Head Over Heels

Audience Reviews

View More

Harry S Aug 27, 2018 Simply awful, total CRAP-FEST...figurative and literal. Skip it. But if you must know, perhaps in order to learn how NOT to write, produce, direct, and cast a silly, gross rom-com for pre-pubescent girls, here's your chance. Though filmed in 2001, it feels like 1980's CHEESE somehow (writer, director influence?). Why young, straight men with thin wallets and cheap suits would methodically lose their minds over tranny-looking, materialistic, learning disabled, egocentric, parasitical "models" is just plain silly (with waiting lists to interact, of course). However, these particular models could easily turn away mature, wealthy sugar-daddies like "Big" from TV's Sex and the City. Sure. They. Could. Professional models from that time period should be offended. Within minutes, you'll suffer from the atrocious content and delivery of dialogue, including one too many "jokes" about male dog humping, child molestation and pedo-lust, esp. in the Australian outback. Apparently the FOUR adult men who wrote, and the one who directed, this female-centric humdinger are desperately imagining what young girls want in a rom-com. First, with NO LESS than five men creatively working on this movie, they managed to title it "Head Over Heels" when there is nary a reference to it. Perhaps they meant brains (head) over beauty (heels) with the whole models versus art restorer, but all the young ladies were inanely helpless in their own way. A title of "Weak in the Knees" would have made more sense, since this problem was portrayed ad nauseam. The acting is like a high school play, the main actress appears too "maternal" next to the miscast "professional" male lead who looks to be a college boy. Saving grace: one of the writers had a deep moment, so the male character uses an asthma inhaler, so as to be flawed...OR pulmonary disorders are funny to address during action scenes? In the end, somebody cast two leads who inspire an odd-couple with "ick" factor, along the lines of brother and sister shenanigans...but then they kiss/have sex with absolutely no chemistry or sweat. While there's no revealing nudity, the fake heavy breathing does what it can on the sofa or when weak in the knees. The overly moody, weepy, bumbling, stuttering, supposedly intelligent art-restorer is ridiculous and completely helpless until the end. She's likened to three little, old ladies coworkers who apparently have no life, or no one to love, outside of the art and their cats...so she's supposedly doomed without things like artificially enhanced beauty, superficial relationships with either gender, and lots of attention to your own needs. Like a junior high girl's idea of the "grown-up" world. The ridiculous plot is further enhanced by senseless, misplaced TOILET humor....literal poop, farts, and all. Yes, juvenile and gross. Inexplicably, the music generally made the visuals feel even more disingenuous. Unless you're a 12-year-old girl, this film will seem beyond juvenile, but fairly harmless in its fake world of romantic art, goofy spies/commies, romantic boys trying to be men, cheer-section roommates, gross-out gags & dirty jokes, and the "grown-up" world of adults that seems campy. The movie's stereotyped, masculine, dumb-as-rocks models - that inadvertently become heroes, of course - are the last bastion of what every girl was shown a supermodel could be (minus anorexia & heroin use in this PG-13) ...before those somewhat unfair stereotypes were wiped out when real-world "models" finally found expression ad refuge on Instagram with the other millions (aka: unemployed narcissists with duck-lips). Quack! See more

Albus R Sep 15, 2017 As far as to address the Critics Consensus, I didn't think it was a huge mess, I didn't think the plot or jokes were idiotic, and I didn't think the toilet humor was gratuitous, or more gross than funny. There are two scenes that could be considered "gross", but only because they take place in the bathroom. It wasn't too much that it was gross to me, though, and then I also found it them funny! But, this is a pretty good movie, at least I think! It's from the director of Mean Girls, and the Freaky Friday remake! I thought this was pretty well directed, and that he did the jokes well. I thought it was pretty funny too, with a few laugh out loud scenes. I thought Freddie Prinze Jr. gave one of his best performances! I'm not gonna going to say anything else, to keep this review short. But, I will say, that by the end, I was loving it, and seeing a huge amount of re-watch value! I'd recommend this to most anyone, but specifics could include fans of Mark Waters' work, or Freddie Prinze Jr. fans! I had a third/kinda kind of fourth specific, but it was a an unspecific one/ones, and just a joke! See more

Ron M Sep 13, 2017 Don't know why they would make a film so bad

Luke L Sep 3, 2017 A romantic comedy with a Hitchcockian twist. This premise sound interesting and truly should be, but unfortunately, it wastes its time on toilet humor which is far grosser than it is funny. Monica Potter is an art curator who move into an apartment full of models with a view to an attractive businessman (Freddie Prinze, Jr.) who Potter spies on throughout the day and eventually sees something highly questionable. She and her model roommates try to solve the mystery surrounding Prinze with ill-timed pratfalls and ridiculous scenarios. It's too bad because Potter and Prinze are very charming and the fact that they were given roles that seemed tailor-suited to them makes it all that much more disappointing to see it wasted in such an egregious fashion. See more

Abraham P Jun 2, 2017 Cute movie! If you don't take this movie too serious it's a good movie. It's ridiculous at times, but very charming.

Read all reviews

Head Over Heels

My Rating

Read More Read Less WRITE A REVIEW EDIT REVIEW POST RATING