bruuno-1 First let me say that I thought the basic premise was a pretty good one. I really liked the concept of turning the typical cheesy sex comedy on its head and making the women the 'aggressors'. I also thought Sophie Monk was actually quite good. So good in fact I wish she was the lead in the film. Unfortunately I just didn't find Cameron Richardson particularly compelling as the lead. The movie would have been better served had they switched roles. The cameo roles (Tia Carrera and Tom Arnold in particular, Kattan was a bit of a mess but not sure that was his fault as his character seemed to be poorly written)were decent as well. However this movie just never got off the ground due to either terrible editing, a poor script, or that they just seemed to run out of time (or money?) to put this thing together in a really coherent manner. Possibly it was all three. The father/daughter issues plot line, which motivated much of the characters behavior, never really came together until the very end and by then it was too late. Also the racial stereotypes were a little annoying as well. Having said all that is certainly better than the very low score it has on here. It does have moments and some of the performances were pretty good, particularly Sophie Monk. And I have to give credit to the writer(s) and director for at least trying something different.

zif ofoz why i watched this 'igganunt' movie i do not know. but it kept my attention and some of the dialog is actually clever. just where this clever dialog is in this stupid movie - i am unable to point out in this review. but it is there.you get to see lots of clean unblemished tight flesh on the girls and the guys. you get to see some very nice interiors of their house and others. you get to see pretty exterior scenes also. and that is about it.i think this flick was made for the 'tweens' who want to be the kewl teens! it's something you can rent without the parents getting too upset because the 'naughty bits' are never seen. just boobs, abs, and muscle.there you go - !!!

MBunge Written and directed with all the style of a wretchedly unfunny sitcom on the CW or its predecessors, the WB and UPN, Hard Breakers sets a new low in product placement by prominently displaying an infomercial in one scene. Fortunately, this movie is so thoroughly terrible that such a crass move fits in perfectly with the crippled plotting, abortive characterizations and leaden comedy. And by leaden comedy, I mean they don't just rely on stereotypical gay jokes in 2010. They use the same gag of the main characters not knowing they're in a gay-oriented business twice. Sophie Monk also embarrasses herself here with weak acting and weaker mugging for the camera. And director Leah Sturgis reveals that she has as much imagination as the average catfish by repeating the exact same establishing shot over and over and over again. This is just a pitiful effort.Alexis (Cameron Richardson) and Lindsay (Sophie Monk) are friends who hang out at their beach house and complain about men. They eventually hit upon the idea of knocking men unconscious and taking them back to their place, with the idea that the men will revive, have sex with them and then leave. Shockingly, that plan doesn't work out so well and then Alexis gets tied up by this absurd movie producer (Chris Kattan) and must be rescued by her neglectful father, Lindsey and Alexis' stalker ex-boyfriend. That's really all of Hard Breakers' story guck I can stand to repeat.Firstly, Sophie Monk does take her top off in this film but if you blink, you'll miss it. Cameron Richardson doesn't get naked, but some poor actress flashes her boobs in a depressing moment. I'm not one to complain about gratuitous nudity but this almost slapped me in the face with how cheaply exploitative it was. There's really not a lot of bad language here and the humor isn't even that crude. So if you're looking for raunch, keep looking.It's difficult to even tear into this disaster as hard as it deserves because the whole production is so pathetic it feels like kicking a retarded puppy. Co-writers Sturgis and Elaine Fogg make so many elementary mistakes with their script and their writing is so unintentionally awkward that I feel more sorrow than anger toward them. Watching this motion picture is like watching a kid trying to ride their bike for the first time without training wheels and seeing them crash every 5 feet. Someone should have stepped in and stopped the production like a boxing referee protecting a fighter that's being beaten to death. I can't imagine anyone in Hollywood seeing Hard Breakers and then hiring Sturgis and Fogg as dog walkers, let alone for any cinema-related job.This fiasco is not funny. It's not sexy. It's not outrageous. It barely makes any logical sense. Avoid Hard Breakers like it has an incurable venereal disease.

dantemp First of all, let me get something clear. I'm not rating this film based on the quality a film should have. I'm rating this film base on what it's trying to be. And it's stupid, tasteless and shameless fun. And it does beautifully. There is nothing subtle or puzzling about it. There is nothing even cool. It's weird, it's clumsy. It's what it should be. It's just about a lot of people making fool of themselves. And not in the "oh, what did I just did!?!?" way. More like "Mr Officer, what's wrong with running on the street naked wearing a pirate hat. Is it the pirate hat?" The script is none existent, the character's have little to none development. There isn't any sense in the most that is happening on the screen. But that doesn't matter. Just go watch the trailer and if u laugh, there is a big chance u'll find other things to laugh in the movie