, the trailers made the film look funny, and pronounced the critical acclaim for it, but unfortunately, its brash title's suggestion is the only reason people will either run to see the movie, or avoid the film like the plague. And for such a great little film, that is truly a shame.

The film follows four very different couples (and one three-person group) through the course of one night in their sex lives. It picks up right at the beginning introducing the couples (from one that is actually labelled as "The Couple" to another labelled as "The Friends"), and the circumstances that brought them to the inevitable sex, and then progressively goes through the various steps these groups go through from the pre-sex, to the after-sex (cutting back and forth between the groups in-between each of the six intervals).

What is most interesting about this film is how many different ways it covers sex. No one couple in this film is the same, and through the film's clever use of cutting back and forth between them, the audience can genuinely say that they have sat through something truly unique. In North America, sex is always looked down upon as being totally taboo, and a healthy dose of action is what audiences end up getting fed instead. When certain films show up on the radar, like the blazingly unrivalled, albeit, nearly pornographic Shortbus two years ago, they are met with controversy and are almost automatically put down for their depiction of something so inherent to human life that we would cease to exist without it. Young People F**king is not as graphic or raw as Shortbus, but it would be much in the same category in what it is trying to accomplish.

Young People F**king succeeds in being a great film because it stays within reality. Yes, there are certain things said and done that some may not find to be normal, but for the most part, the film plays on sexual stereotypes and sexual themes that everyone knows and can find solace in. The small cast of characters on-screen are real, and are dealing with real issues. There is little to no fantasy being explored here. These are characters that have had their emotions stomped on, who have genuinely real problems that just about anyone in the audience can relate to. The filmmakers know the universality of their subject, and they know that comparisons are going to be made. What they might not have realized in their developing of the stories and characters, was just how affecting it would be.

What also makes the film a success is how funny it is. It never once tries to go over-the-top (minus one particularly vulgar piece of dialogue that the trailer cleverly teases at), and for the most part, stays grounded in the reality of how one would imagine these couples would interact. The film knows its audience, and it stays true to its characters. For every hilarious nugget of dialogue, there is another that is funny only because of how honest and truthful it is, and another that is truly moving. The film does not skimp on trying to make itself out to be something it is not. It wants to be frank, and it does not even try to steer around the topic of sex. And in that respect, the film delivers in spades (and real comedy unlike some of the forced sex comedies we are used to seeing).

Singling out one couple or one character in the film would giving the film its proper due. Every single one of the eleven actors involved in the film make this film what it is. No they are not perfect in their acting styles, but then, neither are these characters. They pour their hearts into making the film believable, real and mature. They all work well off their partner (as none of the groups interact with any of the others), and you can see the honest and sincere emotions in their facial and body expressions (since there are many moments where dialogue is not expressed as much as facial emotion). Yes, some of the situations these characters encounter may seem ridiculous, but the cast rolls with them, and makes them feel just as normal as any other.

If the film suffers from any imperfections at all, it is in that it feels boring at times. Its quick and blazing fast opening suggests that it will not dwell, but in exploring its characters, it unfortunately falls into some fairly exhausting and dull moments that have trouble picking back up. And it is the same problem with every couple featured in the film, in that they just cannot keep up with the pace the film wants to have. I appreciated the deep explorations these characters got, but I think there could have been an easier and faster way to get to some of them. It feels like the filmmakers know how they want to approach these couples, and know how they want to explore their uncertainties and real world emotions, but they just miss the mark in a few instances. It is not a widespread plague that ruins the whole movie; it just halts it from getting from one place to the next in specific instances.

For what the film promises in its title, Young People F**king does an excellent job of making itself out to be a comedy, but out to be a drama all the same. It is funny, sweet, vulgar, and touching all at once. It is an excellent must-see film, if only because of how it treats its subject. It suffers only because of some boring instances, but then, so too does life itself.

8/10.

Ally McBeal + Ed Burns Movie = this turd

[ragboypizza · 1/10 · 11 March 2009]

What a bloody awful movie and proof that IMDb users are so middle of the road.

I only saw this because it was on Movie Channel and I'm trying to get my money's worth. I was actually expecting something out of the ordinary, but wow it couldn't be anymore Ordinary. I love good comedy, but this isn't even mediocre comedy. I couldn't force myself to laugh once. The Ally McBeal "screwball" acting that has infected the minds of so many unsuspecting conventional people wears thin very fast. There isn't one ounce of anything that feels genuine. It's all so "scripted" and the actors are obviously not capable of saving the whole clichéd affair.

