Ji-Hwan (Kwon Sang-Woo) and Dal-Rae (Kim Ha-Neul) are old friends and they have grown up in the same neighborhood. Ji-Hwan admires Hong Kong movie star "Jacky Chan" and wants to be a world action star. Dal-Rae has a desire to be an actress. They always bear grudges against each other with their private weak parts, and they quarrel everyday, however they are great friends who care for each other. One day, Dal-Rae goes out with Young-Hoon who is in the same Taekwondo group as Ji-Hwan. Young-Hoon is a student representative of the department as well as an all-round athlete. Ji-hwan is also dating a girl, Ji-Min, a gorgeous glamour girl who has a well-shaped figure. It seems that there would be no problem between the good friends Ji-Hwan and Dal-Rae, but somehow a strange atmosphere arises after they start seeing someone else. Everybody knows it is more than just a friendship, except Ji-Hwan and Dal-Rae.
(Korean with English subtitles) Ji-hwan is a taekwondo student with a part time job as a stunt man, who dreams of becoming Korea's answer to Jackie Chan. Dal-rae is a drama student and ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Erin F (br) wrote: The problem with this movie, essentially, is simply that there is away too damn much going on with it. I tried to like it particularly because I really like Kat Dennings as an actress, but halfway through the movie I found myself bored, detached from the story, and slightly infuriated. Caroline is constantly about two seconds away from me wanting to slap her. She plays Thurston like a fiddle, going between these two guys with her only excuse being that she's some messed up teen, experimenting with love through some no- good doings. Even realizing this, however, I couldn't bring myself to feel bad for Thurston in the midst of all this- or any other character, for that matter. For the time allotted I feel as if more could be done with this story had they focused on the point of the movie. Perhaps if the plot had been more centralized around the serial killer- the only time we here about him is in passing, or a line or two mentioned offhandedly in dialogue. Not to mention the teacher conflict. We go from what is clearly an unhealthy relationship to Mr. A jumping off the deep end as if he belongs in a padded room, nearly killing himself, calling his ex fianc (who we also know next to nothing about) before eventually ending up with the (you guessed it!) bland, one dimensional gym teacher. Hopefully this review shows you exactly how many factors this movie has attempted to bite off before they can chew. I was left with no real meaning to an hour and a half of madness other than that you should never trust the new girl in town, because she will probably end up using a nice, clearly available guy her own age in order to get closer to the big-bowl-of-crazy-flakes history teacher. Oh, and did I mention the title has virtually nothing to do with the movie?Yeah. It doesn't.
Stefan L (ru) wrote: Pretty decent musical movie. I still prefer Les Mis but the singing was just outstanding. I didn't think the story had too much depth but as a lighthearted musical with a more serious undertone it was ok.
Deborah R (us) wrote: parts were funny, but it was kindof pointless, a worse version of "Orgies and the Meaning of Life". atleast that movie had some psychological aspect to it... but the guy is funny
Christopher S (de) wrote: The writing leaves you with so many great quotes it's pretty astounding. The performances range from mesmerizing to sedating. The concept, more charming the the actual delivery. An interesting film that makes me want to befriend actors, find an absolutely stark yet compelling space and film a dramatic reading of anything. But for me, the most interesting material is the asides. The moments at the beginning, intermission and end of the piece where you watch the actors and audience mingle over coffee and snacks. Where you hear the little asides about the space, the production, and to be honest what each person did before arriving that day. I find that far more compelling and was hoping for more interludes, breaks and discussions of the text by a troupe of actors that I more revere than anything else about the film.I bought the DVD after reading about the film's production in the Projections Series (Edited by John Boorman). It would have been far more interesting to me to have seen the development of the play rather than the execution of the play. Still, something that I found greatly inspiring, although Andre Gregory incites a passionate dislike in me. If we met, we'd probably clash on every subject, and he'd disparage me to his actor friends after I'd gone, and I'd regale my filmmaking associates with tales of infuriation at his hands. We'd really cross swords. Gregory only appears in the film for about 5 minutes of the two hour running time.
Julie K (fr) wrote: Edgar swore I'd love this movie, but I think he actually showed it to me so I'd stop bugging him about backpacking through Europe. o____o I guess this is considered a masterpiece or a classic or something, but eh. I felt like it was much ado about nothing. Plus, it was a baaaaaaad idea to put the ending at the beginning of the film.
Ms Amanda J (es) wrote: Oh god. It had twists, yes, but the movie's boring nature cannot be forgiven.
Adam C (fr) wrote: I don't think there is a more hair brained and dated romantic comedy I have seen n some time. But thats what I liked about it. The film is absolutely preposterous and seems to be in a world all of its own. How refreshing it was though. The insanity and loose attitude of the film proved to be charming. The film also is a great time capsule for the sexual and cultural ideals of the early 1960's. This film is also about advertising firms, so in many ways its like a comedy version of Mad Men. I think this film may be funnier now then when in came out because of how it encapsulated a period in time so well. In many ways it also was rather risky for a fluffy romantic comedy. What also makes the film so appealing, even with its faults, is the great acting. Hudson and Day are a great screen couple and play off each other very well. The two are the quintessential romantic couple of their era. That being said, the really impressive performance of the film belongs to the hilarious Tony Randall. There is not a scene he does not steal and he gives a comic performance to behold. His timing is perfect and his line deliveries are deadly funny. Randall is the glue that holds a lot of the film together and provides some big laughs. His introduction alone is worth seeing the film. As enjoyable as the film was though, the ending falls apart in this film. It seems like they just could not find a way to level out the story and bring it back to earth. All together Lover Come Back is a film with its problems, but it seems like those problems get washed away with the films charm and some strong performances.