At first it's hard to tell what the two stories in this trailer have to do with each other: Stephen Rea is depressed and having trouble filling out some paperwork somewhere (unemployment department, maybe?). Mena Suvari has been named captain of the nurse's assistants at her job, and goes out partying to celebrate the promotion. The two strands have nothing at all to do with each other, until she hits him with her car on the way home after taking some pills and probably also drinking. That's what you get for celebrating, Mena! It looks like she drives her car the rest of the way home with him on the hood, and then hides the bloody mess in her garage. He's alive and asking for help. She's sorry, but not sorry enough to take him to a hospital or to even admit that she did anything wrong. Instead, she tells him it's his fault. He should have watched where he was going. Which ... sort of true, but she should have too. Drivers are usually blamed, after all, when they hit pedestrians, regardless of the circumstances. She inexplicably goes crazy and asks him, "Why are you doing this to me?" As if he wanted to be hit by a car and stuck in her windshield. It looks like she's calling someone for help, but it's not in the way you're thinking. She's looking for someone to help her kill and dispose of poor Stephen Rea. Meanwhile, she's getting yelled at at work for not being responsible. I'm guessing her boss doesn't know the half of it. It looks like maybe Stephen gets away and then almost gets hit by a truck. We end with Stephen saying, "This hasn't been a good day for me." Heh. That's the understatement of all time, but at least it provides some levity to a very confusing trailer.

Reviews By People Who've Actually Seen It:
Variety
Rotten Tomatoes

How is it possible that, after so many years of fame, Liv Tyler still has the same sweet, doe-eyed look of innocence that she had more than a decade ago? Whatever it is she's doing, it's working for her. And that innocence helps sell the fear in The Strangers, another "inspired by true events" horror film, which ... it just keeps getting more and more unsettling to live in the world, don't you think? Liv Tyler and her fiancée, Scott Speedman, live in a scary, dark farmhouse with a creaky swing set. They're happy and in love (there are rose petals and champagne, so you know this is the case). No sooner does he present her with a ring than the creepiness begins, with a loud bang followed by the creaking of the swings. The winsome lovers tell themselves it's nothing, but because this is a scary movie, we know they're fooling themselves. Speedman starts to worry since they haven't heard anything: not so much as a dog bark or a car passing by. Then we see Liv standing in the kitchen unaware that a guy with a white mask looking very much like a Gentleman is standing behind her, gazing at her in silence. It would be scarier if it weren't completely ridiculous-looking. Liv cries to Scott that there's someone out there and then we confirm it by seeing a woman in the same sort of white mask lurking in the garage. Then another one in the street. Of course, Scott hasn't seen one yet, so he remains a firm skeptic. Then a record starts playing on its own, Scott's cell phone ends up in the fire, a window is covered with the word "hello" (written in, I don't know ... lipstick?), and he decides they have to get out of that place. I'm more than a little annoyed it took them this long, but I've never been in a scary movie, so who am I to judge? Just as they're about to leave, an axe breaks through their door. It's always right when they wise up that the bad stuff starts to happen. We end with the three masked figures standing in the living room in front of Liv and Scott, who are sitting on the couch. I can't tell if it's supposed to scare me or look like a weird costume party, but then we hear Liv ask, "Why are you doing this to us?" and a girl replies, "Because you were home." Ok, so now we know there isn't a reason. Which gives us no reason to bother going to see it.

Reviews by People Who've Actually Seen It:
Variety
Rotten Tomatoes

This comedy about a macho, arrogant tae kwon do instructor hilariously speaks for itself, with lines like, "Your weakness is disgusting to me"; "Try harder" (spoken to a kid who tells the instructor he's trying); and, in response to "I hear jujitsu's really good for balance": "No, jujitsu sucks." In other words, if you like this type of comedy, you're going to love it. Unfortunately, though, the movie is released by Will Ferrell and Adam McKay's production company, and they couldn't let it speak for themselves. Instead, we get the comedy bits sprinkled among voiceover guy reading on-screen type (because just one or the other clearly wasn't enough for us to get it) that tells us how much Ferrell and McKay love this movie: They've watched it at least 20 times, they quote it, they obsess over it, and they want to share it. Okay, Will and Adam, share it then, but you don't have to use yourselves to sell it. I get that there's a market out there for people who love Will Ferrell, but some people who like their comedy a little smarter than that might have found this trailer compelling if it hadn't been for those two being thrown in our faces as if they had anything to do with making this movie. (Note: They didn't. They just have the money and clout to get it released.)

