Cashback (film) - Critical Response

Critical Response

The feature received mixed reviews from critics, garnering a 45% ("Rotten") rating on Rotten Tomatoes, which concluded that the film is "full of unlikable characters, messy editing, and gratuitous nudity". In contrast, Justin Chang of Variety described it as "slickly charming, gently erotic and directed with supreme polish". Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times said the film is "lightweight, as it should be", adding that Ben and Sharon "are delighted to be admired by such wonderful partners, and we are happy for them. And that's about it." Matt Seitz of The New York Times called the film a "crock", criticizing its "validation of Ben’s adolescent concept of beauty, its wafer-thin characterizations, its gorgeous but overwrought widescreen photography and its abundance of 'How did they do that?' trick shots." Steven Rea of The Philadelphia Inquirer gave the film three of four stars, calling it "a sleek little meditation on beauty, desire, love and time", but saying it "isn't as deep as it pretends to be." Scott Tobias of The A.V. Club graded the film as a "C–", noting its "luscious imagery" but ultimately calling it trite and unremarkable. Jeff Shannon of The Seattle Times gave the film a positive review, commending its account of love and its visual style. Ed Gonzalez of Slant Magazine gave a particularly negative review, criticizing it for misogyny and sexual objectification, adding that Ben is "just as skuzzily self-absorbed as his perpetually horny mates." Jim Ridley of The Village Voice said "he movie is too cute by half, made close to unbearable whenever Ben's narration spews glib pseudo-profundities about memory and temporal stillness", while also complimenting some of its comic and visual elements. Desson Thomson of The Washington Post was also critical, describing Ben and Sharon's romance as uninventive and the film as shallow.