Completely atrocious !!!



A friend of mine who was studying film at UCLA,was writing a dissertation about the Historical Representations of Black Women in America Cinema the paper was called " Here and Now", she'd come across this movie that later became part of her 90's perspective, and insisted I watched. She didn't tell me why, just that after seeing it I'd know. I love Rae Dawn Chong, and it was cool to see Sandra Bullock, but as I got into the movie I increasingly became appalled. By the time it was over, I came close to tossing it into my fireplace. Keeping in mind it was rented, I came to my senses and just returned it for a copy of Heathers. This was after i reviewed it a few more times just to make sure i wasn't jumping to any conclusions.

Okay, whats the big deal right? Well, i identified with Rae Dawn Chong because we both come from mixed heritages, both are half black and olive complexion. I also view her as articulate, and smart. In the 90's, light skin and educated meant "sell out" according to the movies. Anyway, her character portrayed as not only attractive but promiscuous, vain, and shallow. Her white roommates tend to have a more free spirited, ultra liberal, lifestyle that was all the rage,especially in So. California. She turns from slut to instant Victim when she's attacked by one of her suitors. The message obviously " with her lifestyle, and attitude, she had it coming" , if this message seems lost on the viewer, we actually have Sandra bullock who states it directly. The only person who comforts her is the roommate considered " the innnocent/ ultra liberal, white girl with the heart of gold" , to convince us further, she spends most of her time volunteering in the rought streets of east LA with at risk hispanic kids. So obviously she's in touch with the minorities. ANywho, what seems like a forced, and random sub-plot, is quickly forgotten, and everyone in the house, including rae dawn chong , goes on as if she'd spent the whole night looking for a missing earring. I didn't understand why the rape was necessary, other than to hand out some same moral lesson. The end summed it up very nicely, the girl with the heart of gold gets attack by the "ruff mexicans" and ends up in the hospital upsets her husband to the point where he drinks himself into a drunken stupor. For half the movie, he's held resentment towards rae dawn chong for being superficial and slutty, now we find out they use to bang before he married the girl with the heart of gold. He's sprawled on the couch , in full whino mode, and who happens to walk in. Slutty, Shallow, Victimized,token hot lightskinned black chick. For no apparent reason at all, she seduces the drunk and restless husband of the only person in the house who cared for her after her "traumatic rape". AHHH it becomes clear now. And they bang. The entire house of liberal, openminded, free spirited, white young adults, turns against Rae dawn chong. The chick who let them stay in her expensive home on the hill, extended help to Sandra when she couldn't pay the rent, has now turned full circle into total villianess mode. They all move out, girl with the heart of gold is heartbroken, drunken husband's lost the love his life, and the movie ends with Rae Dawn Chong alone and lonely. Not before Sandra bullock lays into the horrible person she is. She says this to the woman who let her stay, rent free, and who she gave 2 crap loads about when found bruised and raped in their living room because she of course she deserved it for her lifestyle, and Sandy her pegged all along. Thanks for the free room and board though!..


Sorry, this was soo long but i had to lay it out. The "token black chick" beautiful and successful but immoral and heartless , and her freespirited ,liberal white roommates who've she so horribly mistreated. Especially the culturally tolerant, ultra supportive, and loving girlfriend with a heart of gold is betrayed while laying in a hospital bed..

Jesus Christ, if i ever come across the people who made this , i'm killing their pets.

reply

Hospital bed??? Who was in the hospital? Did we watch the same film?

reply

I don't think you paid close enough attention when you watched the film. The character MJ wasn't letting them stay there rent free first off. Within the first 5 mins of the film she asked them all for rent money. Sandra Bullock loaned her gay friend Banks money to pay his rent.

She wasn't some kind "token black chick" that everyone sh*t on at the end of the film either. She was banging her friend/roommates boyfriend. The guy didn't ask the character Frankie to marry him until the end, btw.

But Frankie wasn't the only one to comfort her after her rape. She climbed in bed with Sandra Bullocks character and Sandra held her as she cried. Told her it wasn't her fault, even though yes, MJ is slutty and shallow.

Not sure how you missed all of this and the main point of the film. This film was about life in LA in the 90's. It was about a group of friends that seemed closer than some families even are, still don't have it all together. (At least that was my view on it.) They still have problems and lose those said friendships. Okay, I'm done ranting.

its my bedtime anyway. lol.

reply

So you wanted to talk to the makers of this atrocious film, well here's your chance. I directed this film and co-produced it and would like to point out a few things which I believe you might find interesting. First off is your contention that the film has a racial perspective. Of course it is possible that the film can make a statement about race without the filmmakers intending to do so. But if you think about the film making process I think you will come to realize that the purpose of the film was to make a statement about these characters' personalities and actions regardless of their race. If we are guilty of stereotyping, which I would confess we are, it would be in the representation of the gay character, Banks. As far as MJ, you must understand that the script was written at least a year before the film went into any type of preproduction/casting. And that the character was not written with any type of racial background in mind, and in reality was a compilation of a few real people that all happened to be white. During the casting process we saw many actresses of all types, races, etc. We chose Rae because we felt she had the best combination of power, guile, innocence, sexuality added to the fact that she was smokin hot. Not once did we consider the fact that she was of mixed race and how this would be perceived given the fact that her character was messed up. Perhaps we were naive, but we were not in any way making a statement about race. Can't an actress of color play a messed up bitch without the filmmakers being accused of racial insensitivity?

