Customer Reviews

Peter and Vandy

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

"Peter and Vandy," a chronologically scrambled romance, has charm and likability to spare. This compact excursion through the highs and lows of a relationship in flux has one major problem, though. The inevitable comparison to the more polished "(500) Days of Summer" is a rather large liability. Don't get me wrong, I thought "Peter and Vandy" brought some very truthful moments to the screen--but, ultimately, it seemed a bit slight. Whereas "(500) Day of Summer" was one of my favorite films of its year, "Peter and Vandy" was a pleasant way to spend about seventy-five minutes. If you like relationship based dramas, I'd never discourage giving this piece a look--but, like I said, that other movie (I won't say its name again) would get a rave recommendation.

The primary selling point of "Peter and Vandy" has got to be its lead, Jason Ritter. Paired with Jess Weixler, Ritter's Peter exemplifies the modern "man child" and his struggle to take hold of responsibility and commitment. Ritter is a terrifically appealing actor and is oftentimes more interesting than the material he appears in. And while I liked Weixler, she does come across a bit flat in comparison. Anyone who has been in a relationship will be able to identify with key scenes in "Peter and Vandy," and yet the unpredictable nature of what brings people together and tears them apart never really seemed very unpredictable.

Okay, I lied. I'm going to mention "(500) Days of Summer" again. I know that some people were put off by its quirky effects and visual tomfoolery (which, of course, I loved). If, however, you were intrigued by its narrative structure and want to see something similar but without all these bells and whistles, then "Peter and Vandy" would be an ideal choice! Liked Ritter and thought the film was pleasant--entertaining in the now, I'm afraid I won't remember much about "Peter and Vandy" in a few months. KGHarris, 1/11.

The film "Peter and Vandy" focuses on the conflicts and commonalities between a young romantic couple in their formative months. Jason Ritter is Peter, who is at first unemployed when he meets Vandy, but later finds work in his area of interest. Jess Weixler is Vandy, an artists' agent. She has a lovely studio apartment with probably several thousand dollars worth of art on her brick walls, her bedroom is offset by wood and sheer white partitions.

The film is set in the present day, or close to it, and the story focuses on the individuals' personality and conversational chemistries more than their attraction to each others' appearance or erotic magnetism. The plot doesn't focus on their individual difficulties with their jobs, family, or friends. Instead, the plot in this tightly edited film concentrates primarily on their private, social interactions - and I liked that directorial and screenplay writing decision. For comparison, a Woody Allen film on similar subject matter would take several short looks into the ancillary characters' lives. This film is not about a group of friends, a city's culture, or a cultural era of a specific generation. Instead, this film is about two people and how they get along well and poorly.

Like another recent film, "(500) Days," this film is told out of linear time sequence, which works fine, and I enjoyed the mystery of trying to figure out what scene preceded which. For me, the revelations, of when something was occurring, were a pleasant surprise. Further, the film, as an examination of relationship behaviors, uses the out of sequence scenes to prompt the viewer to wonder: What does the same behavior mean if it occurred before or after other events? This screenplay was probably written before (500) Days, but it's too bad this film came out after, because the comparison is so easy, and this film stands up on its own. I've seen both films, and both are excellent.

"Peter and Vandy" raises universal relationship questions: 1) What does it take for there to be sufficient chemistry between two lovers? When you realize your romantic partner is not many of the things you want in a romantic partner, what do you do? And why do some couples, who appear to be so different and adversarial, stay together? Of course, the film doesn't "answer" these questions; rather, it shows the individual choices these characters choose.

~Spoilers Ahead ~

In the end of this film, the couple decides to try to work things out. While this may sound like a happy ending, the beauty and sophistication of the story comes from the palpable viciousness exchanged between them - after which many viewers might question whether they'd stay in a similar relationship.

But for some of us viewing the film, knowing the equally egregious behaviors we've brought against our lovers, the film rings true, with emotional weight and a hard sense of reality - particularly by highlighting the unflattering traits of both Peter and Vandy.

Peter is a shy, possibly too apologetic, character who may too often suppress what he really wants in order to please his significant other. Vandy is a hard working perfectionist. She is a confident and smart woman, who may correct others too often and too quickly, finishing their sentences when there is the slightest pause.

Both are young, and like most young people, they are unsure about choosing just one person to be with exclusively. Peter is particularly not sure if he is sufficiently happy in his daily life with Vandy, and he wonders if he should try to test what it is like to be in a relationship with a different kind of person.

The ending does not have great dramatic gravity, except to the degree some of us in the audience hope most leading couples will decide to stay together in the end. We can see some of their chemistry and understand why they would be good for each other - but their social chemistry is not overwhelmingly persuasive.

I enjoyed this film because the characters made huge mistakes and still chose to focus on the good things they shared. In light of the strong positives and negatives, they still believed they wanted to be in each others' regular companionship - and I personally enjoy watching couples make that more difficult, realistic decision.

The acting is excellent. The lower budget cinematography is good - not too distracting with camera movements or editing effects - we focus on the characters and not the camera movements. The screenplay is as good as I could hope for. And all of that adds up to mean the director (and screenwriter), Jay DiPietro, did a great job.

There's a wonderful scene with Vandy and her family eating Thanksgiving dinner (during a part of the story when Peter and Vandy have broken up). The scene conveys many provocative concepts. Importantly, the discussion in the scene emphasizes that as with most relationships, there's no "bad guy" or "good girl." As the lyric goes: "There's just you and me and we just disagree." For many couples, the disagreements lead them to call it quits. But as this movie suggests, for other couples, the disagreements and conflicts are the practical, imperfect starting points from which they choose to build their commitments, rapport, activities, pursuits, shared history, and relationship.

In "(500) days," the couple breaks up in the end because the woman doesn't believe the man is sufficiently what she's looking for, possibly because they are not similar or compatible in enough ways.

In "Peter and Vandy," the man doesn't know if the woman is sufficiently what he's looking for, possibly because they are not similar or compatible in enough ways. But in full light and consideration of those conflicts, they still want each other and choose to try further. And that story seems more universal and intriguing to me because most couples, after being together for any significant period of time, realize they aren't ideal or idyllic matches. And choosing to continue to love each other in that reality is . . . well, that's for you to decide.

This has been compared to 500 Days of Summer. sort of the same but on a smaller scale. Bits and pieces out of order regarding the timeline of their relationship, but it all makes sense. This could be confusing for some, but in the end it all made perfect sense. I think the directing was a bit too much, or editing, whatever you want to call it...like they were trying too hard to be complex, but the relationship was real. that's what i appreciated the most about this film. it was very short, but you didnt feel cheated. Jason was adorable and horrible and weird all at the same time...so typical guy :)

I don't remember what made me watch this film. It's told out of order, and I usually don't like flashbacks. It's believable, and I usually don't like stories that seem like real life. However, I really enjoyed this film. Peter & Vandy is a bit like a cross between About Last Night and Memento.

Ritter and Weixler have terrific chemistry together--the scenes they're in play out very smoothly (almost predictably, but not in a bad way). It's also nice to notice little things (both verbal and physical) that connect various scenes. Kudos to continuity.

Peter and Vandy is similar to About Last Night, but without so much pathos. P&V concentrates on what brings these two people together and how they become what they are. I whole-heartedly recommend it.

As a fan if creative movies, I was really hoping for a gem here. What I discovered was a co-dependent "romance" story that made me cringe and soon-enough wish it was over. I want my time back.

Peter and Vandy is very similiar to (500) Days of Summer. Both films are nonlinear but with a different plotline. Vandy played by Jess Weixler wants to be in a committed relationship with her Peter played by Jason Ritter, but their relationship still has problems. I loved the chemistry between the two leads. I like how you are not quite sure if Peter and Vandy will go their separate ways or fall back in love with each other. Such a beautiful, tender film...I highly recommend it! Enjoy!

I started out really disliking this film, but somehow ended with a more tolerant attitude. The acting was terrible. The music was worse. This kind of relationship makes me happily independent and solo. I don't want the type of dynamics that seem to exist in so many duos. I kept seeing his dad in Jason's face and some mannerisms.

Like the other reviewers I have watched and enjoyed 500 days of summer before this movie. And I liked it more.
The movie is good but it needs better music. The actors are good, I enjoyed watching the movie.

Only 75 mins long, this little indie covers a lot of ground by cutting and time shifting throughout. We see the couple at various stages of their relationship, all jumbled up at once throughout. Interesting gimmick and it doesn't detract. No plot. Just the arc of a relationship, and a not especially real one, at that. Still, this holds your attention for its short duration.

This movie is serioulsy my new favorite! It's one of those that you watch..and then you want to watch it again right after. I would compare the whole concept of this movie to (500) Days of Summer...but with a better ending and with more "intensity". Seriously though, this is a million times better. The only thing I would change about it is that it would be longer :).