MurrayT

Great visually and great acting, which is great if you're interested in movie making. The story is a different story. It starts out good, but then gets more and more ridiculous until it gets to the point where I'm saying, "Seriously?"

Incredibly boring and meaningless. If you can stay awake through the whole movie you'll hate yourself for it by the end. None of the unrealistic characters provide any reason to like them, cheer for them, or care about them.

I can't stand musicals. I still can't, yet I loved this movie. Go figure...because I can't. I may have rolled my eyes at the opening number, but after that I was transfixed, and when it was over I was looking up local jazz clubs on the internet.

I bet if this was De Niro's first movie, and if it maybe it had a different title, critics would be saying this was a brilliant new actor. I don't care about Raging Bull and Godfather Part II, or what stuffy critics have to say, when I watch a comedy I want to laugh and be entertained. This movie did both for me.

Just because a movie is nicely filmed, has a big star, and is supposed to be good doesn't absolve it from its most fatal flaw: the two main characters have no chemistry and aren't convincingly in love whatsoever.

I'm the first one to shut down a movie if I think they're trying to push religious beliefs under the guise of entertainment. This isn't one of those. Even the priest wasn't very sure of himself. When all is said and done you can believe what you want to believe, just as the people in the movie did. One of my favorite movies of the year, it's a shame that a lot of people won't see it because the critics trashed it. And by reading some of the reviews here, it's obvious a lot of people don't "get it." A shame.

Surprisingly good, funny with a nice mix of sentimentality. Surprising because the "critics" trashed it. The user scores are considerably higher (see Rotten Tomatoes) because it's fun and entertaining. Isn't that what we want in a movie?

What is wrong with me? The critics say this movie ****, yet I laughed out loud more than any movie I've seen in a very long time. Not only are the three main stars great, but when Jennifer Aniston, Jamie Foxx, or Kevin Spacey show up on the screen you know it's just going to get funnier. If you listen to the critics you won't see this movie. Fun, funny and entertaining is a very bad combination.

The only good thing about this movie is that it allowed me to replace Saw 3 as the worst movie I've ever seen. If someone wanted to torture me they'd just have to make me watch this completely useless and pointless piece of crap again.

How did Jake Gyllenhaal not get an Oscar nomination for best actor? Not only one of the best acting performances of this year, but any year. The same for the movie itself, easily one of the best of the year, and so much better than that Birdbrain movie.

This is a good example of the disconnect between film critics and movie goers. The critics watch so many movies, and here they see something different and they're intrigued. However, different doesn't mean good, and this movie is not good. It spans from boring to ridiculous to can't-wait-until-it's-over. Critics fawn over the art of the film, and there indeed it may earn 8 of 10. The rest of us are interested in the entertainment of the movie, and that's where it earns 1 of 10.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]