sandcrab277 We already know that people from los angeles are seriously messed up in the head and the head....none of these women are in trouble but are creating trouble wherever they go...as usual there is scant scent of a theme and plot...producers, writers and directors that are the same person should desist from wasting money on such drivel for absolutely no one to watch....if it wasn't for carla gugino's breasts this film wouldn't have got out of the edit room

Rob Brown (cinephiliac) This film is entirely watchable if all you want is some attractive wallpaper to scroll across your television for 90 minutes. If you're looking for a smart pulpy film with a witty script and entertaining cut and paste plot, then this is not it, and you'd be best advised to avoid like the plague.Unfortunately this is another one of those films by an underexposed director who wanted to try his hand at writing and directing just like his heroes, only without a modicum of their talent. The film achingly wants to be considered in the same vein as Tarantino for its slice of life dialogue, or Russ Meyer for its pop out technicolour scenery and underdressed girls, but can't reach beyond imitation of those particular styles into something original.The screenplay is underwritten, which is to say, under edited (a good editor would have trashed the majority of it); it's wall to wall filler that can only echo and mangle the best junky dialogue in all those great indie films I won't bother to mention. The quotidean dialogue of those films, memorable for its sheer wit and off-kilter verisimilitude, is transposed into Women In Trouble with no sense of irony. Two women in an elevator strip off and yak about life problems, their apparent no bullshit attidude at odds with their heartfelt sob stories, intercut between leering two-shots breast-high-upwards which thoroughly undermine any hint of emotion. If you're actually listening to the dialogue it's a murky pool of run-on-sentences and non-sequiturs with no subtext. Or, the subtext of a writer-director forcing words into the mouths of babes (who should know better), words which sound every bit like the whiny insouciance of someone who wishes he understood women, men, and how to write them into a film.A short paragraph on the directing. Every scene could and probably should be pulled from the film and taught to young film school undergraduates as a basis of how not to produce a pulpy modern film. The hyperactive cutting best left for MTV, the jarring array of angles which hinder any attempts at narrative and subtext, the aforementioned shots which exist purely to titillate, to barefacedly exploit with no sense of awareness or wit. The angles which could only be described as down-top, for example, pitch the film towards a particular market, but the director doesn't have the balls or honesty to go all out (as Meyer so famously did), and wraps them in pseudo verbose dialogue and pseudo starry casting. When Almodóvar places the camera above his leading lady, cast downwards, it is as if he is peeking, like a naughty schoolboy, unable to believe his luck. She is in on the joke, and so the audience are invited to share in his and her cheeky saucy but playful film-making. Almodóvar loves his leading ladies, as do many other filmmakers who have played the same trick. Gutierrez does not love his ladies or he would not prance around them looking for the best shot of their cleavage, or writing their characters into situations where, quelle surprise!, they just happen to get their kit off. He would not make an exploitation film which tries to pass itself off as something else. What could be more exploitative, to his cast, to his audience?! I could go on and on but I'm sure you're getting the idea by now. It's not as if this film is offensive in the strongest sense, it's just stupid, and awkwardly collegeboy-ish in its sexual ethics, and doesn't have the key characteristic of being honest with its motives. If you like intelligent films by men about women that have respect for the actresses involved and the audience at large (both male and female) then avoid this, or spend 90 minutes squirming in your seat (no pun intended).

lewiskendell FULL DISCLOSURE: I freely admit that the only reason I wanted to see Women in Trouble was because of the incredible number of blindingly hot women that are in it. Carla Gugino, Marley Shelton, Emmanuelle Chriqui, Adrianne Palicki, Cameron Richardson...do I really need to continue? I had little interest in whatever the movie was supposed to be "about", per se, I just wanted to see the hotties. And they did deliver the goods. But this is a review, so I guess I have to talk about something more than how hot the women were. This is one of those kinds of ensemble movies where the numerous characters are directly and indirectly connected. It's certainly not up to the quality of a movie like Magnolia, not even close. The comedic elements work sometimes, and sometimes they don't. The dramatic portions are the same way. I guess the best way to describe Women in Trouble, is three Lifetime movies mixed with a rather tame Cinemax skin flick and a really disturbing bestiality story. If that weird mix sounds great to you, then you'll love this. Everyone else should just tune out the talky bits and ogle these gorgeous women.

KevinB12 I love this movie so much that I never get enough of such a movie like this one. It has lots of beautiful women. I think that this movie is an excellent movie, I give that a big thumbs up. Most men would love to see such a movie like this one. It is a very sexy movie I love to see many times. When men see this movie, it will take their breath away to see beautiful women. I would recommend this movie to anyone 17 years of age or older. People under 17 are forbidden to watch this movie because it is not right for anyone under 17 to see this movie. Carla Gugino is the woman I love so much in the movie, she is as beautiful as she gets. Women in Trouble is the kind movie I would watch many times and love this movie forever.