Let's be realistic.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

While I have some admiration for the concept underlying this movie - a filmmaker retracing his steps to try to establish why he has been such a sexual failure, filmed as a documentary - and, while I found some of it quite funny, it suffered fatally from three things: 1. It was a one-note joke, which became stale quite quickly; 2. The fact that much of it seemed genuine, but some (at least) of it was quite clearly set-up meant that you couldn't fully accept it as either genuine or fictitious, as a result of which it failed to be valid as either; 3. The protagonist became, quite frankly, a complete pain in the *rse after a fairly short while.Sorry, but no thanks.

Premiere night in Madrid. Full house to see Chris Waitt himself (and mother) to do the introduction before the movie, with Angel Martin (the guy who dubbed him in Spanish - yes, unfortunately it was the dubbed version). "Meet my voice" said the director/actor with pure irony...The documentary starts with a simple idea: he had just broken up with another girlfriend and decides to investigate why do women always leave him. So, let's start to call of the ex's! The secret of the movie is the very good editing, the music and the extent at which he mocks himself, even up to the point where we can start to feel some pity for the poor fellow... In some points, and by being filmed the same way one tends to remember "Supersize me". I guess the auto-documentary is an easy and cheaper way to express!In the end, we leave the room with some good laughs, maybe even identified with some situations that make up man-woman relationships, but most of all, absolutely sure that to build strong relationships you must give the best out of you and try not to be a childish and selfish pig just like Chris...

This documentary starts out interesting enough, the honesty of Waitt and the vicious rejections of his ex girlfriends are disarming and lead us to feel In tail empathy towards the thirty something film maker. From here on in though, as Waitt turns the film from a meditation on failed relationships to a discourse on his impotence, he himself becomes vulgar and comes across as an entirely obnoxious person. Furthermore Waitts interview technique comes across as cold bordering on ignorant and even passive aggressive.Its impossible to tell if this is a persona that the film maker dons to illicit frustrated responses from the participants he tracks down or if this is actually how Waitt is in reality. Its clear that by the time Chris Waitt is staggering the streets in a Viagra induced stupor asking as many girls as he can if they will sleep with him in the most uncharismatic manner that we have lost all empathy for him and completely understand the hostility shown to him at the start of the film. I found myself hoping that one of the girls approached on the street or one of the men with the girls would end up lumping him. Clearly Waitt feels that wielding a boom Mic a la Nick Broomfield gives him the right to be completely offensive. The stunt itself is pre empted by a childish and phony sequence in which Waitt takes six or seven Viagra pills while waiting for the first to kick in, feigning ignorance of what taking a large amount of Viagra might do.As stated Its clear that Chris Waitt has taken a Broomfield / Louis Theroux style approach to his material but he simply does not have the charm to pull it off. The aforementioned film makers are famous about making films about diverse subjects but in the process also making films that say a great deal about themselves and therefore making themselves the principle players in the unfolding drama. Here Waitt has got the balance horribly wrong, he is making a film about himself, so conversely it would have merited the final film to step back and be more objective and let others speak about him. But Throughout the film Waitt discredits the participants (calling one ex girlfriend a psychopath is one such example) and and is constantly pushing his own interpretation about himself. Its is all him and what he wants. This all makes for a very ugly spectacle, entirely self consumed and entirely cold and unflinching. When his behaviour gets notable bad at points in the film Waitt is quick to insert a validation and some ponderous music but it all feels very mechanical, like an inserted unsubtle disclaimer. The only part I did relate to was the end when Chris meets his ex who is now having a child, this seems to be the only time that the mask slips and we see Chris as a sympathetic character. It is a shame that this interview is edited to the point where it is just a very few exchanges between the pair before showing an emotional meltdown. but it is too little too late and the film fails under the weight of all that has gone previous and the final 'happy' ending and new relationship feels trite. disingenuous and unpleasant. What Nathan Barley might have made given a video camera. Gets only minimal marks for being polished.

Meet Chris Waitt. He's a thirty-something auteur and amateur, who embarks on a project to catalog his past girlfriends following in the footsteps of Jim Jarmusch and "Broken Flowers" featuring the middle-aged Bill Murray. The end result is funnier and different in other aspects, too. Waitt comes off as a Kurt Cobain lookalike, whose toilet floor is carpeted in pubic hair w/ used toilet paper rolls in the corner unlike a furniture catalog by IKEA. He walks around carrying his furry microphone and baggy-saggy pants like a leftover grunge-wars survivor. His "Swedish" face is, however, only the surface, because things are boiling beneath it. As the events that unfold testify, he's got enough balls to visit a dominatrix, test his street-credibility vs. women, serenade a psychotherapist citing "crack-whores" and "religious virgins" and trip on Viagra like we've never seen it happen. The movie suggests that in the lives of most/many GenXers, there are four recurring factors apart from differences in personal hygiene and CV: a) A lost loved one is a mental skeleton in the closet b) (S)he is targeted at least once for reclamation c) Inevitable failure on this front may lead to creation of wicked senses of humor (as a defense mechanism) and d) other people and one's own projects claim the (wo)man in the end. Lived life and history can not be changed. If our relationships are like bridges, we almost always burn them after saying cogently goodbye. Because of these strengths, I was mildly indignant that the audience seemed to revel only in Waitt's failures and shortcomings on the sexual front. I could think of many girls who wouldn't be his match or worthy of him as a date. I rate this film relatively high since it was part of the LOVE & ANARCHY film festival and fulfilled the criteria of providing both aspects of love and anarchy quite satisfactorily. The movie was a bit like Borat for the thinking woman's circle of friends. Hand-held cameras and weird scenes ruled, you know. Out of that L&A context, I can understand if other people find this movie overdone, childish, annoying or crude.