Women in Trouble (2009)

Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

One of my all time favorites.

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

What is this movie? It looks like a middle-somewhere episode of an adult TV series. It is not particularly good, but then again, it is watchable, and there are some gloriously beautiful actresses in it, but I have to hold firm and sink it with a low score, because it is such a shambles going nowhere. I only checked out one of the IMDb reviews just now and was surprised to see that it was gloriously positive. This thing has the appearance of being an experimental film, a practice run of filming something without a real script, just loose ideas to see what you can come up with... And then they went and released it. If you are expecting a real story, steer clear. If you wanna see pretty actresses, well, gee, there's one here, that masseuse, she is, like, wow! All I'd ever want for Christmas and I promise to be a good boy forever! Get the picture? BUT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER TO HAVE SEEN THESE PRETTY ACTRESSES IN PROPER MOVIES OR SOAP OPERAS not this junky thing, AND THAT'S MY POINT and I challenge anybody to disagree with this one. I think this has been my most straightforward review of the lot, double quick time, and really, really helpful, you'd better believe it!By the way, released in South Africa as "Sexy Women in Trouble" with a very glamorous poster which fortunately features on the DVD box. Really made it look like The Big Thing at first sight, which is why I am so grumpy about it!

Gugino, Palicki, Britton and Chriqui. Nice! But then, also Isabelle Gutierrez. Oh no. Nepotism deals another blow.Not one, not two, not three, but four terrific-looking, sexy actresses in this one, and that's reason alone to watch almost any movie. After all, who wants to see Meryl Streep, Glenn Close, Kathy Bates and Anjelica Huston in some damn overrated chick-flick-masquerading-as-deep-drama garbage? Not me. I'd rather see Palicki, Britton, Gugino and Chriqui - in just about anything (or preferably out of it).I do have some beef though with the utterly inane casting of Britton's daughter. Does Connie look like she could possibly give birth to THAT? One look at Isabelle and you just know she's a nepotistically infiltrated stink-bomb of the worst kind. The kid can't act to save her chubby, thin-lipped life, and looks more like something that would spring out of the fawlty loins of a Laura Dern or Jennifer Aniston than a freckled beauty like Britton.Isabelle Gutierrez, to be exact. Guess who wrote/directed/produced WIT? Sebastian Gutierrez. Just like an incurable optimist to cast his own daughter/niece/whatever, hoping to launch a huge but unlaunchable Hollywood career. This girl doesn't have a shot in Hell. In order to make it looking like that (and acting like a rank amateur), she'd need to be no less than the love-child of Stevie Spielberg and Oprah Winfrey. That's the only kind of nepotism that would guarantee her a film career. In fact, the result of such an unholy union would guarantee ANYONE a film career, no matter how bad they are or what they look like.Seb, if you're going to make the fatal error of casting your robotic, wooden-faced, non-expressive, apathetic daughter/niece/whatever in a major film, you might at least make an effort in helping her understand that when she plays the young daughter/niece of a badly-wounded film character that she ought to show at least a smidgen of emotion related to having a close family member lying hurt in a hospital. Capito? Isabelle reacts without emotion to having her mother/aunt lying in hospital all banged up, and yet only minutes later the director expects us to get emotionally involved in a scene in which Britton prepares to announce to Isabelle that she is her mother. If Isabelle didn't care about her "former" mother's car-crash then how the Hell will she care about who her real mother is! Duh.Speaking of nepotism, Josh Brolin. Josh Brolin doing an English accent. Need I even mention how horrible he's done it? I just did. Josh Brolin getting knocked off only 5 minutes after his first appearance: now, that was a nice touch. I was afraid I might have to watch him for an extensive period, as a major character in this rather enjoyable (semi-)comedy – which would then have become significantly less enjoyable had his presence extended beyond those mercifully short minutes (made a little sweeter through that blond actress).Although all four above-mentioned beauties are very good in WIT, I would stick out Adrienne Palicki, with her funny portrayal of a semi-retarded porno actress. Plus, in spite of being much taller than the other three, she managed to come off as the cutest one. Very tall yet cute? Not a mean feat by any means. Producers should be hyping Palicki, showering her with movie offers right now, instead of focusing all their undivided attention on the promotion of various mediocre nepotistic offspring such as Olivia Wilde or Zooey Dechanel. But that's how cinema and TV work; you scratch my kid's back, I scratch your kid's back. All in the family, and right into the sewer goes the quality.It's unfortunate that Gutierrez chose to let the comedy take a backseat to schmaltzy, totally needless drama. Seb, if you stick 4-5 beauties into a movie then that means you're catering to a MALE audience, not a female one. Sticking women no-one wants to see, such as Streep, Close or Dern - THAT would be targeting a female audience, and then you could make it all drama as far as I'm concerned (coz I wouldn't' watch it anyway, obviously). Your male viewers don't want soppy drama, they want something a little more entertaining and intelligent than that. (Yes, even f**t jokes are more intellectually stimulating than a woman crying in front of the camera.)The last third of WIT sees the movie coming to a standstill almost, with a lot of tiresome sobbing and needless hugging. This, and Isabelle Gutierrez, are the reasons I rated WIT lower than I otherwise would have. .

