User Score
5.6 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 23 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 23
  2. Negative: 6 out of 23

Review this movie

  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. MarkB.
    Nov 9, 2004
    2
    What's it all about, indeed. There are three, and only three, truthful moments in this aggressively superficial, emotionally fraudulent and (need we say it?) totally unnecessary remake of the groundbreaking 1966 Michael Caine classic: a short but stunning late-picture confrontation between the womanizing title character (Jude Law) and a former best bud (Omar Epps); our hero's genuinely startled observation on first glimpse of Susan Sarandon that "now THERE'S a real woman!!" (and most certainly Sarandon is)...and, most of all, the rhetorical question asked by one of Alfie's pickups: "What do people see in this Eurotrash anyway?" Couldn't have put it better myself. Co-writer/director Charles Shyer doesn't know either, and he's too essentially gutless to make ol' Alf the callous heel with a veneer of surface charm that Caine so memorably immortalized him as, so Shyer reinvents him as a toothless, focus group-friendly inversion: a charming metrosexual with eyes (and other body parts) that rove around a wee bit too much for his or anyone else's own good. Thus, the guys in the audience can envy him about 90% of the way while the women feel sorry for the sweet, unhousebroken puppy dog and fantasize that if they were only there to be the Annette Bening to his Warren Beatty, why, things would be so much different. (Dream on, ladies.) It's bad enough that the talking-to-the-audience bit, which worked in the original because of its theatrical roots, absolutely doesn't fly today, but Shyer (a three-decade warhorse whose previous efforts have included a couple of Father of the Bride remakes with ex-significant other Nancy Meyers) smothers his material with endless freeze-frames, split screens, slow motion and other gimmickry both to evoke the spirit of 1966 and to make himself seem hip and cutting edge. The result is patronizing and embarrassing: sort of like your Uncle Morty delivering a long monologue about the "bling-bling" he bought Aunt Esther for their 50th. Then again, any attempt to modernize director Lewis Gilbert's and writer Bill Naughton's original oncept was doomed from the get-go: Caine's Alfie was bracing and powerful because the protagonist was so inextricably a part of his time: the height of the British Invasion, with the hippie era just around the corner, was the perfect stomping ground for this hedonist. It goes without saying that Jude Law is no Michael Caine, but one factor that both of them share is a very heavy workload and an apparent inability to turn down any project that comes their way. Again, though, the similarity ends here: Law has Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, I Heart Huckabees and this currently occupying multiplexes; Caine may have made a good many unwise career choices (Jaws: The Revenge, anyone?) but I don't think he EVER made three flicks in a row that almost completely sucked. Expand
  2. MarkB.
    Nov 9, 2004
    2
    What's it all about, indeed. There are three, and only three, truthful moments in this aggressively superficial, emotionally fraudulent and (need we say it?) totally unnecessary remake of the groundbreaking 1966 Michael Caine classic: a short but stunning late-picture confrontation between the womanizing title character (Jude Law) and a former best bud (Omar Epps); our hero's genuinely startled observation on first glimpse of Susan Sarandon that "now THERE'S a real woman!!" (and most certainly Sarandon is)...and, most of all, the rhetorical question asked by one of Alfie's pickups: "What do people see in this Eurotrash anyway?" Couldn't have put it better myself. Co-writer/director Charles Shyer doesn't know either, and he's too essentially gutless to make ol' Alf the callous heel with a veneer of surface charm that Caine so memorably immortalized him as, so Shyer reinvents him as a toothless, focus group-friendly inversion: a charming metrosexual with eyes (and other body parts) that rove around a wee bit too much for his or anyone else's own good. Thus, the guys in the audience can envy him about 90% of the way while the women feel sorry for the sweet, unhousebroken puppy dog and fantasize that if they were only there to be the Annette Bening to his Warren Beatty, why, things would be so much different. (Dream on, ladies.) It's bad enough that the talking-to-the-audience bit, which worked in the original because of its theatrical roots, absolutely doesn't fly today, but Shyer (a three-decade warhorse whose previous efforts have included a couple of Father of the Bride remakes with ex-significant other Nancy Meyers) smothers his material with endless freeze-frames, split screens, slow motion and other gimmickry both to evoke the spirit of 1966 and to make himself seem hip and cutting edge. The result is patronizing and embarrassing: sort of like your Uncle Morty delivering a long monologue about the "bling-bling" he bought Aunt Esther for their 50th. Then again, any attempt to modernize director Lewis Gilbert's and writer Bill Naughton's original oncept was doomed from the get-go: Caine's Alfie was bracing and powerful because the protagonist was so inextricably a part of his time: the height of the British Invasion, with the hippie era just around the corner, was the perfect stomping ground for this hedonist. It goes without saying that Jude Law is no Michael Caine, but one factor that both of them share is a very heavy workload and an apparent inability to turn down any project that comes their way. Again, though, the similarity ends here: Law has Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, I Heart Huckabees and this currently occupying multiplexes; Caine may have made a good many unwise career choices (Jaws: The Revenge, anyone?) but I don't think he EVER made three flicks in a row that almost completely sucked. Expand
