User Score
5.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 171 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 50 out of 171
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. richardb.
    Aug 20, 2005
    5
    I saw Dead Flowers last night. And yes, Bill Murray does do world weary well. I get it. And the mature actresses do look pretty good for their age, although not compared to the starlets, who look GREAT!! And there are some mildly enjoyable nuances and seemingly evocative moments. But no plot. No murder to be solved. No class struggle. No surprising revelation of something. And no point. I saw Dead Flowers last night. And yes, Bill Murray does do world weary well. I get it. And the mature actresses do look pretty good for their age, although not compared to the starlets, who look GREAT!! And there are some mildly enjoyable nuances and seemingly evocative moments. But no plot. No murder to be solved. No class struggle. No surprising revelation of something. And no point. Instead we get "only black people have happy families". Middle-aged white women are casually sexy,soulless (actually most everyone is soulless) or dog whispering lesbians. And bikers are bad. Wow. All of this would be fine background to a gory zombie movie. Alas, all we get is vague mood and a vague disengaged put down of America? all white people?Ford Tauruses? But on a happier note, since my wife made me see Flowers last night, tonight we're seeing Grizzly Man. Expand
  2. NickN
    Jul 5, 2007
    10
    A clever and meaningful film about a middle aged man reflecting on his life and his future. If you think the movie has no end, you're an idiot and you have no idea what they're trying to say. I can see the criticism that it moves slowly, because some people aren't able to engage without constant fireworks.
  3. ChadS.
    Oct 30, 2005
    8
    Don(Bill Murray) hardly seems to be a racist, but derrogatory terms like "spade" and "raisin" are used, albeit in a different context outside of Winston's hearing range. Don calls his wife "the sweetest grape on the vine," and in naming detectives to Winston's daughter, Sam Spade is evoked. Curious, no, especially in light of the wonderful friendship Don and Winston seem to Don(Bill Murray) hardly seems to be a racist, but derrogatory terms like "spade" and "raisin" are used, albeit in a different context outside of Winston's hearing range. Don calls his wife "the sweetest grape on the vine," and in naming detectives to Winston's daughter, Sam Spade is evoked. Curious, no, especially in light of the wonderful friendship Don and Winston seem to share. It's the film's chief delight. Jarmusch and John Sayles are two white men who often write great characters for African-American performers. Winston's passion towards detective stories seems quirky, but that would be a racist notion, because there would be the assertion that a black man doesn't read. As for the women, my favorite stop, and performance, belongs to Laura, as played by Sharon Stone. Jarmusch cleverly acknowledges the former sexpot is aging and passes on the nudity duties to her daughter/protege, as played by Alexis Dziena. The road trip might've been more fun with Winston(Geoffrey Wright) tagging along, but his presence in the guise of a mix tape is a clever subversion of the buddy movie. "Broken Flowers" is an art film, but it's a lot easier to watch a long take of Murray on a couch than an obscure Thai actor sit in a tree in what seems like eternity(this is in reference to "Tropical Malady"). A long take, people, isn't categorically pretentious. Expand
  4. VivW.
    Jan 8, 2006
    0
    One of the worst movies ever.
  5. Mr.MovieGuy
    Sep 15, 2005
    3
    An immensely self-important bit of flotsam, where a stagnant camera and a sonambulant actor are passed off as "art." Tossing off everything film makers have learned over the past century about plot, pacing and character development does not make a film "important" or, in this case, even barely watchable. If I didn't know any better, I'd say this was made on a very tight budget, An immensely self-important bit of flotsam, where a stagnant camera and a sonambulant actor are passed off as "art." Tossing off everything film makers have learned over the past century about plot, pacing and character development does not make a film "important" or, in this case, even barely watchable. If I didn't know any better, I'd say this was made on a very tight budget, which only allowed the director to use a couple of locations...so he decided to just use up screen time watching the ticks and stares of Bill Murray. By the way, is it just me, or do all the roads and airports look the same, despite the fact that we assume (exposition is so last-century...) that Murray is flying around the country. I fear that Murray has entered his Woody Allen, "comedy is beneath me" phase...but I want the old Murray back...and I think most fans do to. Or is it that he's just lazy, and picks his roles based on how little dialogue they entail? All in all, a squirm-in-your-seat, check-your-watch, is-it-over-yet film that even the New Wave directors would have found just flat-out boring! Expand
  6. kathleen
    Sep 4, 2005
    1
    Slow down? Slow down? you'd have to slip into a persistent vegetative state to appreciate the pace of this film. i want my money back. i want my time back. i want bill murray to get over himself and just accept the fact that he's a fabulous comedic actor. i'm really sorry that that doesn't do it for him, but don't take it out on me.
  7. PatC.
    Mar 27, 2006
    8
    A gem of a movie similar to Lost In Translation, but even more flagrant in its audience exclusion. The story is basically Bill Murray embarking on a journey where he encounters the kind of people who would be clueless to understand this movie. This creates an atmosphere of alienation and loneliness through which Murray perseveres by force of habit. The movie truly is a work of genius, but A gem of a movie similar to Lost In Translation, but even more flagrant in its audience exclusion. The story is basically Bill Murray embarking on a journey where he encounters the kind of people who would be clueless to understand this movie. This creates an atmosphere of alienation and loneliness through which Murray perseveres by force of habit. The movie truly is a work of genius, but with one glaring flaw. Murray needs more facial expressions in his arsenal. OK, I get it, deadpan implies emotions roiling under the surface, but any nominally human father would have cracked a smile at the end of the movie. Given all that preceded it, that would have been awesome. Collapse
  8. ShawnB.
    Jan 3, 2007
    4
    Meaningful story but f.cked up acting and script.
  9. vanvera
    Nov 30, 2005
    8
    Slow and good. very good for your soul.
  10. ElaineM.
    Oct 15, 2005
    3
    A major disappointment, particularly after seeing Murray in the spectacular Lost in Translation. The fault lies not with the actors though, but with the writing. Talk about cliches.
  11. JonathanZ.
    Oct 3, 2005
    7
    Ever since I saw Lost in Translation (although Rushmore is a close second), I've enjoyed seeing Bill Murray on the silver screen. His ability to play incredibly remote (even glacial) characters with just the right amount of nuanced humor always strikes me as the mark of genius. In this film he plays the part of Don Johnston, an aging and lonely Don Juan. Events are put into motion by Ever since I saw Lost in Translation (although Rushmore is a close second), I've enjoyed seeing Bill Murray on the silver screen. His ability to play incredibly remote (even glacial) characters with just the right amount of nuanced humor always strikes me as the mark of genius. In this film he plays the part of Don Johnston, an aging and lonely Don Juan. Events are put into motion by a mysterious pink letter with no return address telling him he has a son. With the help of his neighbor and MapQuest, he goes off to visit four women he dated 20-odd years ago in hopes one of them will reveal herself to be the mother. I found the combination of mystery and episodic road trip to work particularly well, considering I was expecting an indie film. Sure, the pacing is off at points and the humor is tinder dry, but I didn't really mind that. I don't think anyone will argue against the fact that Murray drives the entire picture. His face is a stoic mask, and every subtle gesture hints at some deeper form of melancholy. BOTTOM LINE: Though short of greatness and a little confusing, this film is definitely an enjoyable change of pace from the mainstream. Expand
  12. jasons.
    Oct 4, 2005
    8
    The pace of this film has so much to do with Don's character. Who hasn't had a period of time in their own life where nothing happens, nothing is felt? Why else do so many people spend billions of dollars at the theater each year? To fill a void? The trip Don takes is the "hero's journey" where we watch tepid Don's metamorphosis into a man engaged with the world and The pace of this film has so much to do with Don's character. Who hasn't had a period of time in their own life where nothing happens, nothing is felt? Why else do so many people spend billions of dollars at the theater each year? To fill a void? The trip Don takes is the "hero's journey" where we watch tepid Don's metamorphosis into a man engaged with the world and the people around him. I praise Jarmusch for steering clear of a Hollywood morality treatment to the film. There's no huge happiness, or "meaning of life" smashed over the viewer's head; just a story about a man who steps up to responsibility. And in this world that's not so minor of a thing. Oh, I laughed a lot, too. Expand
  13. DanB.
    Aug 14, 2005
    6
    Ehh. I dunno. It doesn't build up much steam, its episodes aren't so witty or poignant... and neither is the film. It is amusing though. I just kept imagining Wes Anderson doing it better. And the ending... I think people who like the ending are liking the idea of a vague, non-standard ending, while not realizing the ending as-is is a lukewarm finish to a lukewarm film. If I Ehh. I dunno. It doesn't build up much steam, its episodes aren't so witty or poignant... and neither is the film. It is amusing though. I just kept imagining Wes Anderson doing it better. And the ending... I think people who like the ending are liking the idea of a vague, non-standard ending, while not realizing the ending as-is is a lukewarm finish to a lukewarm film. If I could I'd give it 6.5. Expand
  14. MarkB
    Aug 14, 2005
    2
    So diappointing. I really liked Murray in Lost in Translation and wanted to enjoy this movie. The movie just failed. It failed to be humorous on a consistent basis and failed to tell a comprehensive story. The critics seem to guilty of the Woody Allen syndrom in that we all like Murray so anything he does must be good. Not here unfortunatlaly. If you can stand silent stares for minutes at So diappointing. I really liked Murray in Lost in Translation and wanted to enjoy this movie. The movie just failed. It failed to be humorous on a consistent basis and failed to tell a comprehensive story. The critics seem to guilty of the Woody Allen syndrom in that we all like Murray so anything he does must be good. Not here unfortunatlaly. If you can stand silent stares for minutes at a time throughout the movie and call it brilliant then you enjoy a different standard of excellence. Expand
  15. sjb.