There's a lot to like about this movie, but by the end it left me exhausted and more than a little bored…and not just because its lack of plot left it sputtering to an anti-climactic ending. Women in Trouble repeats the same narrative dynamic over and over and over again until it has wrung every bit of dramatic juice out, leaving behind a dry and twisted up story that desperately needs a jolt of something to keep the viewer engaged.The film is about what happens in the interconnected lives of a group of women on a single day. Unfortunately, while 10 different women and 1 girl are spotlighted, only three of them actually have a story to tell. Elektra Luxx (Carla Gugino) is a porn star who finds out she's pregnant and doesn't know if she should keep it or even tell the father. Doris (Connie Britton) is a woman feuding with her sister and keeping a secret about her niece. She gets stuck in a hot elevator with Elektra. Maxine is a therapist who discovers that her husband is having an affair with Doris' sister. While other women are focused on equally, they're really just filler or playing a part in the lives of Elektra, Doris and Maxine.The good about Women in Trouble is there are several women who parade around in relatively little clothing and there's some nice acting on display. Most of the characters, even the ultimately unimportant ones, are given long and meaty stretches of dialog to chew their way through. There's also some salty language, but that comes off like a cross between Sex and the City and the Jersey Shore. If you're a fan of pretty and talented actress getting a chance to shine, you'll find a lot of that to enjoy here.Unfortunately, almost every single scene in this movie boils down to the same thing. It's two people sitting on their butts while they talk and talk and talk and talk. This thing is so wordy it would even make Kevin Smith yell "Shut up already!" at the screen. This script could be performed on the radio and almost nothing would be missed. Instead of a motion picture, writer/director Sebastian Gutierrez has made a static picture. While all that stationary emoting is fun to look at for a while, there comes a point where you want the characters to do a cartwheel, dance a jig, pick a fight or just move in some way. And after seeing the same two-person dynamic play out for the 5th or 6th time, you start asking "What else is there?" only to find there isn't anything else here.Women in Trouble doesn't feel like a single story. It feels like watching an audition reel where a series of actresses are doing a bunch of random screen tests, hoping they can catch some studio executive's eye. Some of them are eye-catching but it's just hard to get through them all in one sitting.If you don't care about plot and do like ogling attractive women, you'll have a good time with this movie. For the rest of us, Women in Trouble is an equally entertaining and grueling experience.

Very good comedy, really. No stars (except Josh Brolin) I mean no Sex& City or Desperate housewife's stars.. and good. That's works! It's funny. Really I enjoy. I don't want to write about storyline.. but if you have some time and desire watch something not to heavy, but smart and funny - it's for your mood. I watch this movie when I working.. after 5 min. I stop working and start watch more careful. It' s second thing after "Ten Inch Hero" which is great. No special effect, great dialogue, no shooting, no big budget. You can compare to "Sex, lies and videotapes" - same class. My recommendation.. I like movies like this one.