It starts out pretty sweet,a young boy and a girl who seemingly is in love. She at one point state that shes' been in love with him ever since she first saw him. They sleep together and she still in love,or so it seems. But then the next day, she all of a sudden is really cold and brush him off when he wants to spend time with her.Turns out she's suddenly is not in love with him anymore. When he ask why,she goes into a long explanation about being in the moment,and how he's yesterday's moment From there on it get even more weird and disjointed.Most of the dialog makes no sense either But the rest of the movie seem to revolve about the life of the boy's sexual escapades

I loved the way the director presented these three female characters (mother and 2 daughters) to us. The first scene gives you a hint of this method, and the actors' lines are keenly spoken to carry you through to the next scene. For those who haven't seen this, I recommend paying attention; the simplest line reveals a lot. All the actors did very well, but the cinematography was (in my view) somewhat lacking in places. Even at its longer than average run time, I believe it could have had another 15 minutes or so just to fill in some of the minor plot holes. Though not necessary, I believe the father and boyfriend needed more definition to their characters. I liked this movie for its unconventional approach, tasteful (no pun) nudity, and good humor. Portia Reiners did an exceptional job. I recommend that you find this movie wherever it's playing near you and go.

Outside of the nudity in this film, I cannot think of any other reason to see it, and you can see that with the sound off. This may also be the worst edited film I have ever seen. The film seems to jump from one scene to another with no logic or connection between scenes. The dialogue seems to consist of inane chatter with bits of pseudo-sophisticated chatter thrown in to create a sort of 'stew' of hip nonsense. If this were submitted as a student film in film school, I would hope that the student would be forced to leave film school and go back to being a waiter. The only good thing I can say about this film is that it may inspire me to write a screenplay, since I could do no worse than this. How did they get the money to do this piece of crap?

In continuing with my obsession of all things Jonathan Groff—the Lancaster native who gained fame on Broadway through "Spring Awakening," on the big screen in "Taking Woodstock," and on the TV hit "Glee"—I traveled to the big city (Philadelphia) to see "Twelve Thirty," an independent film by director Jeff Lipsky. "Twelve Thirty" is a dramatic and overpowering look into the lives of a family and a young man who enters and exits abruptly. Groff is that young man, Jeff, who befriends, falls in love, and loses his virginity to the youngest adult-daughter, date rapes the oldest daughter and has a tryst with the mother. Along the way, we learn many personal facts about everyone involved and even some facts about people who aren't even close to being involved. "Twelve Thirty" is far removed from the typical Hollywood movie, which makes it hard to review. At points, the film meanders through devastatingly boring dialog and at other times whips through a whirlwind of discourse that plays on every emotion. It is real. Sometimes in our personal lives we just don't want to hear what someone is saying, sometimes we don't want the conversation to end, this is the driving force behind "Twelve Thirty." During the walk from the theater to our dinner reservation, my wife and I talked and talked about the movie. We dissected scenes, connected with characters and wondered how much time we spent staring at naked bodies on the screen (yes, there is a lot of nudity). That conversation makes "Twelve Thirty" a good film. Get out and see "Twelve Thirty." If anything, it gives you something to talk about.

You really have to wonder how these mostly good actors got talked into this. Especially Jon Groff. Must have been a momentary lapse of judgment. Please see this if you must, but I would prefer to have my money and my two hours back. An aimless, wandering, boring gratuitous piece of cinema junk. The whole silly concept is filled with ridiculous suburban stereotypes. Pandering nudity that isn't terrible, just vulgar because it is so stupidly pointless. Characters that seemingly fade off with no resolution. Dialogue that is so bad I wanted to hit fast forward (and finally did, briefly). I enjoy film, but this in the top all time 5 of my worst. No wonder it's not even rated. It's not as bad as Liz Garcia's The Lifeguard, but it's really, really close. A serious time waster for anyone but the wine and cheese crowd who always find something to like.

Twelve Thirty