Colibel Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

ShangLuda Admirable film.

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

Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

moonspinner55 Cable-film follow-up to an excellent predecessor about abortion through the years; the theme this time is lesbianism, and the opening segment set in 1961 is outstanding as Vanessa Redgrave deals with the loss of her elderly lover, the coldness of the woman's family and her seeming lack of all options. The short film is a tiny bit over-the-top, but extremely well-acted and sensitively viewed. It dominates this overall look at women dealing with sexual issues, especially as Chloë Sevigny isn't given much to do but smolder in chapter two, and the closer with Ellen DeGeneres and Sharon Stone fails because the actresses are totally unconvincing as lovers who want a child.

Theo Robertson HBO were credited as producing this TVM the same company that produced critically acclaimed hard hitting dramas like OZ and THE SOPRANOS so right away I was expecting some in your face intense drama along with explicit scenes of lesbian love making . Unfortunately I was very disappointed on both counts in this anthology drama Story one ) This centres around a lesbian couple who have lived together for decades . The home owner dies so her distant family decide to sell the house meaning her partner will become homeless . I can't help thinking there's an agenda here , one that screams in support of civil partnerships . Whatever the rights and wrongs of this it should be pointed out that there's a lack of logic to the premise . All the dead woman had to do was change her will while she was alive Story two ) A bunch of feminist " lesbian " students find the going tough when their college commitee turn against them though for one of them it leads to a happy ending . This is what I don't understand - Are they lesbians or are they just trendy students jumping on a bandwagon ? I think they are but the script is neither scathing or cynical enough to make this point clearer Story three ) HBO doesn't do comedy very well and this third story is trying to be a comedy . We also have to put up with a lesbian whining to her girlfriend " Why can't I give you a baby ? " That's because you're a woman dear . I was also puzzled how anyone who looks like Sharon Stone has a problem finding sperm Not as bad as it could of been but as someone who thinks HBO is the most outstanding TV company in America I think they should concentrate on dramas featuring gangsters and maximum security prisons

Danishya I absolutely loved this movie. I probably wouldn't have written a review, except I read the review that says unequal, and I completely disagree. I believe this movie was pretty accurate in each decade. The one that depicts 2000 was very moving and a lot different from the first decade. I think they were very brilliant to focus on the pregnancy issue. Lesbians and gay men these days want children and realize this can be a reality. I don't believe that was an issue until recent years. There is always a big focus on discrimination and unequal rights. This decade focused on the people and not only the huge issue of discrimination. It gave everyone just a little insight that lesbians and gays are people too with normal desires and needs.I think it was a super movie and I highly recommend it.

bob the moo Three tales of lesbian couples having different struggles across three different time periods. In the sixties a lifelong lesbian couple who have never come out find the difficulties that occur due to them having no legal connection to one another. In the seventies a university student who is a feminist faces her friends' disapproval when she falls for a stereotypical `butch john' lesbian. In the nineties an openly gay couple decide to try for child and start looking for sperm.I first heard of this film because I always have time for anything that Nia Long does. This caught my eye on her CV and when it came on TV I watched it. I wasn't sure what to expect but most of it works quite well. As the stories are pretty distinct (the only connection being the house) so I'll deal with them so. The first is easily the best and is the most emotionally involving. It is a little too happy and unreal at the start but the tragic situation that Edith finds herself in because of her love is very moving. The second story is a little less real to me as it deals with a problem within the lesbian community (of which I have no experience to speak of). It is less moving and also a little more explicit and may satisfy those who are only interested in lesbians in terms of male arousal! I don't think it is very sexual or overly done but I didn't think there was too much need for it - regardless of the participants sexuality I didn't think it really added to the subject. However the story again is pretty good and is interesting as it is not an issue I was aware of.The final story is the most optimistic but also the weakest. The `issue' is a lot less serious and the film treats it as such with the whole segment being very light-hearted and bright. It doesn't really add anything to the film and doesn't fit with the first two segments. The cast are pretty much all good. In the first part Redgrave is excellent and her plight is made very real by the strength of her performance. In the second film Sevingy steals the show easily with a good performance. In the third DeGeneres happily underplays and isn't `zany' or `wacky', she is funny but not in an annoying way. Stone is weak because her character simply doesn't fit with her body - far too youthful and carefree to suit Stone. The support add to the feel that this is full of `stars' with Perkins, Giamatti, Long, King and others all doing OK in support.Overall this film starts strong but gets progressively weaker as it goes, with the final section being quite frivolous compared to the emotion of the opening. It is an interesting film but it doesn't quite work as well as it should have done.