Mjeteconer Just perfect...

Blaironit Excellent film with a gripping story!

Grimossfer Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

Sammy-Jo Cervantes There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

wes-connors "In this classic coming-of-age tale, forbidden love and impossible dreams intertwine when the handsome, working class Holt brothers are drawn to the beautiful and wealthy Abbott sisters. With an all-star cast including Liv Tyler, Joaquin Phoenix, and Billy Crudup, 'Inventing the Abbotts' is," according to the DVD sleeve, a strongly told story "of hidden desires and romantic possibilities." Adding Jennifer Connelly and Joanna Going as the other two beautiful Abbott sisters gives you five good-looking performers engaged in various couplings. You will see that their "hidden desires" are all made fairly obvious. The film begins in 1957 small town Haley, Illinois, and has many obvious - but nice - period trappings. Ms. Connelly has an arousing topless scene.The story stresses the pairing of Mr. Phoenix (as Doug) and Ms. Tyler (as Pam), although Mr. Crudup (as Jacey) manages to steal most of the booty (both the film and the women). The "leads" suffer from being cast as teenagers. Doing the math (Phoenix is two years younger than high school senior Crudup) helps explain how they act. A fifteen-year-old would paint on "artificial sideburns" with India Ink while humming Elvis Presley's "Heartbreak Hotel". So, Phoenix is made to act unnaturally juvenile. As the most beautifully cast sisters, Ms. Going and Ms. Connelly excel in their smaller roles. You can also enjoy both Crudup's angst-ridden older brother, and secretive mother Kathy Baker (as Helen).****** Inventing the Abbotts (4/4/97) Pat O'Connor ~ Joaquin Phoenix, Billy Crudup, Liv Tyler, Kathy Baker

dminkster I read the other user reviews, and boy are you people easily pleased. Why make this movie? We have all been there in one way or another. Teenage angst, young adult angst. Ho-hum. No three dimensional characters, no action, almost no plot, and no life going on around the characters on screen. The acting is fine, but they don't really have much to work with. And it is SO SLOW. Good God, Mr. Director, what did you think was so fascinating about this film that you would take so bloody long with every scene and every shot? I don't have a short attention span, but when scenes drag on with 'meaningful pauses' that don't mean anything, then you teach me that I don't have to pay attention since nothing happens. Another 'ice maiden' performance from Jennifer Connelly, a one level performance from Billy Crudup, and Kathy Bates is the most rounded character, and gives the best performance. However, she is a very minor character in the big picture, and only made me aware of how shallow all the other roles were.It looks great, right on period wise, I think. Although the score, while very catchy, seems out of place. I don't remember all that wonderful boogie music at the start of the film as 1957.It's not awful, it's just sort of nothing and a bit of a waste of time. All these actors have done far better work in the last 10 years.

Amanda Morrison Alright. I remembered seeing this movie years ago, when it was first released to video, and I liked it. Now, upon re-watching it for the first time since that fateful day ten years ago, I see why. Because I was a pervert. Clearly, I didn't enjoy this movie for its sweet message or its fine actors. Ugh.Let me gripe from the beginning.Alright, so first we're introduced to actors that are far too old to be playing their characters. That's fine, though -- I grew up watching Saved by the Bell -- I can deal with that. Then, as we get to know the characters a little better, we realize that, well, we really haven't gotten to know the characters at all. Other than Doug drawing breasts on a picture in school (that's how we find out that he's a "rebel) and Pam saying that each sister is the good, the bad, or the one who gets away with everything, we get nothing. There is literally NO character development. At times, it seems like the director might have tried...then no, by the end, you just find yourself angry because you invested two and a half (or whatever) hours into a movie about people, and you do not care in the slightest about any of the people.But what about their acting you say? Well, that was just as terrible as the trite and obvious dialogue they were forced to spew. It's amazing when you see brilliant actors in earlier roles when they are give almost nothing to work with. Joaquin Phoenix is perhaps the most surprisingly horrid. Liv Tyler is cute -- when isn't she -- but she has nothing to work with, and to be honest, her acting was far from perfected (has it ever been, though?) She plays this innocent rich girl to a tee, but she still doesn't give us much of a reason to like her. And why does she like Phoenix's character Doug? Because of that rebellious drawing? Geesh. Give us some credit here.Billy Crudup and Jennifer Connelly were good, I can't complain about their acting. But, Jennifer Connelly disappears after the first twenty minutes, in a ridiculous scene, with a ridiculous reason.I could go on for hours. The "secret" behind the Abbotts and the death of the boys' father is pathetic. The attempt at sympathy for Lloyd Abbott falls flat. Maybe it wasn't intentional. Actually, I hope it wasn't.Inventing the Abbotts keeps the viewer guessing what's going to happen from the get-go. It might be a Romeo and Juliet story, it might be a romantic coming-of-age, as the synopsis suggests. Unfortunately though, it actually turns out to be such thrown-together non-sense that the viewer wishes that their idea had been what happened. Instead, they're left with a characters they don't care about doing things they don't care about, and offended sense of romanticism and a bad taste lingering in their mouths.

David Bogosian To be honest, the main reason I saw this movie was because I wanted to see Liv Tyler. To my surprise, here she plays an awkward, gawkish young girl whose appeal is overshadowed by that of her two older sisters. But there is something so engaging and charming about her simplicity, her shyness, and her ability to follow her own path in spite of her family's wealth and social standing.All the cast are terrific, with Kathy Baker, Jennifer Connolly, Liv, and Joaquin Phoenix taking top honors. It is the type of movie that transports you to another time and place, and to another age. You feel what it was like to be 18 in 1957: the class differences, the social constraints related to dating, all the bittersweet ache of young love.At its core, this movie is about the relationship of two brothers. The narration begins with that, and really that is the core that unites all the other subplots. It's a fascinating relationship too, because they are so different yet their paths end up crossing in so many ways. And at the end, it's clear that the viewer is going to be drawn to one (Doug), but yet the other (JC) is not condemned or criticized; you just come to understand that he is driven to do the asinine things he does by powers he cannot seem to tame within himself.I also have to say I was delighted by the fact that the protagonists (Doug and Pam) are modest and moral in their relationship, while the screwed up characters (JC, Eleanor) are promiscuous and amoral. It would have been easy to conform to stereotypes and have Doug and Pam in bed at the earliest opportunity, but the fact that they don't adds tension and drama and ultimately makes for an excellent story. There are a handful of instances of the F-word, and two brief sexual scenes, otherwise this would have been a great movie for younger teens as well.Overall, an excellent movie, badly underrated by IMDb users, and well worth the watching. I gave it 8 stars.