Advanced Search >
Help Me Search

Movies

Weekend Box Office
Film Awards & Top 10s By Year
All-Time High Scores
All-Time Low Scores

Wide Releases
Now In Theaters

sort by namesort by score

Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed movies.

Limited Releases
Now In Theaters

sort by namesort by score

58 (Untitled)
96 35 Shots of Rum
56 Adam
39 Adventures of Power
66 Afterschool
73 Amreeka
49 Antichrist
76 Baader Meinhof Complex, The
86 Beaches of Agnes, The
71 Big Fan
65 Black Dynamite
76 Bliss
26 Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day, The
44 Brief Interviews with Hideous Men
81 Bright Star
76 Broken Embraces
70 Bronson
62 Cloud 9
65 Coco Before Chanel
69 Cold Souls
60 Collapse
82 Cove, The
75 Crude
82 Damned United, The
53 Dare
50 Defamation
67 Departures
70 Earth Days
85 Education, An
55 Endgame
88 Fantastic Mr. Fox
31 Fix
49 Food Beware: The French Organic Revolution
80 Food, Inc.
xx From Mexico with Love
28 Gentlemen Broncos
72 Good Hair
89 Goodbye Solo
63 Horse Boy, The
74 House of the Devil, The
xx How to Seduce Difficult Women
26 I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell
70 It Might Get Loud
46 Killing Kasztner
43 Little Traitor, The
34 Looking for Palladin
80 Lorna's Silence
46 Love Hurts
84 Maid, The
45 Mammoth
75 Messenger, The
55 Missing Person, The
59 More Than a Game
34 Motherhood
62 My One and Only
48 New York, I Love You
66 No Impact Man
26 Oh My God
68 Paranormal Activity
68 Paris
79 Precious: Based on the Novel by Sapphire
73 Red Cliff
69 September Issue, The
79 Serious Man, A
65 Skin
41 Splinterheads
42 Staten Island
50 Stoning of Soraya M., The
58 Storm
82 Sun, The
49 Ten9Eight: Shoot for the Moon
73 That Evening Sun
61 Trucker
49 Turning Green
83 U2 3D
45 Uncertainty
67 Visual Acoustics
32 War on Kids
67 Way We Get By, The
65 Wedding Song, The
xx White on Rice
59 William Kunstler: Disturbing the Universe
74 Woman in Berlin, A
43 Women in Trouble
69 Yoo-Hoo, Mrs. Goldberg

Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed movies.

Full Frontal

EMAILPRINTMiramax Films

Full Frontal reviews
45
5.4 User Score:

Mixed or average reviews

Based on 37 critic reviews
How did we calculate this?

Based on 7 votes
Read user comments
Rate this movie >

Movie Info

Genre(s): Romance

Written by: Coleman Hough

Directed by: Steven Soderbergh

Release Date:
Theatrical: August 2, 2002
DVD: February 11, 2003

Running Time: 101 minutes, Color

Origin: USA

Summary

RATING: R for language and some sexual content

Starring Blair Underwood, Julia Roberts, David Hyde Pierce, Catherine Keener, Mary McCormack, Erika Alexander, Rainn Wilson, and David Duchovny

A movie about movies for people who love movies. (Miramax)

What The Critics Said

All critic scores are converted to a 100-point scale. If a critic does not indicate a score, we assign a score based on the general impression given by the text of the review. Learn more...

90

New Times (L.A.) Robert Wilonsky

That's all Full Frontal is: a brilliant gag at the expense of those who paid for it and those who pay to see it.

90

Time Richard Corliss

The result is Soderberghs liveliest experiment since the strenuously weird "Schizopolis" six years ago -- except that this one works.

Read Full Review >
80

Chicago Reader Bill Stamets

Catherine Keener is wonderfully weird as a vicious vice president of human relations, and Nicky Katt is brilliant as an actor playing Hitler in a stage play.

Read Full Review >
75

San Francisco Chronicle Mick LaSalle

Viewers need only a willingness to have fun and not mind when they realize the movie was never intended to be profound. Full Frontal is merely human, funny and unusual -- and that's enough.

Read Full Review >
75

USA Today Claudia Puig

These characters are interesting for their flaws and wounds, but the movie doesn't delve deeply into the sources of their pain. See this movie for its humor and talented cast and you won't be disappointed.

Read Full Review >
70

The Onion (A.V. Club) Keith Phipps

The fact that Full Frontal comes together so well removes any doubt that anyone other than a master filmmaker is pulling the strings.

