User Score
4.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 45 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 45
  2. Negative: 23 out of 45
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Smurf
    Nov 23, 2006
    8
    This movie was very moving. I really enjoyed it. The storyline is interesting and not predictable. You are constantly trying to put the puzzle piece's of Catch's life together and intrigued by the relationship between him and Sharon.
  2. TheFiendishPlotOfGilbertMulroneycakes
    Oct 25, 2003
    7
    Better than it has any right to be. Caviezel's brilliant, obviously, and Carrie L can give over, because Lopez proves here that she's a good actress. She doesn't always have the best material, but she's never less than impressive. Oh, come on, she's even great in "Enough", which is something of a Herculean achievement. As for the film, it's all a bit glossy Better than it has any right to be. Caviezel's brilliant, obviously, and Carrie L can give over, because Lopez proves here that she's a good actress. She doesn't always have the best material, but she's never less than impressive. Oh, come on, she's even great in "Enough", which is something of a Herculean achievement. As for the film, it's all a bit glossy and a lot unlikely, but enjoyable (and occasionally haunting) nonetheless. Efficient. Expand
  3. NickS.
    May 23, 2001
    6
    This film would have had a completely different impact if it had been marketed differently. From watching the trailer, one would assume that "Angel Eyes" was a supernatural thriller. It seemed as if the film dealt with angels, as the title indicates. But there are no supernatural elements in this film which should be known to the public because as an old-fashioned dramatic love story, it This film would have had a completely different impact if it had been marketed differently. From watching the trailer, one would assume that "Angel Eyes" was a supernatural thriller. It seemed as if the film dealt with angels, as the title indicates. But there are no supernatural elements in this film which should be known to the public because as an old-fashioned dramatic love story, it works rather decently. Lopez gives a good performance and Caviezel is always good in every role he plays. This is a nice romantic film to see with a person you love. Expand
  4. CarrieL.
    May 26, 2001
    0
    I don't want to offend any J.Lo fans, but this is JMHO...the film was too slow and tedious for my tastes. I've yet to be impressed with her "alleged" acting abilities. If she has talent I didn't see it in this film.
  5. SunnyS.
    Jul 25, 2004
    0
    Despite the media's overwhelming support for Jenifer Lopez's skill as an actress I could not see any evidence for this, I'd say in this particular role (hotheaded tough girl cop) she is quite mediocre. Furthermore this film was quite slow paced and rather tedious. As for James Caviezel he seemed rather emotionless and robotic. This isn't the worst film I've seen Despite the media's overwhelming support for Jenifer Lopez's skill as an actress I could not see any evidence for this, I'd say in this particular role (hotheaded tough girl cop) she is quite mediocre. Furthermore this film was quite slow paced and rather tedious. As for James Caviezel he seemed rather emotionless and robotic. This isn't the worst film I've seen but its certainly near the bottom of my list. Expand
  6. LoganneB.
    Oct 19, 2001
    10
    The movie was great. Jennifer Lopez's performance was better than ever. None other than wonderful can explain this film.
  7. ChadS.
    Nov 12, 2005
    6
    Having just recently seen the latest offering by David Cronenberg, "Angel Eyes" sort of plays like "A History of Music". If not for a godawful sequence in which we see Sharon(Jennifer Lopez) and "Catch"(James Caviezel) fall in love via montage, "Angel Eyes" is reasonably mysterious, and more importantly, rare in a studio film, subtle. In an extremely obscure way, the familial subplot Having just recently seen the latest offering by David Cronenberg, "Angel Eyes" sort of plays like "A History of Music". If not for a godawful sequence in which we see Sharon(Jennifer Lopez) and "Catch"(James Caviezel) fall in love via montage, "Angel Eyes" is reasonably mysterious, and more importantly, rare in a studio film, subtle. In an extremely obscure way, the familial subplot reminds me of Cameron Crowe's "Say Anything", because both films end with the man coming to his woman's rescue after an uncomfotable meeting with her father. At various times, we think "Catch" might be a ghost, or a child molester, or perhaps a child molesting ghost. One half of his secret is interesting, but the other half might be too melodramatic, and yet Jennifer Lopez and Jim Caviezel redeem some potentially yucky scenes by resisting the temptation to go for the Oscar. Lopez needs to stay out of the tabloids. Jenny-from-the-block makes a very convincing cop. Expand
  8. ElizabethS.
    Nov 21, 2001
    10
    This movie was awesome. It made me ande my collegiate friends cry.
Metascore
39

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 28 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 28
  2. Negative: 9 out of 28
  1. A movie about healing that makes us want to scream out, ""Hollywood, heal thyself!"
  2. A unique and striking film for at least the first two-thirds of its running time, after which it turns, all too sadly, predictable and mundane
  3. The product is so synthetic it has only attitude where its heart ought to be.