the working title for no looking back was long time , nothing new , and rarely has there been a more apt name for a motion picture .
even though this movie clocks in at a relatively skinny 96 minutes , it seems to run long enough to engulf two titanics .
writer / director edward burns has trotted out a hackneyed storyline , the trajectory of which will be instantly recognizable to anyone who has n't spent their life in seclusion .
instead of tweaking the formula a little to invigorate the proceedings , burns is content to allow the film to ramble aimlessly towards its irritatingly predictable conclusion , offering precious few momentary pleasures along the way .
no looking back is dominated by three very dislikable characters whose constant presence on the screen is painful .
the most appropriate ending would have been a triple suicide , and the sooner , the better .
alas
, that 's not the case , and those who stick with this film for its entire length will be forced to endure the prolonged company of this wretched trio .
and , to further depress audiences
, burns has shot the entire film on cold , rainy days in a gray new york state beach town .
peeks of sunshine are few and far between .
no wonder the characters are all so miserable .
first of all , we have charlie ( burns ) , a generation x slacker who abandoned his girlfriend three years ago after she had an abortion , then spent some time bumming around in california before deciding to come home .
that girlfriend is claudia ( lauren holly ) , and , after picking up the pieces of her life following charlie 's departure , she has moved on , shacking up with one of charlie 's old school buddies , mike ( jon bon jovi ) .
the two have a comfortable relationship , but it 's apparent to even a blind person that they 're not right for each other .
claudia years for some spice in her life ; mike wants to settle down and have children .
then charlie re - enters the mix .
so who , if anyone , will claudia end up with ? who cares ? ?
no looking back goes to extraordinary lengths to make sure that we 're not especially interested in the outcome of the romantic triangle .
so what if no one finds happiness -- these characters do n't deserve it anyway , especially after wasting 90 minutes of our time .
they are n't real people -- they 're a writer 's construct stumbling through a too - obvious storyline .
they should know the ending as well as we do .
and burns should have given his audience more credit and presented them with a plot that at least offered a surprise or two .
another frustrating thing about no looking back is that burns has populated the film with a group of potentially - interesting supporting characters .
blythe danner is solid as claudia 's housebound mother , connie britton is suitably high - strung as claudia 's neurotic sister , and jennifer esposito is eye - catching as a bartender in search of a little romance .
sadly , all we get is quick glimpses into their lives , although a movie about any of them would have been far more intriguing than the story burns has chosen to tell .
none of the lead performers are going to wow critics with their thespian attributes .
edward burns is pushing the edge of his limited range here .
jon bon jovi shows more acting ability than one might reasonably expect from a singer branching into a different career , but he could still use a little polish .
the worst case is lauren holly , who presents a completely bland claudia .
as portrayed here , she 's hardly the kind of woman who would inspire even a moment 's interest , not to mention undying love .
burns ' ex , the monumentally untalented maxine bahns , would have been hard - pressed to do a less inspired job .
when he released the brothers mcmullen , edward burns was revered as the wunderkind of the 1995 sundance film festival ( robert redford has apparently stuck with him -- the aging actor / director executive produced this mess ) .
two films and three short years later , the luster has faded .
some movie makers have only one good film in them . with back- to - back duds
like she 's the one and no looking back to follow the delightful brothers , burns is beginning to look like a member of that undistinguished club .
to further depress audiences sadly who cares ? ? painful it seems to run long enough to engulf two titanics the luster has faded with back- to - back duds a hackneyed storyline another frustrating thing the worst case none of the lead performers are going to wow critics with their thespian attributes allow the film to ramble aimlessly towards its irritatingly predictable conclusion