The_Film_Cricket You know that theory of human cloning that says that if you make a clone of a clone of a clone, the results will be diluted and far less defined than the original the more copies you make? Where the Boys Are is kind of like that. It comes so far down the line of Horny Teenager flicks that even the mere idea feels watered down and diluted. There is nothing here you haven't seen before even from fellow inferior clones.The pitch idea, flimsy as it was, might have seemed tantalizing. There is the typical standard, average story of kids who are up to no good heading to Fort Lauderdale to party and get laid. The twist is that instead of four guys, there are four girls. That's not exactly a step forward for women especially considering that this female quartet is just as boneheaded as any quartet of guys. If that's equality God help us all.The movie follows these four college girls down to Ft. Lauderdale for spring break. There is the potential to build characters there. There's Laurie (Lynn-Holly Johnson, who won a Razzie for this) who thinks and dreams only of hot sex with a hunk. There's Sandra (Wendy Schaal) who seeks the heart of a good man. There's Carol (Lorna Luft) who needs a vacation from her boyfriend. There is Jennie (List Hartman) who is torn between the affections for a stuffy concert pianist and a rocker. The potential, you can see, is there to build some characters but the movie doesn't have that kind of energy. This isn't a movie so much as a checklist of antics from a hundred other party movies.The characters are irritating. They talk in short, clichéd sentences and only do what is required of them by the genre. I could say that the camera loves them but even that little detail is lost on this film. The title suggests more than the movie can provide. Hearing it may illicit memories of the old Connie Francis ditty (never heard here) from the 60s but one look at the film takes a bat that notion. The soundtrack that is on display is dead as a doornail.The only point of interest in this film is to note that it was produced by Allan Carr three years before he produced the Oscar show that paired Snow White and Rob Lowe in a duet of "Proud Mary" and three years after he unleashed The Village People's "Can't Stop the Music" into the very first Best Picture award at the Razzies. 'nuff said.

stevethepirate2 I used to watch this movie on VHS at my friend's house after school, in the late eighties. I wish I could find the movie now because I'd definitely buy it. It's a crude beach flick, meant to make you cringe and giggle, and it does it well. The performances are earnest, if not actually good, and you end up actually liking the group of ditzes. The music and the party scenes are enjoyable, in a trashy way, and I love that the rich, upper class characters like Barbara and Camden are so out of place in all the spring break wildness. I mean, who visits their uptight family friends on Spring Break? The plot to this movie is irrelevant, because its fun lies in its brainlessness. Enjoy the half-naked coeds and cheap jokes, because sometimes, that's a beautiful thing.

gberns At first glance, this seems like it should be a mildly entertaining 80's style spring break party/skin flick. What unfolds is a disappointing attempt at a spring break drama. With a cast that includes babes like Lisa Hartman, Wendy Schaal, and playmate Lynn-Holly Johnson, combined with a R-rating, you'd expect to be fulfilled, yet bikini's and crappy drama is all you get. The R-rating isn't close to being justified, and it could've gotten a G-rating save for a few swear words. There's a few scenes that conjure up a brief chuckle, but you're definitely left wanting more, especially in the scenes with Holly-Johnson, who you'd expect to bare some skin considering her Playboy resume, but she appears to think of herself as more of a Thespian, which is ridiculous, considering I think this was her last big screen appearance. Overall I give it a 3. Rent Spring Break instead.....

Kcuaron I saw the original in 1960 and it was a piece of fluff even for back then. What I can't understand is who would want to remake a bad movie, except, perhaps, if your goal was to end the collective careers of everyone in the cast. All the actors were a little long in the tooth for the roles they played. Lisa Hartman Black looked like she may have been a professor at Heidi Fleiss University but a 21 - 22 year old co-ed? I don't think so. This movie was so awful, I felt embarrassed for the actors. Come to think of it, it did effectively serve as a career-ender for several of them. On the whole, I think it's only marginally better than the "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes," which is generally believed to be THE worst movie of all time.