  3. Churi
    Nov 6, 2004
    8
    Jude law in a perfect role for him!! the film is funny, inteligent, and really sexy!!
  4. Ricky
    Nov 7, 2004
    8
    Enjoyable film. Though I have not seen the original (I intend to soon), this version offers a good role for Jude Law. I couldn't help but think of him as Gigolo Joe from "A.I.". At times it can be a tad predictable. Though a good film to catch in the cinema or on dvd.
  5. PaulD.
    Jan 6, 2006
    5
    Good soundtrack and performances don't make up for shallowness of script and direction in this pointless remake.
  6. SteveA.
    Nov 13, 2004
    7
    My opinion is not effected by seeing the original. I thought it was funny and sexy. We all know someone who is a little like Alfie and I believe we all have a little Alfie in us.
  7. VinceH.
    Dec 3, 2004
    3
    Dissapointing, to say the least. The film starts off really good, with Jude intoducing his various gals and welcoming the audience into his world. It's all whirlwind-editing and jazz-induced pacing but entertaing as hell. Once Alfie has a cancer-scare though about 20-minutes in the film, it's all downhill. Not only does it become preachy and moralistic, but really dull and boring too. The rest of the movie is shot like a Vogue layout with little narrative drive to entertain the viewer. Very dissapointing. If you defend liking this movie cause of Jude, go see "Closer" instead, which has a fabulous perf. from him. Expand
  8. Robert
    Mar 27, 2005
    9
    Very well done movie. Tremendously interesting and different from most movies. Law's character is one of the more fascinating ones that I've seen recently - we get to see the various facets of his personality, and he's not a "good guy" or a "bad guy", as characters are all too often, he's a mix of both. Overall a very well done film.
  9. [Anonymous]
    May 2, 2005
    3
    Very disappointing! Very drawn out with no climax!
  10. Dudley
    Dec 29, 2004
    0
    Alf would have been better. Yuk!
  11. TonyB.
    Nov 3, 2005
    4
    This strangely unsexy film is an unnecessary remake of something that was highly overrated to begin with. The acting is good enough, but Jude Law looks too young for his last scene with Susan Sarandon to make any sense. For the most part, it is a series of vaguely related scenes which the running monologue, a gimmick that soon wears out its welcome, fails to mesh into a smooth-flowing whole. What is the point here? Are we supposed to feel sorry for our anti-hero at the end? I don't, simply because he will soon become involved on some level and in some way with the next available female who comes his way...and that's what it's really all about. Expand
  12. Filmgirl
    Dec 2, 2005
    10
    I didn't expect it but this was a great movie. Fun and poignant at the same time. Bravo!
  13. Kirrag
    Mar 21, 2005
    0
    This is easily the worst movie I've ever seen. Bad music (save Buddy Rich's "Beat Goes On"). Racist. Bad style. And none of the salacious, juicy stuff before Jude Law seeks to redeem himself; he starts to rethink his life within the first 15 mintures of the film! I wish this director just went out and bought a red corvette or Harley and spared us his mid-life crisis. This movie would have also worked better had it been a literal Vogue fashion layout the previous poster spoke of. Had I been able to casually flip thru a couple pages and be done with it, I would not be so resentful. Expand
  14. Apr 6, 2012
    7
    Enjoyable! There are very good moments, and I loved the performances, the general feeling of it, and the music; however, there is something missing that I can't identify; I have watched it a few times already, and I always have a good time doing that. I think for what it is, is a nice movie. Fun, somehow sexy, light, and refreshing. Not overly deep, but it explores life as many people-more people than what we think- live it. We may just not see it. Collapse
Metascore

Mixed or average reviews - based on 35 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 35
  2. Negative: 8 out of 35
  1. Reviewed by: Dan Jolin
    60
    Law's slick, pretty-boy reincarnation is less icy and insensitive than Caine's wide-boy original, so we still have all the painfully confused "What's it all about?" soul-searching.
  2. Alas, this is a remake without a reason. Alfie can no longer shock us.
  3. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    70
    A breezy, sexy romp with a conscience that reflects in obvious but interesting ways on societal changes over the intervening 38 years.