|
|
 |
|
|
Alynda Wheat, People: GOOD (NOT GREAT) (cg) "Cue the carpet f-bombing, toilet humor, and generally doing anything and everything to avoid looking like a chick flick -- never mind that it's a pretty decent one. Oh well." (Read the full review...) 191 words, 09/02/10 Mary Pols, Time: GOOD "...sweetly compelling, and like the better Judd Apatow movies is that unusual animal: a romantic comedy that works for both sexes." (Read the full review...) 942 words, 09/03/10 Jake Coyle, Associated Press: WEAK (cg) "It's as though director Nanette Burstein, working from Geoff LaTulippe's screenplay, tried to surround a sappy rom-com with Judd Apatow-inspired yucks. It comes across as desperate for laughs.... feels contrived." (Read the full review...) 602 words, 09/02/10 Thelma Adams, Us Weekly: MODERATE (cg) "The costars -- despite their real-life are-they-or-aren't-they relationship -- lack the crazy spark that's needed in good romantic comedies.... As for the humor, it's pretty lame..." (Read the full review...) 177 words, 09/02/10 Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly: EXCELLENT (cg) "...a minor movie, but it's also the rare romantic comedy in which you can actually believe what you're seeing." (Read the full review...) 738 words, 09/03/10 Peter Travers, Rolling Stone: WEAK (cg) "...a sappy-sweet romcom... Barrymore and Long are both appealing, but not enough to sustain audience interest in the cinematic equivalent of dry-humping." (Read the full review...) 136 words, 09/03/10 Claudia Puig, USA Today: MODERATE (cg) "...stops short of the finish line, burying its romantic-comedy assets under calculated efforts to be socially relevant and vulgar attempts at humor." (Read the full review...) 391 words, 09/03/10 James Berardinelli, Reel Views: VERY GOOD (cg) "...the details are unique enough for the production not to seem overly formulaic. It's a nice, understated way to end the summer." (Read the full review...) 816 words, 08/31/10
A.O. Scott, New York Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT) "...crisply directed by Nanette Burstein from a better-than-average script by the first-timer Geoff LaTulippe... hardly breaks the generic mold, it has enough honesty and charm to set it apart from most other recent examples [of the romantic comedy]." (Read the full review...) 1,018 words, 09/03/10 Joe Neumaier, New York Daily News: POOR (cg) "...feels as if it's filled with all the hot air that separates New York and San Francisco, yet still manages to be a suffocating bore." (Read the full review...) 406 words, 09/03/10 Michael Phillips, Los Angeles Times/Chicago Tribune: VERY GOOD "I liked the movie mainly for Barrymore. The way she handles the crucial, early 'I love you' moment (he's saying it to her, and the camera shows us what she's thinking), you think: This is one canny actress." (Read the full review...) 468 words, 09/03/10 Lou Lumenick, New York Post: POOR (cg) "...not even remotely funny." (Read the full review...) 443 words, 09/03/10 John Anderson, New York Newsday: GOOD (NOT GREAT) (cg) "Chemistry-free relationship at heart of movie makes it a bit of a slog, but the peripheral characters can be hilarious." (Read the full review...) 413 words, 09/03/10 Mary Houlihan, Chicago Sun-Times: MODERATE (cg) "Deep within lies an interesting modern romance, but it's buried beneath a stunning amount of in-your-face vulgarity that stoops low for laughs in nearly every scene." (Read the full review...) 648 words, 09/03/10 Karina Longworth, Village Voice/LA Weekly: POOR "...fucking boring.... rated R because everyone swears excessively for no reason, the supporting cast of smart comedians (Charlie Day, Jason Sudeikis) saddled with delivering painfully dumb, often unnecessarily dirty dialogue." (Read the full review...) 253 words, 09/01/10 Linda Barnard, Toronto Star: WEAK (cg) "...a reminder of the sorry state of the rom-com, where gross scenes and easy-to-write trash talk have replaced smart dialogue." (Read the full review...) 574 words, 09/03/10 Rick Groen, Toronto Globe & Mail: POOR (cg) "...the cinematic equivalent of landfill..." (Read the full review...) 703 words, 09/03/10 Josep Parera, La Opinion: GOOD (cg) "El guión desvergonzado del debutante Geoff LaTulippe, es aprovechado por los excelentes secundarios para ir más allá de las convenciones de la comedia romántica." (Read the full review...) 420 words, 09/03/10 Norman Wilner, Toronto Now: GOOD (NOT GREAT) (cg) "...brings a refreshing frankness... the leads are awfully winning." (Read the full review...) 152 words, 09/02/10