Even worse, the characters are unlikeable in a post-Seinfeld kind of way. Just grating and totally void of wit. I offer the character of Ken as exhibit A, a 2-dimensional "playa" that probably every office cubicle jockey aspires to. All high concept and no character. Yawn.

Even worse again, those pretentious "chapter" inter-titles that divide the movie because the writer doesn't have the attention span or skill to construct a solid whole from the limp parts.

In a nutshell, Young People F---- or whatever it's called, is nothing more than a calculated opportunity for predictable and boring people to pat themselves on their backs for embracing something that's so "controversial" only because Entertainment Tonight tells them it is.

If you thought it all couldn't get any worse, the cinematography is really flat, too, aspiring to that mid-90's "indie" thing that's so popular with artsy hockey moms.

My advice: watch early Seinfeld instead. It's light years ahead of this trash with it's clever storytelling and ability to skewer human social norms.

One of the best films about sex in a long time

[ametaphysicalshark · 16 June 2008]

With its provocative title and the general controversy surrounding it thanks to Bill C-10, director Martin Gero's debut film "Young People F-cking" has gotten a far wider release in Canada than most films of this sort do, getting the chance to compete with the likes of "The Incredible Hulk" and "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" in 2008's summer season. I can't think of a film more deserving.

"Young People F-cking" is honest, real, unpretentious, sad, and funny all at the same time. Its script is one of the best I've come across in quite a while, using a unique narrative which takes the 'six phases of sex': prelude, foreplay, sex, interlude, orgasm, and afterglow- in that order, and applies them to five different couples (well... four couples and a threesome). The film progresses through the six phases in order, cutting back and forth between the five couples, 'Friends', 'Couple', 'Exes', 'Roommates', and 'First Date', and observing their interaction with each other.

These stories vary in quality but even the weakest; the Roommates story, is involving and fun as long as you remember that while Gord is exaggerated, there ARE many guys like him around. Martin Gero and Aaron Abrams are smart enough not to play all of the stories for laughs, with the 'Exes' story maintaining a wistful, slightly sad tone albeit one punctuated by humor. The 'Friends' portion of the script is also remarkably true-to-life and the only one other than the 'First Date' story that I could personally relate to. My favorite story within this film was the 'First Date' portion starring Callum Blue and Diora Baird; it's hilarious, insightful, and never boring in the slighest.

Providing superb drama, good comedy, and some of the best and most entertaining observations on sex outside a Woody Allen offering, "Young People F-cking" is THE movie about sex for anyone in their twenties or thirties right now. I can't promise that the film would maintain its best strengths for those who can't relate to the events on screen. I expect that people over forty or so will enjoy the film less than younger people because after all even the politics of sex change, just like everything else.

Fresh, unique, relevant, and beautifully photographed and directed, "Young People F-cking" is unquestionably going to end up as one of the best films of 2008. It is just phenomenal.

8.75/10

Gosh, let's say f*ck & c*m and b*lls a lot and make believe it's meaningful!

[pak-hanafi · 3/10 · 17 June 2009]

OK.. There are a few moments of humor, but by and large, this film is intended to titillate; no more, no less. It's part of the wave of humor that has evolved since you could get away with sex jokes and nudity in the mainstream. Now that its permitted, they're "balls to the wall" with taking advantage of the situation.

Don't let your young teenagers watch this piece of crap. They'll think this is the way everybody behaves. It's a Hollywood fantasy aimed at a young audience. Sex starved 30 somethings may watch it for the partial nudity, sexual situations and suggestive dialog.

The film tries desperately to be hip, but fails miserably. I watched because I was misled. I can admit it. You have the opportunity to pass and see something at least minimally worthwhile.

loved this movie

[guybennett-1 · 10/10 · 9 October 2007]

Straight up - I adored this movie. It's a razor sharp sex comedy that is extremely funny and has a soul. Structually it does something that you rarely see attempted in an ensemble film. The five individual strands do not interconnect. This is generally considered to be a recipe for disaster. If they don't interconnect - what stops it being five short films inter-cut? In this case - the theme (love) and narrative (negotiations about sex) replace the need for colliding narratives. And it works! The film is a cohesive whole. You don't have to waste screen time setting up clunky "small world" co-incidences (car crashes being the flavor of the month). The other thing that jolted me is that the entire cast is brilliant. There is no weak link. Disclaimer: I do have a family member in the cast - but trust me this is not the cause of my affection. I simply fell in love with the film. All the performances are subtle and leave lots of things for you to discover. Smart, funny, warmhearted. A real gem!

