Metropolitan (1990) Reviews

Metropolitan (1990)
Member Rating:  
The debut film from writer-director Whit Stillman etches a sophisticated comic portrait of New York debutante society at the twilight of the 1980s. Set during the Christmas season, the film is told from the vantage point of Tom Townsend (Edward Clements), a self-professed proletarian radical who stumbles into the social sphere of a group of well-off Upper East Side twentysomethings calling themselves the SFRP (or Sally Fowler Rat Pack, named in honor of a frequent party hostess). The group includes Nick (Christopher Eigeman), an acidic misanthrope; sweet-natured Jane Austen acolyte Audrey (Carolyn Farina); Charlie (Taylor Nichols), a tongue-tied bumbler secretly in love with Audrey; and femme fatale Cynthia (Isabel Gillies). Quickly, Tom, who comes from much more humble beginnings, finds himself caught in the middle of the group. Audrey even develops a crush on him, but Tom is still reeling from a broken relationship with renowned man-eater Serena (Elizabeth Thompson), a peripheral member of the SFRP. It all leads to a romantic climax at the Southampton vacation home of Nick's womanizing arch-enemy Rick von Sloneker (Will Kempe). ~ Jason Ankeny, Rovi

 Read More


Starring:
Carolyn Farina, Edward Clements, (more)
Director(s):
Whit Stillman
Theatrical MPAA Rating:
PG13
Format(s):
DVD  |  Blu-ray
View All Versions to rent and buy
 
 
 
 
 
 

Average Ratings

(17 member reviews)  

Member Reviews

Michael G.

If you like Woody Allen, you'll probably like this movie too. It has the same kind of dialogue and cinematography as many of his later classics. The movie is cuttingly accurate in its portrayal of young upper-class debutante Manhattanites in the mid-80's, yet it has a good heart (and a lot of good performances). It seems to me like "The Graduate" of the 80's. I just rented it on a whim, but was glad that I did.

Yes   |   No


Paul S.

I love cleverly written dialog-intensive character studies about New York City as seen through the eyes of its disparate socio-economic groups. This movie has a Woody-Allen-esque quality that I find irresistible.

Yes   |   No


Neil W.

Not nearly as clever as it thinks it is nor as it would like to be. It tries too hard and fails. The poor script is equalled by the terrible acting and awful editing. It truly reminded me of a high school media class project. The film wants to be heavy in subject matter but is only trifling and uninteresting. The film introduces themes of emotion, but fails to develop them whatsoever, thereby leaving it void of any emotional element. There are a very, very few good moments that in the hands of a good director and good actors will have been acceptable in a good film.

Yes   |   No


Margo P.

This movie was just okay. I was waiting and waiting for the movie to "go somewhere" but I feel that it never really did. There was a lot of irony and it seemed like the writer/director was trying to make a big point, which, ultimately he did make his point, I just didn't think it was all that big. Maybe back in the day I would have enjoyed it more, but today it felt lacking. I'd like to see more recent movies by Whit Stillman because I think, based on this movie, he could develop into a good writer/director with a little more edge and/or depth to his work.

Yes   |   No


Harold W.

An unambitious effort that lives down to its expectations or a brilliantly witty exploration of upper-class post-adolescent angst. Take your pick. I think your mood when watching will determine your reaction. I happened to be in a light-hearted frame of mind and liked the quirkiness of the dialogue and the characters reaction to each other. I didn't see the Woody Allen comparisons others did. I wouldn't recommend Allen fans rent it because they expected his insights and humore.

Yes   |   No


Jerry and Aletha L.

boring & ridiculous!

Yes   |   No


Karen G.

Excellent portrayal of the Upper East Side!

Yes   |   No


DISCO M.

Not impressed, whole movie is dialogue of the protagonist pining for puppy love with humor staler than the cigarette smoke. Best character is absent from the 3rd act, but he and you don't miss anything. Truly uninspired student film that is lackluster in every way.

Yes   |   No


Barbara H.

...dull, lackluster. Seen it in other forms, better done. In my youth I might have found this amusing; at midage, the angst is old and dialog boring. Don't bother.

Yes   |   No


Sandy L.

I did not care for this movie. I found it tedious, and boring. Don't bother !!

Yes   |   No


 
 
 

BY MAIL

Monthly Subscription
NEW! 7 - Day Rental
No subscription required. Usually ships in 24 hours.
 
Buy New  $30.99
 

IN-STORE

 

What's Your Take?

Add to FavoritesIn Favorites  |  Share:     Email to a friendShare on FacebookShare on Twitter
    YOUR REVIEW
    WRITE A REVIEW
     
    1000 
     
    Member Reviews
    Read all (17)
     
    Michael G.

    If you like Woody Allen, you'll probably like this movie too. It has the same kind of dialogue and cinematography as many of his later classics. The movie is cuttingly accurate in its portrayal of young upper-class debutante Manhattanites in the mid-80's, yet it has a good heart (and a lot of good performances). It seems to me like "The Graduate" of the 80's. I just rented it on a whim, but was glad that I did.

    Yes   |   No

     
    Paul S.

    I love cleverly written dialog-intensive character studies about New York City as seen through the eyes of its disparate socio-economic groups. This movie has a Woody-Allen-esque quality that I find irresistible.

    Yes   |   No

     
    Neil W.

    Not nearly as clever as it thinks it is nor as it would like to be. It tries too hard and fails. The poor script is equalled by the terrible acting and awful editing. It truly reminded me of a high school media class project. The film wants to be heavy in subject matter but is only trifling and uninteresting. The film introduces themes of emotion, but fails to develop them whatsoever, thereby leaving it void of any emotional element. There are a very, very few good moments that in the hands of a good director and good actors will have been acceptable in a good film.

    Yes   |   No

     
    Read All 17 Reviews
       

      Quick Links

      Email Exclusives

      Find Us Online: BLOCKBUSTER Blog - BLOCKBUSTER Widgets - BLOCKBUSTER RSS FEED - BLOCKBUSTER Facebook Page - BLOCKBUSTER Twitter Page - BLOCKBUSTER Wiki

      FIND MOVIES

      ALL MOVIES

      Popular | # | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

      ALL ACTORS AND DIRECTORS

      Popular | # | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

      BLOCKBUSTER CORPORATE

       

      BLOCKBUSTER name, design and related marks are trademarks of Blockbuster L.L.C. © 2012 Blockbuster L.L.C. All rights reserved.

      Portions of Content Provided by Rovi Corporation. © 2012 Rovi Corporation.