ridiculous rating

It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

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.

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

In 1991 San Francisco, a disturbed Jim Mitchell (Emilio Estevez) is sitting alone in the dark. In 1960, Artie and his protective older brother Jim are brought up by their hard father (Terry O'Quinn). In 67, film student Jim is filming a political protest but he's more taken with a naked hippie chick. He starts filming porno bringing in younger brother Artie (Charlie Sheen) who marries Meredith (Megan Ward). They are porno pioneers and make the ground-breaking Behind the Green Door starring newbie Marilyn Chambers. Drug addiction slowly drives Artie crazy.There may be a compelling story about these real life pioneers. I am not happy with the directing from Estevez. The movie looks ugly and cheap. Maybe he doesn't have the budget but there is no imagination in this at all. It's distracting how bad it looks. The characters are ugly which doesn't help one bit. It's night and day when compared to a great movie like "Boogie Nights". I'm sure Showtime was intrigued by the lurid subject matter but the quality is simply not there.

I am not a fan of the brothers who dominate this flick, but they seem to play against type well enough that this doesn't matter. Everyone who'd watch this movie knows about the Mitchells at least slightly, so I'll talk more about the way they're rendered here: Emilio renders Jim Mitchell as basically the more mature older brother and Arty is, of course, the free-wheeling schmuck Jim feels indebted to. They make what is essentially "Vanilla Porn" in the sense that apparently none of the more non-mainstream fetishes usually (probably often rightly) considered perversions are visible, like pedophelia, corpophelia, bestiality, rape or snuff is included. And as a result of living something that is considered a societal fringe in the Seventies, they have a drug-induced downfall. Who would have seen that coming?Still, to me, the downfall is played with enough reality (Arty seems to remain slightly sympathetic even during his depths, except for when he expects a spouse is doing someone behind his back) and I'd say sympathy that it felt like a fresh experience to me. But that's just me: I don't watch too much aside from nerdy stuff. Frankly, I think that it beats Boogie Nights because there's no Mark Wahlbergs or Burt Reynolds around, and most important, no Paul Thomas Anderson. Estevez isn't the most humble guy, but at least he didn't approach the material in such a seemingly "I'll make sure everyone pays attention to how well I directed this thing instead of how good the story or things that happen in it are supposed to be." There's nothing really elaborate like that painful three minute opening and not the ton of cutesy dialogue. It's a much more bare-bones production, which I usually like. Plus, I like the commentary track. God help me, but I do.

This film is/was every bit as good as Blow and Boogie Nights(better than Boogie Nights). How this did not get a distributor and had to be shown on Showtime I'll never know. For what ever reason the brother's Estevez were dealt a disservice. This should have been seen on the big screen. I'm sure I will find out but there has to be something behind the scenes as to why this did not get a distributor. The movie was good and the reason it did not get put out was just wrong.

Don't know what Mr. Estevez was thinking; but he wasn't thinking about the script. The script is so full of holes; scenes that start and don't end, whole story lines that are set up but don't get resolved. This is just awful. The worst part is that both the Sheen brothers do a pretty good job of acting, it's just that the story never really goes anywhere and the fancy photography doesn't make up for it.