Michael O'Sullivan, Washington Post: GOOD (NOT GREAT) (cg) "It's filthy, funny and kind of sweet, if not quite up to the level of Judd Apatow's oeuvre in the burgeoning field of R-rated comedies with heart." (Read the full review...) 554 words, 09/03/10 Carrie Rickey, Philadelphia Inquirer: GOOD (NOT GREAT) (cg) "The movie avoids most of the romantic comedy cliches, and its leads are appealing. That's almost enough for me. But not quite." (Read the full review...) 328 words, 09/03/10 Mick LaSalle, Houston Chronicle/San Francisco Chronicle: OUTSTANDING (cg) "...first rate.... recognizes that modern people are pretty coarse, that they're loose, profane and cavalier in ways that previous generations weren't. It also knows that love and intimacy have the same urgency as ever.... captures the harshness and the sweetness of our time." (Read the full review...) 630 words, 09/03/10 Roger Moore, Orlando Sentinel: MODERATE (cg) "There's an unexpected wistfulness, a bittersweet undercurrent... manages more than a few moments that hit close to home." (Read the full review...) 537 words, 09/03/10 Tom Horgen, Minneapolis Star-Tribune: WEAK (cg) "...tries its hardest to blend Apatow's bromance humor with the rom-com's sappy conventionalism. The result is a goulash that just doesn't taste right." (Read the full review...) 339 words, 09/03/10 Randy Cordova, Arizona Republic: MODERATE (cg) "At times, it has the sweet, scruffy nature.... [then] suddenly switches gears and becomes crude and stupid, full of gross-out humor in the 'Van Wilder' tradition. Think of it as the 'Sybil' of romantic comedies." (Read the full review...) 458 words, 09/03/10 Wesley Morris, Boston Globe: VERY GOOD (cg) "Geoff LaTulippe, and the director, Nanette Burstein, manage to carve out an energetic, sincere personality for their movie that verges on grown-up." (Read the full review...) 858 words, 09/03/10 Clint O'Connor, Cleveland Plain-Dealer: FAIR (cg) "...heartless and soulless, flimsy and formulaic. Both leads sleepwalk through the proceedings. There's no connection to the characters. And there's very little chemistry between Barrymore and Long..." (Read the full review...) 452 words, 09/03/10 Moira Macdonald, Seattle Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT) (cg) "...has its moments but is ultimately trying a little too hard (something Barrymore, with her trademark lightness, never does)." (Read the full review...) 383 words, 09/03/10 Joe Williams, St. Louis Post-Dispatch: GOOD (NOT GREAT) (cg) "Justin Long and Drew Barrymore have a believable chemistry that makes 'Going the Distance' worth going to. More or less." (Read the full review...) 317 words, 09/03/10 Steve Persall, St. Petersburg Times: POOR (cg) "...a standard-issue romantic comedy believing smutty talk adds something worthwhile to the genre.... a movie in which doors exist to bonk someone in the nose, drawers are built to bruise shins upon, and background extras noticeably chat phony." (Read the full review...) 530 words, 09/02/10 Tom Long, Detroit News: VERY GOOD (cg) "The sheer audacity makes it noteworthy, while the comic talents involved make it work." (Read the full review...) 506 words, 09/03/10
