Absolutely the worst movie.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

..sure, when you're that unhappy in your marriage start screwing the husband of your best friends... it'll work out in the end for sure... in all the dialogue of this intensely worded production, the final couple lines say it all... "... why would you do it... because I can"... add it all up and these four admirable actors have been in a host of films.. they are all without doubt among the best in their profession.. here's a film that according to numbers on the IMDb site barely made two million dollars (says it est cost to make to be three million).. yet there are many movies on the subject don't nearly do it a fraction as well as this one... ten, twenty years plus.. it won't loose a thing

The boring and empty lives of two couples, two college professors and their wives, the two men being best friends. In this dreary mess, none of the 4 can offer much in terms of either personality, charm, and certainly not in character or values. All have children, who they pretend to value, BUT (big spoiler here) maybe tossing a son and daughter in a rocky river could bring clarity.The film TRIES to show the difference between making love and having a f..k; but since these four losers don't know the difference....... there are a couple of halfway good sex scenes (and both women are nicely slender) but then they get into Hollywood's latest fad of slam-the-girl-against-a-wall-and-do-it-FAST which is supposedly the "good" sex part. What nitwits!Finally, sometimes show business empty-heads who know 95% less than the dumbest moviegoer, open their fat mouths and put their foot in it to portray a permanent negative image. I can lo longer look at Sheryl Crow without thinking about her "one piece of toilet tissue per person" rant, now Mr Ruffolo has ruined it for me regarding his view about who men ought have sex with. Naomi or Laura? Neither! How about Bruce and Kevin. Now that's the ticket. Parents? Best thing: two lesbians. Hey, Mark, my Dad did just great (God rest his soul) and my Mom had no desire to marry the woman across the street.Waste time on these fools -- or believe the jerks who input positive reviews -- and suffer the consequences.One last jab: Ruffole ought go back to the Bronx from which he came, try 209th and Grand Concourse, and preach his lesbian parents thing; just see what happens, pal.

This Larry Gross screenplay, adapted from two short stories by Andre Dubus, is all laid out for us like one bad novel. Two couples in a woodsy small town, ostensibly friends who share many times together, are seen to have cracks under their smiling facade: Mark Ruffalo and Laura Dern play a scruffy teacher and his scrappy, short-sighted wife who start bickering the minute company leaves; Peter Krause and Naomi Watts are the soulless marrieds who've stopped loving each other a long time ago, a fact reflected in their daughter's vacant sullenness. Despite droning dialogue which gets us (and the characters on-screen) absolutely nowhere, director John Curran has a very keen eye for detail, and some of the best moments in the movie are purely visual (Curran is helped by a sharp editor, who juices the monotonous scenario with flickers of thought and bits of different business all happening at once). Ruffalo (who was one of the producers on the film, as was Watts) gives us lots of shots of his hairy chest and photogenic faraway stare (implying that he's a struggling sensitive), but his character is nearly impossible to reach--it's no wonder Dern is so angry with him! Dern has the movie's worst dialogue (such as a caveat about sitting alone in a bar frequented by bag ladies), and she keeps getting in everyone's face, however she's a spark plug for drama and the movie would flag without her. Krause and Watts seem victimized by their own adultery and don't even have the passion to fight any longer, but his needling of others is interesting (I would have preferred a few scenes between he and Dern alone--their moments are kept completely off-screen). The film is fairly tasteful and involving, but I'm not sure how truthful it is, and the symbolism of the trains constantly passing through town are heavy handed reminders that we're all just passing through--presumably a leftover from the literary sources. ** from ****

How many times has this theme been re-worked over and over. I was expecting something halfway decent from the ratings at IMDb and a pretty decent cast: Peter Krause, Mark Ruffalo, Laura Dern and Naomi Watts.The same beaten up old story of spouse swapping. Desperately unhappy people living together with no backstory as to how they got to be so dissatisfied with their lot. Cute backdrop of children. Ongoing and incessant shots of a train, so much so I kept waiting for one of the stars to splat off the front end. No such luck.Males are two selfish professors, women are housewives - I think, it is never clear.Laura Dern looks as if she should creak when she walks, all her bones are visible and her face keeps morphing into a rictus of death. Someone please feed her.Peter just about phoned his performance in and Mark bumbles along in an agony of guilt. Naomi is about the most alert of the bunch.The train keeps roaring through the level crossing. It is the most lively character in this whole sorry mess.2 out of 10.