Reviews By People Who've Actually Seen It:
Variety
Rotten Tomatoes

This trailer starts with a life lesson from Julianne Moore's character, who tells her son that, basically, some people's parents have to work, but they are lucky because they don't. This is an important lesson for a child, of course. It's the little-known, "Don't bother having a work ethic" lesson that you don't read about often in parenting books, but that comes in quite handy if you're filthy rich. This is apparently a true story about Barbara Daly (Moore), who married way above her class -- where she clearly fit right in, but I digress. Julianne Moore is going for another Oscar nomination here and she'll probably get it. She plays a crazy woman, who -- after her marriage fails -- seems to spend the rest of the movie ruining her son's life. She says mean, terrible things to him about the fact that he's gay, that he has emotional issues, that he still loves his father. But, at the same time, she makes him rely on her and makes him think she's relying on him. It looks like just the sort of sick, twisted, slightly (or more) incestuous performance that might actually get her the Oscar win this time.

Reviews by People Who've Actually Seen It:
Variety
Rotten Tomatoes

This is apparently a documentary about a guy who was against steroids, but then he found out that all of his heroes -- Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone, Hulk Hogan -- used them, and the presumption is that our film subject then started using them too. Honestly, though, if those guys are your heroes, there might be a bigger problem than steroid use, such as brain malfunction or lack of judgment. The narrator says, "I can't imagine how my mom would feel if she found out that both of my brothers are on steroids." And, unless your mom lives in a hole somewhere, I'm pretty sure she'll find out when she watches this documentary about their steroid use. The documentary appears to follow the three brothers, but also talks to professional athletes, wrestlers, and even shows us a cow that's on steroids. We hear the president discount performance-enhancing drugs and an Olympic coach laugh when asked if there was steroid use when he coached at the Olympics. It then sort of focuses on Arnold and his contribution -- in the form of his massive muscles -- to the proliferation of steroids, and then on the government's apparent refusal to do anything about it. It looks like it's trying to fit too much in to make any kind of coherent film, but then I might go into it with a biased perspective, because this isn't something I would ever in my life desire to watch a movie about. I don't have much sympathy for anyone who takes steroids, and it's hard for me to care that much if they do when there are so many bigger problems in the world.

Reviews by People Who've Actually Seen It:
Variety
Rotten Tomatoes

The trailer starts, appropriately enough, with shiny, shiny New York City at night. Then Carrie asks Mr. Big -- or should I say "John"? -- for a kiss. Her last single girl kiss. There's our first clue that the movie has a Carrie-Big wedding in the works. Because, you know, the way to return to the ultimate show about single women is with a movie about a wedding. Way to keep fans believing that it's okay to be a single woman in this world. Then we see Carrie and her girls. And Charlotte reading from a wedding announcement about "ultimate single girl" Carrie Bradshaw marrying John James Preston (I'm not kidding. They really did give him three first names). "John" then asks Carrie if "we" should get "you" a diamond. She says, no, just a really big closet. The last time she was unsure about an engagement ring, she ended up not marrying Aidan (the right choice, in case you were wondering which guy I wanted her to end up with). Carrie's narration tells us that she assumed that if she and her friends got their fairytale endings, it would be the end of the story. By fairytale endings, she apparently means being in a relationship, because the montage that shows while she says this is: Charlotte, Harry, and their daughter on a merry-go-round; Samantha and Smith; Miranda, Steve, and Brady playing on their deck; Carrie and "John" looking at a huge apartment. Carrie and "John" bicker about the wedding, though, right as voiceover Carrie says "But real life ... always has a twist." We get to see her in a perfectly wonderful wedding dress, but then we see a cell phone drop on said dress and perhaps all is not right with the fairytale ending. From there, Carrie apparently dyes her hair brown, hires Jennifer Hudson as her personal assistant, and continues hanging out with the ladies. Meanwhile, Steve apologizes to Miranda, saying it meant nothing to him (and, if he cheated, I will kill this movie. KILL it, I tell you), Samantha continues to be a huge cliche (she believes in botox, not marriage, see? Because the two are related in...no way that I can think of) and Charlotte's pregnant. There will be happiness and sadness, it looks like, but the moral of the story will be that these friends are family, and will stick together through it all. It's a winning formula for this Sex and the City, so I suggest it stick to that.

