Peter and Vandy is a 2009 American romanticindependentdrama film starring Jason Ritter and Jess Weixler. The film was written and directed by Jay DiPietro, adapted from his own play of the same name which opened in 2002 in New York.[1]
Plot
Peter and Vandy is a love story told out of order. Set in Manhattan, the story shifts back and forth in time, juxtaposing Peter and Vandy's romantic beginnings with the twisted, manipulative, regular couple they become.
A DVD of the film was released on February 9, 2010, in Region 1.
Reception
Critical response
Peter Vandy drew mixed reviews from critics. As of June 2020[update], the film holds a 65% approval rating on review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, based on 20 reviews with an average rating of 5.55/10.[2]The New York Times film critic Jeannette Catsoulis gave the film a mixed review, praising the film's acting, photography, and soundtrack but saying "nonlinear structure...and unrevealing dialogue too often hold us at arm's length, a puzzle to be solved without sufficient clues....Peter and Vandy is more a designer frame for actors than nourishing entertainment."[3] By contrast, film critics Frederic and Mary Ann Brussat of the web-based Spirituality & Practice, praised the nonlinear structure, saying "the filmmaker challenges us to understand and appreciate that intimate relationships stand or fall on the basis of how couples handle trifles and everyday routines.[4]Metromix film critic Geoff Berkshire also liked the film, saying it offers "a refreshingly clear-eyed look at relationships," comparing it to Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. "The non-linear approach relies on both subtle and obvious visual clues to keep the audience properly oriented, and enhances the narrative...DiPietro's dialogue is sharp and Ritter and Weixler credibly flesh out characters who aren't always likeable, they're just two regular people trying their best at love."[5] Meanwhile, panning the film in Variety, critic Todd McCarthy felt "Some of the linear deck-shuffling creates small frissons, but there's no underlying tension or subtext to shore up the banal talk."[6]
