Reviews

After this movie was over, I couldn't do anything except lie on my bed, turn off the TV, and just be completely and totally stunned for a full five minutes.

First off, it has the most interesting and engaging directing style I've ever seen in any movie. I've never seen "Pi," so I'm not familiar with his work, but I was amazed at how many different ways he presented us with the information! I can't even pick out a favorite scene, there were so many interesting cuts and techniques used. And even in the one major scene where no unique editing was done (where Harry and Sarah are talking in her apartment after he bought her the television) the scene was perfect and gripping.

Anyway, all four major perfomances were outstanding. Not to rain on Julia Roberts's parade, because she did a fine job in "Erin Brockovich", but Ellen Burstyn was seriously robbed. I was also very impressed with Jared Leto--he's come a long way from "My So-Called Life"!

It was the most amazing ride I've ever been on while watching a movie. The ending sequence was so harrowing that it literally had me in tears. I was completely floored. It angered and disgusted me, but it also was probably the single most mesmerizing movie I've ever watched.

In closing, I think that this film should be required viewing for every high school health class. This is enough to scare someone away from drugs, I don't doubt that for a second.

10 out of 10

Thankfully I saw this movie on a date where I didn't have to pay, because if I had spent money on this movie that so shamelessly (1) played off previous (better) movies, (2) employed so many ridiculous situations, and (3) was so utterly disgusting in certain places, I would have been very upset.

First of all, Denzel Washington and Angelina Jolie are completely wasted in this film. They do the best they can, but the plot details are so utterly contrived that it is ridiculous. Why is Jolie (or any police officer, for that matter) sent into underground, deserted crime scenes to investigate, when the killer is obviously still at large? I am not overly familiar with police work, but this made absolutely no sense to me. With such a horrific killer at work, why would any officer, female or male, be sent out alone purposely?

Another problem I had with it was the pseudo-romantic relationship that was hinted at...at least that's how I took the later interactions between the main characters. Must EVERY film with a male and female lead end in the requisite romantic connection? Is it impossible for them to remain simply respected colleagues and friends? Maybe I interpreted it incorrectly, but if not...

When I see a movie, I want to see originality. It didn't exist in this film. 4 out of 10.

My comments on this movie...first of all, what ingenious casting. Tim Robbins in the role he plays in this movie is completely opposite to everything he stands for, and for some reason that just amused me to no end. He pulled the role off perfectly, and gave off this aura of creepiness that was just unreal. He is such a talented actor. As his wife, Joan Cusack was also perfectly cast. She exhibits just the right amount of zaniness, like she could just react in some crazy way at any moment. Indeed, she provides one of the creepiest scenes in the movie, right after Brooke is at the phone booth. It startled the heck out of me, and I don't think many other actresses could have done it as well. Bridges was also perfectly cast. He always seems to me to be calm and controlled, and he was very good as his paranoia overtook him.

By the way, did anyone else notice how ridiculous Michael and Brooke's "investigation" was?? Could they be more obvious? If they thought that Oliver and Cheryl were really the people they were, I would hope that they would be more careful and subtle about their "investigation."

A few words about the ending--infuriating, disgusting, horrifying, and absolutely ingenious. How they did it was absolutely amazing writing, in my opinion. I doubt I will ever look at news reports of tragedies in the same way again.

Overall, 5 out of 10. It was disturbing and well-acted, but certain scenes could have been written better.

I have seen this movie probably seven or eight times, and I simply never get tired of it. It seems like every time I see it, I discover something I never noticed before about it. The structuring of the film is terrific--we really never know the characters outside of the various weddings and funerals they attend. The casting is wonderful--Hugh Grant is obviously the star, but each character is fully fleshed out and so interesting! Kristin Scott Thomas is particularly impressive as the icy, brokenhearted Fiona who has so many hidden secrets. The actors playing the gay couple are wonderful in the subtle way the relationship is handled, and Matthew's speech at the funeral leaves me in tears every day.

This film has it all--sadness at Gareth's funeral, the torment of a broken heart, the joy of a wedding, and some absolutely hilarious scenes! Even after seeing it so many times, I cannot stop laughing in the scenes where Hugh gets stuck in the closet while the bride and groom are "celebrating" their marriage, or where he is stuck at the table with all his old girlfriends, or where the vicar performs his first wedding ceremony. It's hilarious without relying on stupid sight gags, obvious jokes, or other conventional movie cliches.