As for your other contentions, you may think what you like, but given the fact that the writer is a woman and a feminist, I have a hard time seeing your point that we felt MJ had it coming to her with respect to the rape. As numerous characters point out, she was at times a bitch and a slut, but nonetheless, she never deserved to be raped. If we did not get this point across to you then we failed as storytellers. But I think if you watch it again you will see that we make this point very clear. As for your other issues, Frankie (the social worker) is not married and leaves her *beep* of a boy friend once she learns that he cheated on her. Also, she never was in the hospital...it was her artist friend that was shot in the drive-by. I confess that this plot line is ham fisted but I now have 20 years of perspective to see that it could have been handled in a more elegant way, but remember, drive-bys were very real in those days and very scary to all of us who abhor violence. I don't think I can change your mind about this film but to the filmmakers this is a story about the follies of youth, narcissism, and friendships. We are proud of how it came out because we know what was in our hearts and how hard we struggled to make it. We don't expect everyone to love it but we do expect a fair reading of the film without being accused of biases that we never possessed. Thank you for your response because in the end, outrage is better than silence and it gave me a chance to explore these issues again after all these years. Feel free to respond or not. I hope you find these thoughts helpful.

Matthew

P.S. I have no pets, but my wife and I have 2 wonderful sons, the oldest is 21 and was just a little guy during the making of this film and my wife was pregnant with our youngest during the production.

reply

Thank you, Matthew. I love this film and think it's an underrated gem.

reply

I know this might sound completely stupid, especially to the few, but very vocal detractors of the film, but the filmmakers of WHEN THE PARTY'S OVER are batting around the idea of doing a sequel to the film, twenty years later, using the same, albeit older castmembers. To answer your first question, no we don't think Sandra will be in the film, but we will write her a small part and maybe, just maybe, we can convince her to give us a few days which would be really cool. When we first made the film, the idea that I wanted to explore was no matter how old you are at the time (at the time I was in my early 30's) when you look in the mirror you still see someone who feels like they felt when they were 18. But with the onset of young adulthood, it was necessary to push back those youthful ways and grow up and into the waiting world of adulthood. Now that I'm in my mid 50's, I wonder if I have any better perspective on life and what does this perspective allow us to say about these characters we first portrayed in WTPO. Added to that the idea of seeing actors portray the same characters 20 years later, which I can't say I have ever seen before, makes me think that this might be a really cool project to undertake.

What do you think...is this a valid undertaking or just a waste of time. Thanks for your responses.

Matthew

reply

Hi Matthew, Just wanted to say that this is the first time on IMDB where I've seen a director/producer reply to a poster's critique of a film. Very thoughtful response from you. It's too bad they never came back to reply.

Is a sequel still in the works?

reply

A sequel with Sandra Bullock? There's a better chance that Sandra Bullock would pay you to make this disappear.

I'll take Punctuality

reply

I caught the vanishing end of this film the other night on EPIX3, about a minute before the credits began to roll, and I'm just asking if the young woman driving alone into the Big City was Elizabeth Berridge's character? I've enjoyed her work all the way back to THE FUNHOUSE and find her to be a criminally underappreciated performer. Plus, she's cute as a button.

Don't take this the wrong way, but I'm sort of glad to have missed Rae's rape scenes. It's probably the antebellum chauvinism, I know, but I really really don't care for rape depictions even in fictional pieces. But that's my problem, not yours. Steve V.

reply

Yes it was Elizabeth Berridge - and I can tell you that the rape scene is intense because what is not scene rather than what is.

reply

Thanks. I'll keep an eye open for the film in the future.

You make me envious. I've had several novels optioned, but nothing's made it as far as the screen. Keep up the good work. Steve V.

reply

OP's criticism is completely valid

I'll take Punctuality

reply

Well, The OP is right about onr thing, this film was/is atrocious. It was a commercial and critical disaster. I'm sure this is a film Sandra Bullock wishes would disappear. It was a probable career for Rae Dawn Chong, who never got a major role after this.

reply

I didnt' see the racial aspect of that portrayal. I just think the characters were just boring and unlikable. I can handle unlikable, but boring is inexcusable. Maybe if I caught it early in the 90s, I would not have hated it as much. But with much better indie movies that followed this movie in the 90s, there is absolutely no reason for this movie to have a sequel.

I hate to burst the bubble of the director because he seems really earnest, but there is absolutely no way Sandra Bullock would do this sequel. About as much chance of her doing a Fire on the Amazon sequel.

Movies like Dazed and Confused or a Whit Stillman movie made around the same time period seemed to have aged a lot better.

Thisa movie actually has more of a TV mvie than an early 90s indie movie feel.

reply

Yeah, not much point in a sequel, when nobody knows the original exists. Would the original ever have been seen had not Bullock become a star?

Fire on the Amazon, LMAO!

"For dark is the suede that mows like a harvest"

reply

Shame on you!!!! Your name should be "dirt BAG" instead of dirtbunny. I can't believe that you would write something like that. Of course, when you're hiding behind a name on a computer, I guess this is what happens.

I Love....ME!!!!

reply

Shame on you!!!! Your name should be "dirt BAG" instead of dirtbunny. I can't believe that you would write something like that. Of course, when you're hiding behind a name on a computer, I guess this is what happens.


Agreed, that was a disgusting and very offensive reply.

reply

[deleted]

There are so many things wrong with your post that I can't even and begin to explain. Did you watch the movie? I guess will just mention a few things ...
That couple was not married they were engaged.
Sandra not only pay for her rent paid for her friends rent.
friend came up to MJ when she was crying at the end of tried to comfort her.
MJ was sleeping with her supposed friends boyfriend and he was a total jerk to both of them.
Sandra comfort of her afterwards they all did
The girl was never in the hospital her friend Mario was the one who died

reply