Very boring and uninteresting people f***ing

[d_generation_x-1 · 3/10 · 31 July 2008]

Oh wow.

Where do I begin?

Who would enjoy this movie might you ask?

Well,

1. Someone who's never and will never have sex 2. Someone who's never imagined having sex or watched a porno 3. Someone who doesn't know what sex is or that it existed. 4. Someone who's lived his/her whole life under a rock 5. And finally, someone who was involved with the making of this, making him/her oblivious to the fact that this film SUCKS!

About the acting, I cant really judge, and I wont judge the acting, all I can say is what they were acting out was complete TRASH and anyone could've played the roles and achieved the same results.

The script was hilarious, I mean that, this would've been such a funny film if the writers of it were actually intending to make it funny! But they weren't (or not that I'm aware of), and so it just makes it stupid, with the occasional awkward laugh. Speaking of the writers, where were they? And I don't mean that when they were writing the script of the movie, I mean, where were they during the course which teaches them how to write good comedies at writing school (or whatever they attended). I've seen a few reviews for this movie (some of the ones that convinced me this movie was GOOD), and one particular reviewer said that this movie created a genre of its own... Yes, it did, I'm actually torn between calling it the "comedy genre, which isn't funny" or the "romantic genre, which hasn't got but one trace of romance in it", I guess you can decide that though (that's to say you still want to watch this movie after reading my review).

Whoever created this movie has obviously had a lack of sex experience, or an abundance of very disturbing sex experiences (you decide). This movie makes it seems that sex is like a rocket science, or something so complicated that in times shouldn't even be done.

Reading summaries of this film, I thought it was be something original and good. It wasn't, well it was original, but not good, and just because something is original it doesn't make it good.

The characters aren't introduced properly as I forgot ALL of their names (then again, how could I forget their names when I was never told them?). And the couples weren't distinguishable (I got the exes and co-workers and first daters mixed up, which ones did you get confused with?).

Overall this movie needs to be left where it belongs, on the shelf. And to the people who thought this was a masterpiece, why not go out once in a while and maybe you wont just be watching the boring people f***ing with excitement?

One more thing about the script, seeing as the movie goes through each couple during the stages of sex it seems that at times the script contradicts itself. I picked up on a few contradictions (although there are MANY more, see how many you can spot). One that stuck with me:

Girl: Wow your so great, you made me cum 3 times. Guy: Cool... *Guy walks off, comes back to find girl not as satisfied as she said (I wont get into detail)* Guy: I thought I was good, why aren't you satisfied, didn't I make you cum 4 times? Girl: You did, its just that...etc etc blah blah blah.

This was just one, although there was more.

I think this movie should be renamed "Boring people f***ing" as that title would suit it more.

3/10

Pretty decent relational comedy

[siderite · 8/10 · 22 October 2008]

It is a movie about sex, but without much of it. It is not pornographic or offensive, but funny and (to many adults) pretty close to home. The basic plot is about a few couples that have sex and the emotions involved: the exes, the couple, the roommates, the friends, etc.

I can tell you my wife enjoyed it and got in the mood in the same time, so you could definitely try it together with the SO. The film is not a parody. No cheap laughs and stupid jokes, only fun from things that could be real.

Bottom line: a good romantic comedy that is not overly romantic and has a plot! How cool is that? Also Carly Pope, Diora Baird and Kristin Booth look delicious.

Embarrassing

[suburp212 · 2/10 · 13 March 2011]

Well, I must say, the story of "The Friends" (one of the couples) is halfway watchable with a somewhat humorous dialogue and follow-able plot. Some of the other stories were sadly too embarrassing, in a ridiculous, stupid kind of way, and overall, I did not enjoy this movie, as it falls flat as a comedy, and does not have enough drama for a drama. This is sad, since the initial trailer showed a lot of promise, and this movie won the Toronto Film Festival Award. One of the problems in the movie is the forced storyline, that neither makes sense, nor instigates a sense of realism, or much of a comedy. Some of the dialogues are sadly painful and embarrassing to watch.

Don't be mislead by the title

[harry_tk_yung · 18 August 2009]

The title most likely conjures up the image of teenage pornography. This gem from Canadian director Martin Gero is anything but that. For one thing, "young people" in this movie average in their mid- to late-twenties, to whom sex is a mature, ordinary activity just like eating and breathing. There are obviously sex scenes but nothing spectacular. Much more important are the dialogues that take place before, during and after sex. Structurally, it's not unlike watching a stage play with a prologue and 6 acts, each with 5 scenes in it.