I know a lot of people may not agree with me, but I find this movie to be so completely entertaining that it amazes me. It's greatness lies in the individual scenes and the inclusion of sideplots in addition to the main romance between Charles and Carrie. I swear, every time I see it I find something else that I love about it. I highly recommend this to anyone who enjoys a subtle comedy (but be prepared to rewind it in several places to get a grasp on the British accents).

10 out of 10.

I, too, had a little trouble buying that such an intense relationship was born from such a minor conversation between them in the trunk. However, when I was able to get past that inconsistency in the plot, I found a great movie. Clooney and Lopez have great chemistry and show that they are both actors worthy of recognition. I loved the editing--the choppy cuts and the freezing of certain scenes. And I have never seen a better seduction scene in my life. The supporting cast was great too, especially the incomparably zany Steve Zahn. And once I got past the improbability of the relationship being so intense that she would risk her career for it, I thought that the way that she did risk her career was just great. I laughed out loud at the scene when he waves to her from the elevator. That is just a wonderful illustration that not everything is clear-cut or easy to do. Clooney was phenomenal, so cool...and just resigned to his life. I loved it.

By the way, seeing this movie after Jennifer Lopez has launched her career in pop music simply infuriated me that Hollywood has all but lost a true talent to the world of bubblegum pop.

I expected a lot more out of this movie than I got out of it. Although the two actresses perform very well together, and I got special enjoyment of watching their considerable acting talents go head-to-head in their argument scenes, I was completely unable to lose myself in the movie. I found Sarandon's character to be completely cold, unlikable, and unsympathetic. I certainly understand in retrospect why she wasn't the most relaxed, upbeat character ever written, but the things she did to Roberts' character are so inexcusable that it completely erased any sympathy I had for her.

It also struck me that some scenes could have used more explanation. For example, what was it that triggered Jackie's change of heart toward Isabel? Why was the scene at the children's play even included, implying a bond between the women, only to have them back to their conflicting selves in the next scene? Overall, I thought the film could have been a lot better. It was cliched (but without the typical cliched ending of a movie of this type), it did very little to make me care at all about the characters, and it just struck me as a weak attempt at a movie such as "Beaches" or "Terms of Endearment." I hope to see Roberts and Sarandon go head-to-head in a movie that is more deserving of their talents.

First of all, yes, I'm twenty years old and fell right into that minority of people who could honestly relate to this film. Not that I ever was in any of the situations, but...oh nevermind. But I thought that it was a great movie for people my age--sure, it was a bit overblown, but it was a comedy, remember that!! the truth is that kids do think about sex, and by the end of the movie they've made the subtle point that it's not all it's cracked up to be. sure, along the way they make it seem like the best thing ever, but in the changes in all the characters, the message is clear--kids may have hormones, but they're capable of real feelings and emotions. I thought the acting was great--I've seen a few people's comments on here ripping on the acting. All I can say is that these kids acted like real kids. I totally believed that they were people I could have gone to school with. As for some people's comments that Natasha Lyonne was the best thing in this movie, all I want to ask is why is it that so-called "film buffs" always denounce the acting of every teenager in a film like this, except the eccentric, anti-social one? Honestly. I understand that Lyonne really stood out in this movie, and she was good, but she was hardly the best thing in it. I hate to make personal comments about people on here, but I think that if you're too old to appreciate the accuracy and humor (yes, slightly overblown and disgusting humor, but high school humor) of this movie, you really shouldn't be commenting.

Great job on this movie. The most fun one I've seen in a long time. 8 out of 10.

I wonder what real life politicians who saw this movie think about what Jay Billington Bulworth had to say about contemporary politics, because everything he said was so right that I just wanted to personally send a copy to every American political figure. I can't believe how on target this film was about the current political situation. It was a biting satire about the farce that is American politics as well as the corruption of our government, and I loved every second of it. Sure, the Warren Beatty rapping was hard on the ears and (in my opinion) went on for a little too long, but the movie hooked me. The scene where he is speaking at the black church was hard to watch, but only because what he was saying...um...rapping, was so true that I found myself being kind of ashamed for thinking the government was as good as it pretends to be. An excellent screenplay by Warren Beatty and an acting performance where he pulls out all the stops--it's plainly obvious how much he believes in what he is doing. 8 out of 10, and a 9.5 for Beatty's performance.

