Nonureva Really Surprised!

GazerRise Fantastic!

MoPoshy Absolutely brilliant

Isbel A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Wizard-8 As you probably know, the name "Alan Smithee" is the standard pseudonym a director uses when he feels that their movie has been altered from his original vision, which is apparently what happened here. But to be honest, from what we do get to see, I don't think a director's cut would be that much better than this current version. It's true that some scenes in this version play out in a slightly incomprehensible manner. But even the scenes that do make sense suffer from the fact that the level of comedy is simply not funny at all. The humor is for the most part extremely lame, but also at times racist and homophobic. Other script problems include not only the fact that the three central protagonists are really obnoxious and irresponsible, but that there is no real plot for the first seventy or so minutes of this eighty nine minute movie. The only person connected with this movie who more or less survives is actor Geoffrey Lewis; his scenes do have a little spark, and he comes across as somewhat likable. But when a movie can't get any fun out of a cameo by cult movie star Sydney Lassick, you know something is really wrong.

lord woodburry this is one of the medical school movies the eighties produced. all follow the English romantic comedy 1950s era DOCTOR IN THE HOUSE to an extent but none quite attain the elegance and sophistication of English template.of course directed at an American audience this films do have to have an element of silliness and teenage humour to sell tickets. three students are charting a course through medical school; one is an American --- ugh -- who is quite a comedian; a foreigner who befriends him is a far more serious student but there's a serious matter at hand. who teaches whom and what exactly must be learnt? the film does have an important point which it makes well, against the backdrop of a ridiculous pageant of body parts. it isn't quite so bad as some have said and is worth revisiting.the film lacks the charm of certain of its rivals. It isn't quite as genteel as GROSS ANATOMY or as rich in social comment as BAD MEDICINE but certainly towers over PATCH ADAMS which is a pure abomination.

edgewelle "Stitches" fails on just about every level that a film can fail on. It is not clever in the least, it is visually drab, and it has literally no plot for the first 80% of the movie. Over an hour has passed before anything resembling a story structure begins to appear. The preceding hour is filled with tired 80's cliches: spying on naked girls, a sidekick whose name references a body function, and even the evil dean. There truly isn't one original concept in this movie; the main character's name is Bobby Stevens for crying out loud! (SPOILER)Suddenly, 7/8ths of the way through the film, Bobby is kicked out of school; he apparently pulled one too many not-quite-funny pranks. Obviously, he must find a way to get back into medical school (how exactly did he get into medical school in the first place?) Now I am no dimwit, but I have no idea why the events that then take place should result in him getting back into school. He participates in an abruptly introduced pageant that inturrupts the dean's big presentation. Also, of no less importance is the fact that a man literally rises from the dead with no explanation given. The fact that he does this serves to humiliates the dean, but apparently doesn't arouse the interests of medical experts at the school. Lastly, it must be said that the boom mic operator who worked on "Stitches" needs to be removed from his respective union if he hasn't been already. There were so many egregious examples of the mic poking it's way into the frame that it became the biggest laugh of the film. I should conclude my comments by saying that while "Stitches" is a terrible, terrible film, I actually enjoyed myself quite a bit while watching it. If you're looking for a deliberately lousy, campy film littered with foolish cliches and clumsy innuendo, I'd heartily recommend checking this one out. But just so that you don't get confused, the dean DOESN'T like pranks, and Bobby Stevens DOES like to party.

LeRoyMarko Fun at med school. Hurray! Yeah right! This is a stupid, ridiculous movie, not even good for its genre. Lots of beer, a few body parts, a bad dean, what else...The first scene with the cadavre sets the tone of this abysmal movie. How low can you go? This one go pretty low on the tasteless, unfunny scale.Why bother watching if not just to satisfy a bizarre urge to rate a bad movie.Out of 100, I gave it 49. That's good for 0 stars out of 4.Seen at home, in Welland, on December 14th, 2001.