The 6 acts are entitled Prelude, Foreplay, Sex, Interlude, Orgasm and Afterglow. The five scenes trace the emotional relationship development of 5 couple (actually one is a threesome, of sorts) through these 6 phases.

"Friends" depicts how two good friends of 20 years explore sex for the first time, mainly for emotional release after each has separately experienced frustrating relationships, not unlike "When Harry met Sally" (1989). "First date" is not as innocent as it sounds, as it is a sexual-psychological sparring between an experienced old hand and a considerably younger woman who is, however, every bit his match. "Couple" tells the familiar story of a couple in their mid-twenties who are gradually losing their excitement in sex after living together for some time. While the problem is quite ordinary, the solution isn't. "Exes" examines the bitter-sweet feelings of a pair of exes during a post-mortem date that ends up having them in bed. "Roommates", the most outlandishly funny of the stories, tells how a somewhat eccentric guy, feeling sorry for his roommate's lacking in sexual excitement in life, offers the latter a session with his "hot" girlfriend…while he himself sits on a sofa and watch, while sucking an ice cream, among other things!

While the tone is consistently light, the mood varies from mild poignancy to hilarity. Examination of human relationships is at times thought-provoking, but never pretentious. Performances of the ensemble of young actors are all commendable. Director Gero has brought a breath of freshness in a rather cliché subject. All told, a gem.

possibly the worst movie ever made

[jesseisthedog · 1/10 · 11 September 2009]

Some loser Canadian actor decided to try his hand at writing. And he puts himself (ugly bastard) straight into bed with an average looking woman.

Trust me. He would never do as good as an average looking woman.

None of the little "stories" are connected.

There's a lot of fake - unbelievable sex movements that you would expect from really bad porn.

No good acting. None.

Actually no story, come to think of it.

And then there's an out of the blue argument that erupts, that makes no sense. They are acting upset with each other, but there's nothing going on.

what else? Oh, apparently its a comedy. There is not one funny instance throughout the whole painful. movie.

Do not waste your time with this low budget nonsense.

The Zeitgeist of sex

[ferconex · 9/10 · 23 July 2008]

Excellent movie in my opinion. It manages to do a real cross-section of these days' sex-life (because, keep in mind, this is the sex-life of today that we are talking about), being at the same time funny, warm an exciting. The writers and director obviously got to some point the idea that this is going to work only if, as Shakespeare said, to their own selves they would be true. Hence the result. Hell, it's a masterpiece itself the fact that they make a movie that contains in the title, about and featuring f@#king and still the end result is not a porno, but something so deeply human and true as this movie. Being in some of these situations myself at one point or another in life, I can guarantee for the accuracy of the situations depicted :) 9/10

Mediocre yarn

[fckoff-85081 · 3/10 · 29 August 2015]

This film is a yawn. I couldn't relate to the characters. I don't hink much of the storytelling. The camera work was OK. I feel for underemployed actors who have to take whatever roles they can. Still, there is some redeeming features in the film, such as the occasional gag and situational comedy. There are parts where the paces picks up and you relate to the scene. But for the most part this film is not up to par. I feel it is a good first attempt, and maybe the director will evolve, I am willing to see if he improves, put it that way. Hot chicks and gags are not enough to sell a film, there has to be more than that going into the pot.

A seriously funny movie

[lastliberal · 8/10 · 2 May 2009]

You certainly don't know what to expect with a title like YPF. Maybe some soft-core action? What you get from this movie is so much more than what you thought.

It is five separate stories: two exes getting together, a first date, a married couple who have lost the spark, BFFs, and two roommates with a girl. Five separate stories that come together in a way you would not expect.

Yes, it's about sex, and it's about twenty-somethings, but it is also much much deeper. It is about expectations and relationships and being open to new experience. Sometimes things don't work out, and sometimes they work out in ways that blow your mind.

It is seriously funny.

Way too much dialog for a film about sex

[Adrian232 · 4/10 · 12 September 2008]

OK this film wasn't all bad, but god damn, there wasn't a likable character in the whole bunch. Every single one of them I just wanted to punch in the face. Predictable? Yes. Realistic? Maybe. Enjoyable? Sure, why not. But speaking from a man who has been in every single one of these situations (well... but maybe not quite) if there was anywhere near as much dialog, it would never have gotten as far as section v.

Unfortunately it seems that this movie was written from one male perspective and one female perspective, as every same-gendered person has almost the exact same personality... with maybe only a few (yet extreme) differences. The only characters I could relate to are The Third Wheel and Girl on Elevator. They're the only ones who made sense.