Reviews by People Who've Actually Seen It:
Variety
Rotten Tomatoes
Everybody else...

The first thing this trailer tells us is that the movie was Germany's official selection for the foreign language film Oscar. It says nothing about it having been nominated, though, so we at least know there were five films in the world that the Academy deemed better than it. We then find out it's from the director of Head-On, which probably means something to a miniscule segment of the population, but apparently they'll take what they can get on this one as far as selling points. Next, we get to know that it won best screenplay at Cannes and at the European Film Awards. All of this is intercut with scenes that mean very little and are loosely connected: a train tunnel, a pretty girl with a piercing stare, two girls talking at a diner. And then we get a lot of confusing, seemingly unconnected scenes. One of the ladies in the diner is from Istanbul. Some police do something. An old guy is there. There are lots of guns and crime, but also lots of normal stuff like introducing someone to your mother. There's applause, riots, dancing, people holding hands in what looks like a stark hospital room. People sitting on a bus. Someone telling someone in jail that they want to help them. Someone looking for their mother. It's all very confusing and unclear, but either the gritty quality of the film or the Turkish music makes me want to watch it despite having no clue what it's about.

Reviews by People Who've Actually Seen It:
Variety
Rotten Tomatoes

Jonathan Rhys Meyers takes a break from playing the young, hot version of King Henry VIII to appear alongside Radha Mitchell, Chow Yun-Fat and Michelle Yeoh in The Children of Huang Shi, which looks like a sure bet for awards consideration. It's set in China in 1937, and Rhys Meyers plays a journalist looking for a story. But he commits the ultimate sin in journalism and gets attached, finding there are things more important than telling the story. You know, like actually helping people. It's based on the true story of George Hogg, who helped save children during Japan's occupation of China. The trailer has a cheesy tag about the kids Hogg saves: "War made them orphans. Love made them legends." But none of the actual scenes from the movie look like they wade too far into the schmaltz. And, if it ends up being worse than it looks, at least you have four lovely lead actors to gaze at. Either way, you win.

Reviews by People Who've Actually Seen It:
Rotten Tomatoes
Variety

Yet another movie about the Middle East ("Turaqistan"? Really?), but this one's a comedy. And it stars both Cusacks, which always used to mean the movie would be at least a little charming. But then Dan Aykroyd appears, and things go decidedly downhill. Because, have you ever liked Dan Aykroyd? Even in movies that I liked that he was in, I've never really liked him. After all, he is to blame for the Stay Puft marshmallow man. I guess that's actually a good thing, but I still didn't like his character all that much. Anyway, I digress. Back to War, Inc.: Aykroyd sends John Cusack to Turaqistan under cover as a "trade show producer." He is greeted by Joan Cusack (clearly not his sister in this movie), who is working to radically Americanize Turaqistan. She's trying to democratize the country in all the wrong ways (creating a Britney-type pop star, for example, played by Hilary Duff), of course, completely befuddling poor, perpetually confused Marisa Tomei, who appears to be helping John Cusack with something. It all looks silly and mostly stupid, and then Ben Kingsley shows up and makes me wonder if he just wandered onto the wrong movie set one day. Is he old enough that that's excusable? I certainly hope he wasn't in this movie on purpose. It's no Ghandi. It's not even House of Sand and Fog.