Read Full Review >
70

Rolling Stone Peter Travers

It's all part of the joke. Soderbergh may have created a bit of a mess with Full Frontal, but it's a playful and scrappy mess.

Read Full Review >
70

LA Weekly Ella Taylor

The movie remains fragmented, elliptical and overplotted to the point of being hard to track. Still, it's worth hanging in for the finish, a birthday party for Gus (David Duchovny), the producer of the film and the one person they're all linked to. Then Soderbergh pulls off a delicious trick, a gesture of pure, tender, unabashed movie love that makes up for everything.

Read Full Review >
67

Portland Oregonian Shawn Levy

Feels like a tonic for its makers, a means of clearing the palate after a series of rich meals. For viewers who appreciate risks, it should be just as refreshing.

67

Entertainment Weekly Lisa Schwarzbaum

Even by Soderbergh's standards of serious playfulness/playful seriousness, Full Frontal is a tricky novelty item: The director himself has variously described it as an ''experiment,'' an ''exercise,'' and a ''sketch.''

Read Full Review >
63

Miami Herald Rene Rodriguez

It's the summer's most avant-garde experiment, and those who hate it (and there will be plenty) will complain the movie doesn't have a point. Then again, neither did Seinfeld, and look how that turned out.

Read Full Review >
63

Chicago Tribune Michael Wilmington

It's a weird little movie that's amusing enough while you watch it, offering fine acting moments and pungent insights into modern L.A.'s show-biz and media subcultures. But it doesn't leave you with much.

Read Full Review >
63

Philadelphia Inquirer Carrie Rickey

Keener makes this sometimes inert but always intimate tale of love and ambition burst with dynamic energy. Keener doesn't just have attitude, she has maditude.

Read Full Review >
63

The Globe and Mail (Toronto) Rick Groen

Despite (or maybe because of) its showy cleverness, Full Frontal merely seems full of itself -- it's a small film made by a big ego pretending to a modesty he no longer feels.

Read Full Review >
63

ReelViews James Berardinelli

Quality-wise, however, there's a big drop off from sex, lies and videotape to Full Frontal.

Read Full Review >
60

Film Threat Chris Gore

It's disappointing that he (Soderbergh) couldn't make something more cohesive out of his admirable experiment.

Read Full Review >
60

Washington Post Ann Hornaday

No matter how much fun it is to watch -- and for hard-core movie fans, it is often enormous fun -- there's a certain relief when it stops and we're popped back out to our banal, one-track lives.

Read Full Review >
50

Wall Street Journal Nancy deWolf Smith

The medium really is the message here, and it steals what there is of the show.

50

Seattle Post-Intelligencer Sean Axmaker

For an ostensibly personal film, this plodding portrait of the self-involved flailing for meaning in a mercenary world has little of Soderbergh's insight, empathy or generous personality.

Read Full Review >
50

Boston Globe Wesley Morris

Studding your movie with friends, admirers, and sycophants is having a ball; it does not bring us to question the illusory power of cinema or the politics of entertainment.

Read Full Review >
50

New York Daily News Jami Bernard

When improv is done well, it sheds a unique light on the human condition. When it is done adequately, as it is in Full Frontal, it simply makes you long for a good script and pricey production values.

Read Full Review >
50

Christian Science Monitor David Sterritt

Far from a great film, but it certainly stretches the envelope.

Read Full Review >
50

New York Post Lou Lumenick

You can't get much more perverse than asking Julia Roberts to wear fright wigs, do her own frumpy makeup and costumes -- and then shoot her scenes in eyeball-gougingly ugly digital video.

Read Full Review >
40

TV Guide Maitland McDonagh

Though some individual scenes crackle, overall the film feels unfocussed and flabby, like a series of acting improv exercises strung together.

Read Full Review >
40

Slate David Edelstein

Full Frontal could not be more opaque. I honestly don't have a clue what it's about; it went completely over my head.

Read Full Review >
40

New York Magazine Peter Rainer

Has its fun moments, and the dialogue, some of which was surely improvised, has a natural flow. But Soderbergh suffocates everything with stylistics. Soderbergh is exploring his navel.

Read Full Review >
40

Salon.com Stephanie Zacharek

Aside from a few well-shaped moments from some of the actors, the editing is about the only thing that keeps your mind occupied in Full Frontal -- and any good editor will tell you that's a problem.

