Metascore
45

Mixed or average reviews - based on 37 Critics What's this?

User Score
4.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 45 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring: , ,
  • Summary: Paul Weitz brings us an utterly insane comedy about politics, reality TV and the idea that everybody in America has a dream - and how that 'great thing' can actually drive our culture crazy. (Universal Pictures)
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 37
  2. Negative: 11 out of 37
  1. A blithe, funny, and engaging movie.
  2. Reviewed by: Ty Burr
    75
    American Dreamz pitches its softballs with style. Martin Tweed, the preeningly heartless British host of the title TV show, just may be the great comic role that has always eluded Hugh Grant.
  3. 67
    Weitz has a winning way with a one-liner, and he's recruited a stellar cast that gets the most out of his material.
  4. Reviewed by: Michael Agger
    50
    As a political statement, American Dreamz is overly didactic and liberal in a read-too-many-blogs sort of way.
  5. 50
    Weitz's idea of satire is generally both ludicrous and mild: exaggerating types, then sentimentalizing them.
  6. 38
    It's a redundant comedy, like hearing the same tired joke for the 100th time.
  7. Reviewed by: Michael Ferraro
    20
    It is definitely the weakest movie of the Weitz catalog and will certainly be forgotten faster than Hung himself.

See all 37 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 25
  2. Negative: 13 out of 25
  1. DaveF
    Nov 10, 2006
    9
    Biting, incisive, and honest satire of America, Americans, and...terrorists. Much more nuanced than the red-scorers would have you believe, American Dreams mixes blithe South park subversion with amiable Airplane slapstick. A dreamz come true for anyone who reads The Onion or watches the Daily Show. Expand
  2. JayS.
    Apr 21, 2006
    8
    The critics got this one wrong. This is a black comedy (not a spoof) and as such hits many correct notes. For instance, the president in this picture is more sophisticated, not less, and speaks more clearly, not less, than president Bush. The audience I was in laughed throughout, not like some Hollywood so called comedies where there is nary a peep for 2 hours. If you like dark comedies which tell a certain truth about the less cheerful side of life, give this movie a chance. Expand
  3. PeteM.
    Aug 26, 2006
    7
    This film is certainly a blunt instrument with very obvious biases, but there it definitely has its fair share of hysterical moments. While, I think there Expand
  4. EliC.
    Nov 30, 2006
    3
    I would like to know what the writer's though was funny about this film. One of the few films I found myself constantly looking at my watch wondering when it would be over. Expand
  5. Dec 20, 2010
    2
    One of those attempts by Hollywood to be 'smart' and funny at the same time, but it is just horrid. There is barely anything funny, and at the end of the day, one just wonders why did people spend millions of dollars on such junk like this? This is not smart, this is not funny, this is not satire - it is just a piece of crap. Surprised it had some decent actors in it...Only reason it gets a 2, really. Expand
  6. CraigS.
    Nov 6, 2006
    2
    Desperately wants to be 'satire' but ends up being a mish-mash of cheap shots at soft targets like Simon Cowell, George W Bush and Reality TV. Worse than that, some of the material here is borderline racist and reinforces the wildly incorrect perception that the entire known universe revolves around what happens in the US mediaspace. In fact, vast swathes of the global population don't know or care about crap US reality TV. Expand
  7. JohnD.
    Sep 13, 2006
    0
    Some critics diss Paul Weitz's American Dreamz as too "middle of the road," but that's a pose. Weitz errs in his calculated bid to create the definitive, film-critic-pleasing contemporary satire -- lampooning Bush's War on Terror and American Idol. It's not that he heralds The New York Times (that's considered positive), but he presents a Red-Stater President as being capable of accessing the "nuance" of The New York Times. Ergo: "middle of the road." Access to that New York Times "nuance" -- a bogus concept -- is a privilege film critics maintain for themselves. Weitz is so delusional -- so enraptured to ambition -- that he accepts the authority of The New York Times as American Reality. Expand

See all 25 User Reviews

Trailers