Karina Longworth, Village Voice/LA Weekly: POOR "...fucking boring.... rated R because everyone swears excessively for no reason, the supporting cast of smart comedians (Charlie Day, Jason Sudeikis) saddled with delivering painfully dumb, often unnecessarily dirty dialogue." (Read the full review...) 253 words, 09/01/10 Brett Michel, Boston Phoenix: WEAK (cg) "...script must have sat long buried in dust -- which might also explain its filthy dialogue.... there's little need to go the distance with this bumpy ride." (Read the full review...) 143 words, 09/02/10 Scott Tobias, AV Club: VERY GOOD (cg) "...the rare example of how the old formula can still work, provided that it's animated by good writing and appealing performances, and that it never actively insults the audience's intelligence." (Read the full review...) 389 words, 09/02/10 Peter Martin, Cinematical: FAIR "...an intermittently funny romantic comedy that piles on obscenities and sexual innuendo in a desperate attempt to be hip and relevant.... only works in fits and starts." (Read the full review...) 942 words, 09/03/10 Nick Schager, Slant: WEAK (cg) "...fervently follows its genre's trademark formula, its lack of imagination so pronounced that it's a miracle Cake's 'The Distance' doesn't appear on the soundtrack." (Read the full review...) 361 words, 09/01/10 Norman Wilner, Toronto Now: GOOD (NOT GREAT) (cg) "...brings a refreshing frankness... the leads are awfully winning." (Read the full review...) 152 words, 09/02/10 MaryAnn Johanson, Flick Filosopher: MODERATE (cg) "Be careful how you rom-com..." (Read the full review...) 921 words, 09/03/10
A.O. Scott, New York Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT) "...crisply directed by Nanette Burstein from a better-than-average script by the first-timer Geoff LaTulippe... hardly breaks the generic mold, it has enough honesty and charm to set it apart from most other recent examples [of the romantic comedy]." (Read the full review...) 1,018 words, 09/03/10 Michael Phillips, Los Angeles Times: VERY GOOD "I liked the movie mainly for Barrymore. The way she handles the crucial, early 'I love you' moment (he's saying it to her, and the camera shows us what she's thinking), you think: This is one canny actress." (Read the full review...) 468 words, 09/03/10 Dana Stevens, Slate: MODERATE "...a pleasant, floppy romantic comedy that's hard to hate... but also hard to love." (Read the full review...) 665 words, 09/02/10 Andrew O'Hehir, Salon: MODERATE "...a solid but totally forgettable entertainment, redeemed somewhat by Barrymore's loud, horsey laugh and some agreeably racy comic situations." (Read the full review...) 1,211 words, 09/03/10
Justin Chang, Daily Variety: WEAK "[An] uneven effort... the kind of verbally exaggerated sexual humor that not only comes off as embarrassingly strained and calculated, but also compromises what the picture genuinely wants to be... buried inside this foul-mouthed comedy is a leaner, wiser drama trying to fight its way out." (Read the full review...) 949 words, 08/20/10 Kirk Honeycutt, Hollywood Reporter: POOR "A total misfire from beginning to end.... It's hard to imagine any romantic comedy going wrong in so many different ways.... subject gets lost amid a welter of misjudgments ranging from bad gags and inane caricatures to a failure to take its lovers seriously. That it's utterly predictable is the least of its sins." (Read the full review...) 578 words, 08/19/10 Michael Phillips, Los Angeles Times: VERY GOOD "I liked the movie mainly for Barrymore. The way she handles the crucial, early 'I love you' moment (he's saying it to her, and the camera shows us what she's thinking), you think: This is one canny actress." (Read the full review...) 468 words, 09/03/10 Emanuel Levy, Cinema 24/7: MODERATE (cg) "Another film in which the charming Drew Barrymore doesn't play against a leading man of her caliber? Decidedly so.... a rather flat tale, which in desperation turns to be coarse and rude, while peppered with very few good moments." (Read the full review...) 535 words, 08/26/10 A.O. Scott, New York Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT) "...crisply directed by Nanette Burstein from a better-than-average script by the first-timer Geoff LaTulippe... hardly breaks the generic mold, it has enough honesty and charm to set it apart from most other recent examples [of the romantic comedy]." (Read the full review...) 1,018 words, 09/03/10
Thank you for following MovieReviewIntelligence.com |
Opening Soon (Early Figures)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