Read Full Review >
40

Los Angeles Times Kenneth Turan

When a set of pre-shooting guidelines a director came up with for his actors turns out to be cleverer, better written and of considerable more interest than the finished film, that's a bad sign. A very bad sign.

Read Full Review >
38

Chicago Sun-Times Roger Ebert

A film so amateurish that only the professionalism of some of the actors makes it watchable.

Read Full Review >
38

Charlotte Observer Lawrence Toppman

You could dismiss it, as I do, as an impenetrable and insufferable ball of pseudo-philosophic twaddle.

Read Full Review >
30

Austin Chronicle Kimberley Jones

Fails because it takes itself so seriously, and because it is itself so seriously dull. Soderbergh's straining to give us a wink -- come on, guys, this is fun -- but really it just feels like some awful eye twitch -- a spasm of yawning self-indulgence in a mostly captivating career.

Read Full Review >
30

Variety Todd McCarthy

Arid, self-consciously arty and emotionally uninvolving.

Read Full Review >
25

Baltimore Sun Michael Sragow

In this film, Soderbergh appears to judge the actors by how well they spew or swallow bile.

20

The New Yorker David Denby

Full Frontal is the sort of arbitrary mess that gives experimentation a bad name. The news that the movie was shot on digital video and film in eighteen days, and that the actors drove themselves to the set and applied their own makeup, would have made a nice Sunday Times story if the movie were any good. But it isn't. [5 August 2002, p. 80]

20

The New York Times Dana Stevens

The aesthetic of Full Frontal is as rough and grainy as the off-the-rack digital video in which much of it was shot.

Read Full Review >
20

Village Voice J. Hoberman

"Every work of art is an uncommitted crime," Theodor Adorno once wrote. This one is more of a botched misdemeanor.

Read Full Review >
10

Washington Post Desson Thomson

The only way a self-absorbed treatise like this can get any kind of audience (not to mention distribution) is to cast famous people in it.

Read Full Review >

What Our Users Said

The average user rating for this movie is 5.4 (out of 10) based on 7 User Votes

Note: User votes are NOT included in the Metascore calculation.

Ian Watkinson gave it a 1:
Boring, pretentious twaddle. The only redeeming feature of this film, is that you wonder how the hell they duped Julia Roberts into doing it.

Gilbert gave it a 7:
....Yeah. Well, I see where he's coming from...but he only partially succeeds. Still, partially is enough to make it watchable.

Chad S. gave it a 7:
"Full Frontal" reminds me of a SNL sketch that featured Jon Lovitz as a meglomaniacal Pablo Picasso who would scribble haphazardly on a notepad and assume it had artistic worth because of his celebrity. He was right. A collector of Picasso's artwork would want to see the artist's doodles just like how the Soderbergh faithful are going to put up with this curiousity; which looks awful but the performances aren't, in particular, David Hyde-Pierce like you've never seen him before, and Hitler(Nicky Katt) like you've never seen him before. And there's a considerable kick in watching the most famous woman on the planet so poorly lit and photographed. Perhaps Soderbergh is trying to outdo Tim Burton and actually be Ed Wood. But there's something admirable about an A-list director who'll make a film just for the hell of it. See "Full Frontal" with that same sense of adventure, for the hell of it.

David M. gave it a 3:
Its bad, pretty bad. Wonder if this movie would make half as much without the "big" names associated with it. Skip it, and move on.

Michael F. gave it a 9:
This is one COMPLETELY different movie. So original and interesting. I can unerstand one walking out of this movie and shrugging then saying "Who Cares?" I thought that it was interesting and REALLY well done (I like grainy). Great performances, hysterical cameos. Interesting twists and characters. This movie is in NO WAY, a "sequel" to "Sex, Lies and Videotape." They deal with COMPLETELY different issues, well, the style in which it is written is a little similar to that "interview dialouge" of "Sex, Lies..." but, I think, that this was a slightly better and more interesting film. It's funny and fascinating and well done, well acted, well written, well everything. Yeah, it's a bit slow at times but it's really good.

Jkasound gave it a 5:
Sometimes forgets where it's going until it gets kicked back on track by any member of the talented cast. Maybe not consistent but funny and introspective.

Popular on CBS sites: SEC Football | NFL | Video Game Cheats | iPhone | Video Game Reviews | Notebooks | Antivirus Software

About CBS Interactive | Jobs | Advertise

© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy (UPDATED) | Terms of Use