Reviews by People Who've Actually Seen It:
Rotten Tomatoes
Variety

This one is less indie than what you'd usually consider indie, particularly since director Uwe Boll has been all the buzz around the internet lately. Plus, it stars Dave Foley. And Vern Troyer. I find it difficult to take seriously any movie that stars Mini-Me, on principle. It's really not clever to use a line from Brokeback Mountain that was tired the first time someone used it in any context other than discussing the movie (side rant: Don't you hate when there is a lovely moment in a film, like that moment in Brokeback and it's ruined by the endless overuse/making fun?). But Postal is important. It's about taking down Osama bin Laden, after all. Except the conceit here is that Dave Foley, Vern Troyer and a bunch of bikini-clad blondes are the ones for the job. Yeah, I think I'd actually put my money on Morgan Spurlock over this group. While I'm at it, I'd rather spend my money on Spurlock's film than on this dreck, too.

Reviews by People Who've Actually Seen It:
Rotten Tomatoes
Variety

You would have to be from another planet to have missed the three trailers and numerous TV spots for the latest installment of Indy -- and I would wager even life on other planets has heard of this one, actually. There's the first, and arguably best, trailer that hearkens back to the first three movies and spends its time on the iconic imagery and action that makes Indiana Jones who he is (that hat; the bullwhip). It gives us enough of a taste of the new film (Shia LaBeouf and Cate Blanchett) to leave us wanting to go without spoiling even a little bit of anything. Then the second trailer gave us more insight into this movie, explaining what the mission is: Indy's after the "crystal skull," "supposedly made out of solid gold." I don't know if it's just me, but how can a skull -- or anything else -- be "crystal" and "solid gold"? Oh, who cares about facts? This is Indiana Jones. We also learn here that Cate asks (or forces, at swordpoint) for Indy to help her find the skull. She appears to be a bad guy, though, so I'm guessing Indy's not going to work with her. Indy spends lots of time protecting/mentoring Shia and even more time doing fun and crazy action sequences that only Harrison Ford can pull off, even in his 60s apparently. Trailer three, then, is a mishmash of the first two: It gives us backstory and iconic images, but also fills us in on what this one's about and gives us a small glimpse of the film. Blanchett is sporting a sort of ludicrous Russian accent and there are the usual unbelievable special effects, but if you aren't excited about this movie, you might want to check your pulse. Because it's been 20 years since we've had Indy and it's likely this will be the last time we get to see him, at last played by Harrison Ford. I mean, nothing against the guy, but he can't keep doing this into his 80s, can he?

Reviews By People Who've Actually Seen It:
Variety
Entertainment Weekly
Rotten Tomatoes
Ain't It Cool News

Almost everything looks amazing in this second film based on the C.S. Lewis classics: The settings are lovely and pristine, using effects when necessary to enhance. The action and visual effects (water monster, anyone?) are stunning. The young actors are still perfect in their doe-eyed innocence. It's magical and wonderful and will draw you in right away. There's just one problem, then: Who is this boring guy they cast to play Prince Caspian? I would have hoped the film's namesake would have a more memorable on-screen presence (really, I forgot about him even before he was off of my screen; he was so boring compared to the rest of it). To be fair, he's only on-screen for about 15 seconds in the entire trailer (those 15 seconds are horrendous, but still). But, again, he's the namesake. If he's not around, there must be a reason, right? Either he's just really as terrible as those moments make him look (with the bad acting, overly serious line reading, etc.), or -- and I do hope this is the case -- they don't want to reveal too much to viewers in the trailer, and instead want to surprise us without how great he is. This is a big-budget, mainstream Hollywood flick based on a well-known book, though; I'd be shocked if they were trying to maintain any mystery at all in the trailer. That said, I'm holding out hope they are and that he'll blow me away, because this film isn't the last we'll see of the character, so I'd rather not hate him.

Reviews By People Who've Actually Seen It:
Variety
Rotten Tomatoes

The trailer for Reprise is like two trailers in one: The first half succeeds at making a literary Norwegian film look quite rock 'n' roll, and the second half turns tragic. What I can gather is that two friends both submit manuscripts, and one gets published. That's obviously good news and they both party, with pretty ladies and anyone else up for it. Until it looks like the friend who didn't get published punches the other one in the face and then ... seems to want to kill himself. I get that it can be tough watching someone else succeed if you are falling on hard times, but this guy might be taking it a bit far. But he does luck out and seems to make it all -- the movie, the story -- about him. So, in at least one way, he bests the successful writer, right? (By the way, there are various trailers floating around for this film, and I went with the one on the official movie site, because I figured it was most likely to be what Miramax wants U.S. viewers to judge the movie on; this one, though, tells a lot more of the story. Apparently, Miramax doesn't want us to know that much, though, so I'll spare you the details.)

