Best two reviews:
1) Film Threat - For non-actors, everyone in this film really pulls their character off extremely well. (Rating: 80) Read Full Review >
2) New York Post - Joe Swanberg - who directed, edited, lensed, co-wrote and played one of the lovelorn characters - has done wonders with a nothing budget and a personable cast of nonprofessional actors. For viewers so disposed, there are several arty shots of nude women. (Rating: 75) Read Full Review >
Worst two reviews:
3) The New York Times - Authentic in texture if narrow in scope, LOL is a movie about the way we live -- or rather about the way white, urban, heterosexual circuit boys are failing to live. (Rating: 60) Read Full Review >
4) Village Voice - The characters are a bit too OCD for LOL to work as the definitive commentary on technology and human relationships that it strives to be...But the movie is unusually attentive to the ironies of communications technology. (Rating: 50) Read Full Review >
1) Film Threat - For non-actors, everyone in this film really pulls their character off extremely well. (Rating: 80) Read Full Review >
2) New York Post - Joe Swanberg - who directed, edited, lensed, co-wrote and played one of the lovelorn characters - has done wonders with a nothing budget and a personable cast of nonprofessional actors. For viewers so disposed, there are several arty shots of nude women. (Rating: 75) Read Full Review >
Worst two reviews:
3) The New York Times - Authentic in texture if narrow in scope, LOL is a movie about the way we live -- or rather about the way white, urban, heterosexual circuit boys are failing to live. (Rating: 60) Read Full Review >
4) Village Voice - The characters are a bit too OCD for LOL to work as the definitive commentary on technology and human relationships that it strives to be...But the movie is unusually attentive to the ironies of communications technology. (Rating: 50) Read Full Review >
Alumni
6y
Ratings & Reviews
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE