I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

I only give this film a 6 because, having seen the short-form original on the BOYS LIFE 5 DVD compilation, I generally prefer it over this feature film. The only point in this film's favor is that it develops the character of Johnny Drake, who was virtually raised in an emotional vacuum. The creators totally blow the ending of this film, by not having Johnny develop a relationship with either Alexa or Ben that satisfies his desire to be loved. The short-form film never touches on this theme, and I believe is better because of it. That film at least leaves the viewer wondering what might happen in the future with Ben, but neither film leaves the viewer with a satisfactory resolution. Believe me, the version of the story told in 20 minutes works better from a cinematic perspective that this drawn-out version of the same story.

Let's get a couple of things straight. This movie is rated R for sexual content but Emmy Rossum does not get naked in it. If that's what you're looking for, trust me, you won't find it here. What you will find is one of the reasons movie critics get so cranky. When you see a critic who appears overly harsh about a film's flaws, it could be because he or she has seen those same flaws in so many other movies. That's what happens with Dare. It does something I've seen in at least 2 or 3 other films and not only does it never work, I don't think it can work and don't understand why anyone ever thinks it would.What Dare does is completely shift its focus from one character to another as it goes along. I'm not talking about focusing on many different people whose stories intersect or even telling the same story over again with different perspectives. I'm talking about one continuous story where the main character simply changes as you watch, oftentimes with a little notice on screen to indicate the change.Where this storytelling device comes from is a mystery to me. What I am clear on is that it's defective, at least in the context of a motion picture. Whatever the theory or intent, the practical effect of doing this in a film is to ask the audience to do the same thing over and over again. At the start of the movie, the viewer is introduced to a character and asked to take an interest in their life. Then that character is either ejected or relegated to the background and the viewer is introduced to another character and asked to take an interest in their life. And that's repeated again and sometimes again and again and again.The problem with this should be obvious. If the audience actually takes interest in the first character you show them, that's who they want to watch. They don't want that person to be replaced by some other character, either one they haven't seen before or one they have but has been established as a minor character in their minds. The first 10 or 15 minutes of a motion picture is usually when people figure out if they want to watch it or not. Rotating the main character is asking people to go through that introductory process over and over and that's not a natural thing. Dare rotates through three main characters. Alexa (Emmy Rossum) is a virginal theater chick in her high school. Her story is about how she's emotionally repressed and inexperienced and how being taunted about that by a well known alumnus of her school transforms her into a slut. Next up to bat is Alexa's best friend Ben (Ashley Springer). His story is about how he's gay and…well, that's pretty much it. The commonality of the first two segments is that Alexa and Ben both have their first sexual encounter with the same guy. He's Johnny (Zach Gilford) and he takes over as the main character in the third and thankfully final part of the movie. After being shown as the cool but still somewhat dickish most popular kid in school, Johnny's segment is about how he's really even more screwed up than either Alexa and Ben because…blah, blah blah. Alexa's story is the only one I cared about and it gets shoved off screen just as they start to show the fallout of her making a radical change in her life, replacing it with the utterly-by-the-numbers tales of Ben and Johnny.Well, utterly-by-the-numbers isn't accurate. Ben has sex with Johnny after he knows Alexa and Johnny have boinked and Johnny knows Alexa and Ben are best friends when he and Ben do it. I know kids today are supposed to be more sexually fluid, but that's pretty twisted and Dare loses its last chance to engage the audience by having Ben be totally unconcerned by such bed hopping, Johnny treating it like having to choose between chocolate and vanilla ice cream and Alexa acting as though the cross-copulating is like eating your salad with the wrong fork.By the time Dare wraps up, it's clear that Alexa was ultimately a supporting character to Johnny's story and Ben was barely more than a bit part, even though the ending to Johnny's story happens entirely off camera. That's the kind of nonsensical structure you get from rotating main characters. It doesn't work and filmmakers need to stop doing it.The acting and the direction of Dare are fine and the dialog is unmemorable, but none of that matters because it's so poorly structured. If this film were a house, it would be condemned and the only ones who could live in it would be families of raccoons. I could have overlooked that if Emmy Rossum had gotten naked. She doesn't, so I can't.

One of the worst films I have ever seen in my life. Emmy Rossum is trying to prove to everyone that she isn't just the girl next door, she is the slutty girl next door on crack.I'm confused, are we supposed to feel sorry for these rich kids who don't know what to do with their lives but to booze, drug up, have all kinds of unprotected sex and still make it into high society, corporate America and become future bureaucrats like their parents? Uh, to quote an "f" bomb like one of the ones used in the film. "I don't effing think so." This film deserves an "F" as in "F***". Avoid this movie like a plague. You have been warned.

The movie is split into four acts. The first three tell the story from the perspective of each of the three main characters, respectively, and the last act is a kind of epilogue. The film is still linear though, meaning that while the second act shows a different perspective than the first, it's still a continuation of the story, rather than a restart from the beginning. The rest of the acts continue that way.The first act had me wondering why I was putting myself through what seemed to be your run-of-the-mill teen drama that might as well have been an episode of The O.C. rather than a feature film. A typical high school "good girl" who always played it safe and never got into trouble starts questioning her value system. She wonders if being "bad" would benefit her, namely, to give her the life experience she needs in order to realize her dreams of becoming an actress. Her lifelong platonic male best friend is worried about her newfound rebelliousness, and he even feels betrayed by it.Sometime during the second act is when this film started to deviate from anything I had expected. When the third act came, the story had gotten so messed up that I felt ashamed of my initial assumptions. I'm not even going to hint at what happens, because it might soften the impact of seeing it unfold on the screen. All I'll say is that it deals with questioning the seeming obviousness of people's sexuality and popularity. This turned out to be something of an artsy picture that didn't focus on typical Hollywood entertainment values. It's "smart", in that it's not always obvious what exactly is going on, and there's no voice-over to tell you what the characters are feeling. It's an original story that makes you think.Was this movie good? Tough call. The acting is excellent and the production quality high. Some people might be bored or just confused by this, due to the strangeness and ambiguity. If you like a deviation now and then from the norm, you might appreciate it, and if you're into independent film, definitely give this a shot.