Reviews By People Who've Actually Seen It:
Variety
Rotten Tomatoes

This trailer took a little digging for me to find -- at least in an English version -- because the movie originally was called Padre Nuestro (Our Father). The change to Sangre de mi Sangre (Blood of my Blood) seems to be a better fit, judging by the trailer. A title like Our Father might make one think this is a feel-good family film about siblings, or a film with religious connotations. Neither one would be accurate. Blood of my Blood fits better, then, because what really happens is that two young men meet while heading from Mexico to New York City. One of the men, Pedro, is looking for his father. It's unclear what the other man, Juan, is after, but he quickly changes his mind and goes after Pedro's father, pretending to be Pedro, in order to get money and a live in the U.S. There are glowing quotes from critics peppered throughout the trailer, so you know it has to be good, right? I mean, they can't fake those or anything, can they? This movie definitely looks intense, and tragic. And it's in Spanish, with subtitles (unless, of course, you speak Spanish, and don't need them). And it won Sundance's top award (under its old name, though; this really is more confusing than it should be). You won't be wasting your money then if you pay to see this one at the theater. Good luck finding it, though. Judging by past behavior, don't be surprised if the name changes again before it hits a theater near you.

It's difficult for me to give this trailer an unbiased review because there is a clause in my contract with life that says: "Any movie screened as a luxury on Big Brother is guaranteed to be a waste of your time. It will never be good. Don't even think about seeing it." Yes, the Big Brother houseguests will rave, but these are people who chose to live in a house with a bunch of strangers and no intellectual stimulation for 90 days. So, keep that in mind when you read what I'm about to say about What Happens in Vegas: Ick. Okay, granted, we get a glimpse of Floyd from 30 Rock, Lake Bell and Treat Williams to kick things off. But those are short-lived, and then we're stuck with all Ashton Kutcher and Cameron Diaz all the time. And it's not pleasant. Apparently a very haggard-looking Cameron (seriously; high definition has ruined her for this world) was dumped by her boyfriend (Floyd), and Ashton's dad (Treat) fired him. So, of course, they both head to Vegas. Because ... what else do you do when you're down, right? While in Vegas, they meet, get drunk, hook up and get married. And then, before they part ways, he wins a huge payout at the slots. So, she suddenly wants to stay married to get her half of it. He wants a divorce. In court, judge Dennis Miller sentences them to marriage (because that happens all the time). So Ashton pulls out all the stops to try to get her to leave. He even pees in the sink, which seems to be the latest movie trend (this is not a good thing, I assure you). I'm going to go out on two limbs here: 1. They fall in love, and stay married. 2. This movie is not good.

Reviews by people who have actually seen it:
Variety
Rotten Tomatoes

This movie could be the next indie darling and, just like Juno, it even stars Ellen Page. On the other hand, it could be a huge mess. It's hard to tell from the trailer, because whoever put it together was trying too hard to play on the "fragments" half of the title, so we get a lot of many-times-split-screens with too many things going on to really follow. What we can figure out is that Tracey (Page) is looking for her 9-year-old brother, Sonny, and this leads her to some seriously dark and dangerous places. It's harder to tell how much of this is by choice, and how much of it she's being coerced or even forced into. It might be profound; it's definitely trying to be. Ellen Page is looking more Hard Candy than Juno here, though, so it's sure to be disturbing and might even scar you for life.

