A Family Affair (2003)

The course of true love doesn’t always run straight. Died-in-the-wool New Yorker Rachel (Helen Lesnick) moves to San Diego looking for a new life and a new romance. That’s where her supportive PFLAG parents live. Rachel is surprised to find how they’ve adapted to the laid back California scene, and totally shocked when her mom (Arlene Golonka) wants to set her up on a blind date. At first, Rachel refuses, but eventually Rachel lets her mother introduce her to Christine (Erica Shaffer). Soon, Rachel finds herself in a real romance, but just when the two women begin to plan their wedding, Rachel’s old flame Reggie (Michele Green) makes a comeback attempt . . .

My Lesbian Jewish Wedding

Writer/director/actress Helen Lesnick tries to write, direct and actor in this film. She wears too many hats in this film.

Lesnick plays Rachel, a woman who escapes NYC after a bad break-up with a former girlfriend Reggie (In one of the best preformances in the film, Michele Greene).Lesnick mis-casted herself in her role. This mis-casting is the first nail in the coffin of this comedy

She goes to stay with her hip jewish California mother (Mayberry RFD"s Arlene Golonka) who hooks her a blind date with Christine (Erica Shaffer).

In a way, this film is a paradox of My Big Fat Greek Wedding. I should say it gets one star due to its glibness of the script. However, without being lurid and oversexual, it mimimalized an idyllical Lesbian relationship with a lot of wit. I will say the film is well shot by director of photography Jim Orr, it is just that the acting is SOOOO BAD!

With Arlene Golonka and Barbara (Bunny from the old Gomer Pyle TV show) Stuart as the mothers, Their performances seems to overplay itself in this film . As I said before, L.A. Law's Michele Greene seems to overshine the script and her role..you almost wish the film was about her alone!

Now other than Lesnick failure as an actress, Stand-up comic Suzanne Westenhoefer tries acting AND DOES IT BADLY..SUZY, stay a stand up comic PLEASE! and lets not get started on the wooden two note acting performance of Erica Shaffer. Her blonde wig acts better than she does in this film.

The funny part is the audio commentary of this film . Lesnick is filled with trivia, if only the film deserved this commentary...IT DOESNT!

This film belong in the oblivion of any vidio library. If you can get this for a dollar, you paid too much!

Bennet Pomerantz AUDIOWORLD May 3, 2008

The bad casting of Lesnick ruined the movie

Pretty boring film. The movie is about New Yorker Rachel (Lesnick) who moved to California to get away from her ex-girlfriend, Reggie. Rachel meets Christine, they fall in love, the are going to get married and Reggie comes to get Rachel back.

First of all, the casting of Lesnick was a great mistake in the movie. She is unlikable, unable to deliver an emotional performance (honestly, a piece of metal can muster more affection and emotion that she can), and just the wrong person for the role. She was supposed to be playing someone in her early 30s; but instead, she looks much older - her mother looks just a few couple of years older. Rachel came across as flimsy, neurotic and not the greatest catch.

On the other hand, Christine was very likable (and pretty much reminiscent of Charlotte in Sex and the City, maybe a bit too much). Reggie was actually the best character in the movie; she was aggressive, assertive, and smart. I actually wished that Christine would get together with Reggie. It would have certainly made it more interesting. Lesnick tried to cover too many issues in this movie and they were only superficially explored.

(SPOILER) Another thing that went into the movie was Rachel's deep rooted childhood trauma of losing a sister. It came to late and too superficial. The movie, and the story, seemed to contrived and too "put together" that it just doesn't fit. The other people in this movie could barely act, and the dialogue was delivered as if on queue.

The audio in this movie is horrible and the editing is not that good.
April 27, 2008

God, lesbians, and fidelity

I find this movie to be redemptive. Yes, it has its low-budget problems, but it also has enough (dare I say it?) spiritual maturity to give it a groundedness that I don't see often in the genre. Very few movies take spiritual conversion seriously, much less attempt to portray that mystery on film. This story manages to avoid the melodrama usually associated with conversion, and instead treats the experience with a plausible, convincing authenticity. The filmmakers are beginners, and it shows, but they deal with ancient issues of the human heart, and I'm so glad. October 5, 2007

No "pass" for lesbian theme: another stinker!!

There will always be those who don't care at ALL about quality in a film. As long as there are lesbians in it, baddah bing, 4-5 stars. This movie just plain old fashioned stinks. It makes Clair of the Moon seem great. Just take the advice the the 2 stars and below ratings...save your money. February 15, 2007

Writer/Director/Star = A Horrible waste of your Time.

Who wouldn't want to star in a movie they write and direct. Who wouldn't want two attractive women to fight over them in the story line. If you have the money and can make the movie, why not? But PLEASE keep your adventure into egotism to yourself. 1.) The star can not act. 2.) The director allows this film to go overboard and loses control. 3. The writing is so filled with such swagger and egocentric dialogue it is as if the writer is screaming "LOOK AT ME I AM FUNNY AND CLEVER!!!" I am sorry to say you are not. And what makes this worse, the writer, director and star are all one person. This movie could have been saved if the star/writer/director put a talented attractive (I am sorry but you have availed yourself to critics) actress to play off the two supporting actresses (who can act and are quite attractive)....Of course you would still have the dialogue but it would have been easier to watch. I hope it was worth the money to stroke the ego of Ms. Lesnick (actor/writer/director), but please you would have been better off donating the money to charity. I imagine she is an actress/writer who can not figure out why she can not get work, so she decided to hire herself. Who now can say "LOOK AT ME I AM A STAR OF A MOVIE." The trouble is if she saw the dailies each day while filming she should have fired herself. July 2, 2006

More reviews at Amazon.com ...