Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Tayloriona Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Jay Thompson 'Gross Misconduct' was one of a series of texts released in Australia during the early-to-mid 1990s that explored the supposed victimisation of the Privileged Heterosexual Male in the age of feminism. This creature only needs look at a Pretty Young Thing, and he's accused of sexual harassment, and his life is ruined. Damn those women's libbers! Grrr...As my tone might suggest, I don't buy any of this anti-feminist BS, and correspondingly didn't enjoy this film. 'GM' trivialises the issues of sexual harassment and teacher-student relations. Sexual harassment is here the product of a Confused Young Woman's imagination, and those professional boundaries that teachers are meant to maintain ... well, when the teacher is a charming and handsome family man (and played by Jimmy Smits!), well needn't worry about those.Sexist trash, and even by reviewing it, I'm giving it more time than it deserves.

morphion2 University Professor Justin Thorne (Jimmy Smits) has got it made. A good-looking, sophisticated teacher, with a loving wife and two adorable children. He plays the saxophone, owns an expensive car and his students love and respect him. But when temptation calls, in the form of one of his bright, pretty, sexy and willing students, Jennifer Carter (Naomi Watts), he foolishly gives in. The next day, he is being charged with her rape, and his perfect life could be forever ruined.When we see an American actor in Australian film, we know we are not in for a masterpiece. But even viewed with low expectations, "Gross Misconduct" is a huge flop. Based on a play with a rather unimaginative title and then adapted into a reasonably enjoyable book, it fails to engage, convince or even remotely interest its audience on a most fundamental level. The script is awkward and unconvincing; the acting is, for most part, not much better. Watts gives an acceptable performance, demonstrating for one of the first times on screen her emotion rawness, but she is the only good thing about the film, which seems almost like even it can't wait to be over.The direction is not horrible or distracting in anyway, but it is just painfully mediocre. Apart from the afore-mentioned Naomi Watts, who could be forgiven, seeing as this was early in her career, the acting is wooden and gets steadily worse over the course of the movie. The usually reliable Jimmy Smits doesn't seem to have been trying in this one, and who could really blame him? All these small failures, however, only add to the film's ultimate fatal flaw, which is that the focus is entirely in the wrong place. Any empathy for the characters or interest in the outcome is lost in a sea of what is basically soft-core entertainment of an adult kind. By the end, audiences will probably be bored, tired and wishing they'd done something else with their ninety minutes. Unless you just want to see Naomi get naked 4 or 5 times, you could definitely afford to give this nonevent film a miss.

KarenJBristol It has been some time since I last saw this movie but what struck me, at the time I first saw it, and still now, was the over-all artistic quality. Set in my home-town of Melbourne, it is one of the rare pieces that actually shows this town as I know it.Locations aside, this is the first movie I'd seen Naomi Watts in, and her talent shone through brilliantly. A difficult role for her, I'm sure, but she rose to the challenge :) Certainly a memorable performance.Jimmy's inclusion is definitely something I give a standing-ovation to the casting directors for! You couldn't pick a better actor for this role. Jimmy is just simply made for roles like this!Stunning and moving, plot-twists abound, quietly riveting from one minute to the next. I recommend this movie for anyone wanting quality viewing.

Joshua Bozeman The story of the film is an interesting one that we've heard before, but that's not a problem--all films work like that. Well, most of them do, atleast. It looks as tho this film was made with a very small budget, which might actually be the case, and it takes away from it a lot. There are some sexually explicit scenes in the film, one of the most revealing being when the female lead is in the shower, and there's a full frontal shot of her nude. On that subject, what did that have to do with the story? Why was it necessary to add that scene? Especially at those angles (starting from her breasts, suddenly cutting to shots of her crotch).....makes no sense. This is a poorly put together movie, and it shows. The look of the film is somewhat shady in my opinion, and the way it's pulled off, I didn't find it very believable. Could have been much better. 5/10.