Reviews by people who have actually seen it:
Rotten Tomatoes

Are the Wachowski Brothers crazy geniuses, or just plain crazy? Speed Racer is a strong argument for the latter. First of all, this should be a kids' movie (or a movie for people who were kids when the cartoon was popular), but they seem to want us to take it somewhat seriously. It looks like a cartoon -- all bright primary colors -- but they also want us to feel like something big is at stake and Speed Racer's life is at risk or something. But, let's face it: Even if this movie weren't a completely CGI'ed Crayola advertisement, it would still be difficult to take anything seriously that has Emile Hirsch, Susan Sarandon, Matthew Fox and Christina Ricci in such ridiculous wardrobes and haircuts (not to mention some of the lines they have to utter, including Ricci's "Cool beans"). If the movie weren't cartoonish and the characters could be taken more seriously, there would still be the problem of our title character's name. My advice: When you turn a cartoon into a live-action film, maybe you should give your title character a real name so that you don't have to try to make viewers believe that people would actually call him "Speed" or "Speed Racer." I realize that people like Jason Lee name their kids Pilot Inspektor, but people in the non-Hollywood version of the real word are going to have a hard time buying into a guy being called Speed Racer. If you can put the many ridiculous concepts aside, or if you're a hard-core fan of the original Speed Racer, or, especially, if you are on some really good drugs, you're gonna love this.

Reviews by people who have actually seen it:
Variety
Rotten Tomatoes

The protagonist here is a guy (Tim Robbins) obsessed with silencing car alarms -- obsessed to the point of becoming a vigilante who bashes any car that has a car alarm (or is it only cars with alarms currently going off? It's hard to tell from the trailer). He gets arrested, his wife (Bridget Moynahan, a cellist, apparently) gets annoyed, he finds a younger girlfriend who worships his cause, he becomes a sort of hero, annoys the mayor (William Hurt in the ugliest wig in the history of the world; it's very Donald Trump, which begs the question: Why would anyone wear a wig that looks like that?), and basically has a mid-life crisis. I'm sure there is supposed to be a larger point to this movie. It is an indie, after all. But then again, this is a movie about a guy who hates car alarms. Could it really have much of a deeper meaning? Sometimes a stupid film concept is just a stupid concept. And sometimes it's obvious why certain scripts couldn't get money or backing from major studios and so were released as indies. What is less clear in this case is how they got a couple of Oscar winners (Robbins and Hurt) to sign on. If you figure it out, let me know.

Reviews by people who have actually seen it:
Hollywood Reporter
Rotten Tomatoes

We open with a freckled kid shooting a porcelain cat off his friend's head with a bow and arrow. Luckily, he's a good shot and doesn't, you know, shoot his friend in the face or anything. Then Freckles -- clearly the boss in this friendship -- tells the other kid he's making a film and that the friend gets to star in it. Hey, it beats getting shot in the face. Next thing we know, almost-shot-in-the-face friends is yelling into the camera, "I! Am the Son of Rambow!" I have no idea why Rambow is spelled that way other than maybe someone thought, "Well, how can we make it clear this is about kids?! Oh, kids can't spell, right? Let's use that!" Anyway, Freckles is confused: "You want to be the son of Rambow?!" Turns out Son of Rambow is the bad speller in question. It also turns out he's not supposed to be friends with Freckles because of Son of Rambow's religion. If he's friends with Freckles, he'll be in the worst trouble ever. But he's the Son of Rambow, so he throws caution to the wind and shows up at Freckles' house to finish their movie. It's really a dangerous little film. But everyone wants to be in it. Problem is Son of Rambow, whose name is Will, starts to take over and the friends start bickering. From the looks of this trailer, their little film involves Rambow, Son of Rambow, ninjas, rock stars, and lots of other random stuff that kids and teens might put into a self-made film. Lucky for us, their film within a film will probably make this a pretty delightful movie. At least, according to the trailer, every festival in the world seemed to think so.

