Some films seem "long" because it demands the audience's attention at all times, others are so because the audience is bored. "Broken English" falls comfortably in the latter.<br /><br />I have a feeling, in making Broken English, Cassvetes sticks with "safe" grounds. The topic, the set, and the characters are nothing new to those familiar to the "chick flick" genre. Being an independent film, she could have been a little more bold in her story, but she was too worried about pleasing the judges than the audience.<br /><br />Instead, it is reduced to a "checklist" independent film. Lead role with obvious personality flaws - CHECK! Cheated by playboy celebrity - CHECK! Man in "sexy" accent - CHECK! Nice guy and gay friend - CHECK! Ethnic representation (Jewish, Hispanic, Asian, etc) - CHECK! Friend has secret psychological problems - CHECK! "Romantic" location for ending - CHECK!<br /><br />The interesting thing is, the broad brush Cassavetes used to paint the "typical" American woman: perpetual depression, distorted reality, aimlessly looking for "happiness" in the wrong places, fear disguised in a sense independence. Is this the message she is trying to convey?<br /><br />To sum up, "Broken English" tries to be groundbreaking, or topical, or both. But it ends up being a paint-by-number independent festival film. The distinction comes not from the satisfaction of the audience, but from the tick marks on the judges' evaluation forms. I hope films such as "Broken English" is not indicative of the trend in independent film making, but I am probably wrong.