You know, I don't think there's an actor out there I dislike as much as Leonardo DiCaprio, but there is absolutely no denying his talent as an actor, especially in this movie. He is one of the few reasons I enjoyed this movie. I was floored at his tender portrayal of Arnie Grape. The movie was decent, although not one that stands out particularly in my mind, but I will never forget seeing teenybopper heart-throb Leo come onto the screen with that tousled hair, innocent face and absolutely convincing acting. Although I don't like him, his choices of characters and skill at acting keeps me watching his movies.

As someone with a slightly questionable relationship with my father, few films can bring me to tears the way this one does at the end. The line "Dad, wanna have a catch?" is more than enough to make me cry. But the best part of this movie is that it isn't just a sappy, feelgood movie about father-son relationships. In fact, I watched the entire thing the first time simply because I wanted to see the next step in Ray's weird and unbelievable journey. What's going to happen in Terrence Mann's apartment? Who is that old man with the cane? It's a cliche'd, corny (haha, sorry, couldn't think of another word) plot, and yet it's fascinating... Good always prevails, nothing ends with death, children have all the answers...what more can we ask for? The acting wasn't great, although Ray Liotta's mystical portrayal of Shoeless Joe fascinated me. But altogether, I felt the cast complemented each other nicely and it is just a great movie. And I definitely agree with the quote--I don't know if I could love anyone who didn't at least get teary-eyed at this movie. 7.5 out of 10.

The thing that hit me the most after seeing this movie was the way that the audience, upon the turning on of the theater lights, simply rose as one and walked silently out of the theater. Not more than a word was said, and I think that's the best compliment anyone can give this movie. Out of all the teenagers and Gen-Xers that were in the theater, not one of us felt compelled to speak after watching this. I can say that the opening sequence hit me harder than anything I have ever witnessed in my (albeit short) life. I found myself wrapping my arms around my knees, trying to hide my eyes but unable to avoid the horror unfolding on the screen. I actually felt like somehow I was in danger. The horror I felt as the soldiers stepped out of the boats into the gunfire was gut-wrenching. All the movies we watch in school, all the History Channel specials don't even touch what this movie touched, honestly. I never realized the horror of what D-Day and this war was until I saw this movie. It took it out of the abstract and forced those of us who have never had to live through a real war to see it as they did. It makes me want to thank every one of the men who were in this war for what they sacrificed for those of us who live here now. I don't know if I would be strong enough to handle it, and I hold as my heroes anyone who was.

About the movie in itself, I actually thought the scenes at the beginning and end were touching. A bit too theatrically staged, definitely, but I thought it was a nice beginning and end for the movie. The battle scenes, enough said. Phenomenal. The one and only criticism I have is that I think the script was a little weak in its character development. I had a hard time really feeling for the characters, and I think that maybe the battle scenes were emphasized so much that we lost who the men really were. It's hard to develop characters while the audience is concentrating on gunfire. However, this was an excellent, excellent movie, definitely, a 9 out of 10.

I loved this movie. I absolutely loved it. I was fascinated by every single aspect of it. Sure, the plot wasn't the most realistic, but who cares? Movies are entertainment, and that's all. The profanity was not that excessive if you spend any time at all with many lower to middle-class people around the age of the characters. In fact, it was downright realistic. As for the acting, it was wonderful watching Damon portray this character who has to struggle with what he thinks he wants, what he is told he should want, and what he finally realizes he really wants. No, I don't think it was the best performance of the year, but it was definitely one of the top five and worthy of a Best Actor nomination. The chemistry between him and Minnie Driver was electric, particularly during their first date and again in the scene in her apartment before he leaves. Robin Williams, in my opinion, delivers his best performance. Sure, it's the typical Williams-drama character from Dead Poets Society and the like, but this character was better with the mental games and interactions with Will. The best part of this movie was watching the relationship develop between Will and Sean. This wasn't an epic movie, nothing too profound, but it was a small movie about love, relationships, and finding yourself, and in this capacity I think it was wonderful. 9.5 out of 10.