Reviews by people who've actually seen it:

Variety
Hollywood Reporter
Rotten Tomatoes

Within the first 15 seconds of this trailer, you learn nearly that many things: There's a fight; Pay-Per-View is pulling back on promoting it; tickets aren't selling; Tim Allen's here; so is Joe Mantegna; and a couple of other semi-recognizable types. And then we find out it's a David Mamet film and all of the rest of it starts to make sense. Actually, it continues to not make sense, but now we at least know why it doesn't make sense: Mamet films are not easy to trailerize. It appears the star of the film is Serenity bad guy Chiwetel Ejiofor. He's a fight trainer, who's hard-up. We hear his fight instructions played over his own sorry existence. His rent check bounced as he says "There's always an escape." He gets in a bar fight with Tim Allen as he says, "Put the other guy down." Turns out Tim Allen is a movie star and calls Chiwetel in for a chat. Chiwetel gives his cool idea about fighting with an arm tied up to Tim and Joe, who take the idea and run. Chiwetel sues, using hotshot Emily Mortimer as his attorney. But it's still building, building, building to Chiwetel showing up at their fight to expose them, and take them down. As they try to stop him he says, "There is no situation you cannot escape." Which probably means he's going to fight. Maybe even with one arm tied. But I'm guessing he's still going to beat the slimy older guys.

Reviews by people who've actually seen it:

Rolling Stone
Hollywood Reporter
Rotten Tomatoes

This little indie film is directed by and starring Helen Hunt. And so I wanted to hate it, because I always want to hate when an actor decides to take his or her first stab at directing, and also decides to star in the movie. But this one actually looks decent. The trailer is subtle and revealing in the right ways. Plus, we get Hunt (even if she is playing 39 here, which I'm not buying; and, for the record, neither is IMDb) acting alongside Matthew Broderick (her husband, who leaves her early in the film), Colin Firth (who swoops in to win her over when said husband leaves) and Bette Midler (her birth mother who she gets to know over the course of the film). The gist is that April (Hunt) wants to have a baby, but she's getting older, and then her husband leaves her. She meets Colin Firth right away and really likes him, but then her husband calls and they have a one-night stand ("break-up sex," according to Bette, who is full of inappropriate wisdom for her newly found daughter). Needless to say, April ends up pregnant by the break-up sex, but a reconciliation is not in the cards. She wants to be with Colin. So, it's one of those triangles that is going to pretty much stay that way forever, and it's going to work out cutely and quirkily. Which, I know, that never happens in real life, but at least it's not a totally traditional rom-com, right? Or is it? Maybe they disguised it as an indie and filled it with people like Firth, Broderick and Midler just to fool people like me into seeing it. Well, it worked.

Reviews by people who have actually seen it:
Entertainment Weekly
Hollywood Reporter
Rotten Tomatoes

What a surprise. Patrick Dempsey plays something of a cad in this movie. His name is "Tom," and he has many "girlfriends." Which probably isn't an apt description of what these women are -- they're one-night stands, flings, girls who write their phone numbers on disposable coffee cup sleeves; you know the type. The point is, he can get anyone he wants. Write that down; it will be important later. But Tom also has lots of guy friends. They are "guy friends" because they play basketball with him and they all make fun of -- and find excuses not to play with -- the less-cool guys who come to the gym. It's so nice to see men in movies have evolved past junior high antics like making fun of "tiny shorts guy." Turns out, though, Tom has only one "best friend." A woman, of course. And a pretty one. He can sleep with whomever he wants, but Hannah's his one constant in life. Then she heads to Scotland for six weeks and, as men in romantic comedies often do, he realizes what he could have had only when it's almost too late. So, he hatches a plan to tell her he wants to be with her upon her return to the States. But, of course, she comes back engaged, to Journeyman and Rome star Kevin McKidd. Hannah wants Tom to be her maid of honor, and you know what that means? It's My Best Friend's Wedding all over again, where he tries to be supportive while secretly longing to be with her himself. And the woman is completely clueless apparently, because she goes so far as to have a lingerie fashion show for Tom to help her choose something to wear on her wedding night (yeah, not even Victoria's Secret models do lingerie fashion shows for their friends, regardless of gender). Tom throws Hannah a shower and his meathead "guy friends" think the potpourri is snack mix and eat it. So funny! Except that it's not. Then he's introduced to the priest as the maid of honor and he gets a very conciliatory, "It's okay to be gay" hug. We all know that Dermot Mulroney chose crème brulee over Jell-O in the end of My Best Friend's Wedding, but this one is feeling a little more predictable than that.