I have seen this movie probably 7 or 8 times in the past three years, wrote a paper about it for my college film class last semester, and basically regard it as my favorite movie of all time. Where to begin with the praise for this movie? Let's start with the acting. Dustin Hoffman is my favorite actor, and has been for a while. I'd watch him in any role. I was amazed at the way he was able to pull off this role. I've never seen a more deserved Oscar win. The vacant stare, the monotone voice, the screaming, it was unbelievable. Each time I watch it I am floored by his talent. Tom Cruise is also good, the villain of the story who undergoes such a subtle change that it's almost not visible until nearly the end. He is, however, perfectly suited for the flashy, egotistical character of Charlie, and I think he did a great job. The directing was unobtrusive and beautiful, for the most part just letting the action unfold, which is exactly the way it should have been done. It's a feel-good movie that does that and more, and I think nothing I've seen in the movies is as touching as the scene in the motel where Charlie discovers who "Rain Man" really is. I give this movie a 9.5 out of 10. Absolutely wonderful.

First of all, I'm 19 years old, and seeing this movie makes me realize that a lot of what went on in the 60's is still relevant today. Nearly everyone I know who graduated around my time is just as unsure of their future and open to suggestion as Ben is in this film. What do we do? Do we settle down with what is sure to be a stable future ("Plastics"), or do we sow our wild oats, as Ben did? This movie isn't about having affairs with our parents friends, not at all. It's about confusion, about a million people telling you what to do and you just wanting to tell everyone to slow down, just let you rest for a second. This movie was great, but I can also understand how some people wouldn't think it was that great. If people come out of graduation knowing exactly what they want to do with their lives, they will probably see this movie as simply about a slightly disturbed kid sleeping with an older woman. However I think many people see it for what it really is.

I agree...Dustin Hoffman's performance was wonderful. It nearly made me nervous just watching him portray the nervousness of Ben. He was terrific. I, too, was really struck by the scene at the end. Ben and Elaine have run off, they're going to be so happy...yeah right! There they sit in the bus, not talking to each other, just staring straight ahead. Sure, they're excited, but for what? And that seems to be life. Decisions are made irresponsibly and too quickly, and things rarely turn out the way you imagine them to be. The ending was sadly perfect. It may be over 30 years old, but this movie is still completely relevant to today's youth. A 9 out of 10.

I am a college student who watched this movie for the first time last year in my film class. I'd had very minimal experience with Hitchcock before this class, with just the standards (Psycho, The Birds) under my belt. This one fascinated me though. From the slightly creepy homosexual undertones to the double scenes, it amazed me. How would someone get the idea to make a movie about a matched pair and then make two of every single scene??? What a genius. Absolutely fantastic.

It was only the short length of this film that kept me watching throughout. I agree with those who say that the first half of this movie was intriguing. The concept that the movie is based on is very interesting and it could have been a lot better. I thought Marsden and Holmes were okay, not bad for early in their careers, and I'm certain they will have many more opportunities to showcase their talent. However I think the pairing of their characters made little, if any, sense. The subplot about Steve's dead brother seemed like there should be more of a tie-in, like the movie was edited one too many times. I never really understood where the film was trying to go with the flashbacks to his brother. The scene, though, that really removed me from this film was the one in the psychiatric institution. Not only was the institution horribly stereotyped as a Gothic, rundown dungeon, but the patients were comical in their portrayals. I understand that the director was trying to show the horror of the mind experiments, but what was meant to be horrifying was so overplayed it ended up making me laugh. In my opinion this sequence alone turned the movie from a little above average one to no more than a 4 out of 10.

The genre of teen slasher flicks that was reincarnated with the brilliant Scream and Scream 2 has gone swiftly downhill. Each movie is now the same basic thing, except for slightly different, but equally predictable, plots. This genre is getting grossly overused and although capable of conjuring up a few screams, the quality of these movies is decreasing rapidly.

I love this movie. I absolutely love it. I hate the horror genre, I hate teen movies as a rule, but I loved this movie. I don't understand why Hollywood lets anyone except Kevin Williamson write these scripts. Disturbing Behavior, Urban Legends, and all the other non-Williamson movies have been, in a word, pathetic. The best part of this movie is how throughout it, they make a complete mockery of horror movies, and yet come up with one of the scariest ones I've seen in a while. This total self-satirizing style kept me laughing when I wasn't screaming, and I thoroughly enjoyed myself.

I don't think Wes Craven or Kevin Williamson "rediscovered" the teen horror genre. I don't think it's really a genre worth rediscovering, at least based on the recent flops that have been released. It's only through the brilliance of Craven and Williamson that this movie was so wonderful, in my opinion. I wouldn't have enjoyed it nearly as much if it wasn't so cleverly written. I give it an 8 out of 10.