    Aug 16, 2005
    9
    Bill murray follows "Lost in Translation" with yet another brilliant under-stated performance.
  16. MarshaW.
    Aug 19, 2005
    3
    This film really drags. It is very very slow, dreary, and usually shot in dark settings. The actresses whose presences promise to revive it aren't enough. None of the characters was particularly interesting. Bill Murray continues the same acting as in "Lost in Translation"--a poker face, with one slight smile. It was as though he had been transposed from one set to the other. Really This film really drags. It is very very slow, dreary, and usually shot in dark settings. The actresses whose presences promise to revive it aren't enough. None of the characters was particularly interesting. Bill Murray continues the same acting as in "Lost in Translation"--a poker face, with one slight smile. It was as though he had been transposed from one set to the other. Really disappointing. Expand
  17. MikeK.
    Aug 20, 2005
    2
    After reading glowing reviews this film was a gigantic disappointment. You can have a deadpan actor but you then need an interesting plot. Think "About Schmidt". It deserves at least a 2 because it was nice to see some great actresses work. The best part was Murray getting punched, I felt like doing it myself.
  18. DougR.
    Aug 22, 2005
    4
    A mediocre movie that did not live up to the critics raves. I think they liked the director and actors and wanted to find something nice to say. Even my wife almost fell asleep and she really was looking forward to it from the reviews. How you could walk out and rave about that movie is beyond me.
  19. JulieR.
    Aug 23, 2005
    5
    Mediocre at best. Murray has moved way beyond the subtle, introspection of his work in "Lost in Translation" to deadpan, expressionless, non-acting. How did this guy with the personality of a doorhandle attract so many intelligent, quirky women?
  20. MarcK.
    Aug 24, 2005
    5
    Another overrated movie in a horrible year for movies...maybe since movies are so awful this year, critics are jumping on anything that might be remotely interesting. As someone noted below, Murray plays just about the same character as he did in "Lost in Translation." What a stretch. The thing that I did find interesting about the movie that no one (thus far that I read, at least) has Another overrated movie in a horrible year for movies...maybe since movies are so awful this year, critics are jumping on anything that might be remotely interesting. As someone noted below, Murray plays just about the same character as he did in "Lost in Translation." What a stretch. The thing that I did find interesting about the movie that no one (thus far that I read, at least) has talked about is the theme of self-examination of the choices we make in life, and how those choices affect us as we move on in our lives. Expand
  21. HowardS.
    Aug 25, 2005
    4
    Very disappointing, especially after reading the glowing reviews! Murray's deadpan expression worked well when he was "Lost in Translation" in Japan, but his comatose personality is boring here. Too much time wasted on camera shots of Murray in his apt and motel rooms; needed better editing! Only life in movie was with Sharon Stone and "Lolita" dgtr. At least, if his current Very disappointing, especially after reading the glowing reviews! Murray's deadpan expression worked well when he was "Lost in Translation" in Japan, but his comatose personality is boring here. Too much time wasted on camera shots of Murray in his apt and motel rooms; needed better editing! Only life in movie was with Sharon Stone and "Lolita" dgtr. At least, if his current girlfriend did write the letter, it caused Murray to "come to life" a bit! No Oscar nom for this one, Bill! Expand
  22. GeoffJ
    Aug 20, 2005
    3
    OK, I tried really hard to "get" this movie, and I failed. But a rating of 80? Please. The reviewers snookered me on this one.
  23. GilJ.
    Aug 7, 2005
    4
    Bill Murray has spread himself too thin. Can someone say Samuel L Jackson. Hey Bill, what about Bob?
  24. Mark
    Aug 8, 2005
    10
    By far the best movie of the year. As per usual in his latest movies, Bill Murray turns in a stellar performance, simultaneously hilarious and tragic.
  25. KenG.
    Sep 14, 2005
    6
    Movie is dealing with some meanful themes but the handleing of it felt slight and thin.
  26. DrSuess
    Sep 15, 2005
    10
    Lovely.
  27. DanD
    Sep 19, 2005
    2
    An unsuccessful attempt to pull another Sideways.
  28. MegD
    Sep 2, 2005
    1
    Horrible - a waste of money and time. Very boring with unneccesary nudity.
  29. George
    Sep 23, 2005
    2
    I agree with Michael G.: Murry "masters" the same unemotional bump on a log that he's played in his 5 previous roles, and the bit is old. This business of "no actor is better that Bill Murry at doing noting at all, and being fascinating while not doing it" (Ebert) is amazing to me. When one's "fascinating" while doing nothing, and is then praised for it, I think someone should I agree with Michael G.: Murry "masters" the same unemotional bump on a log that he's played in his 5 previous roles, and the bit is old. This business of "no actor is better that Bill Murry at doing noting at all, and being fascinating while not doing it" (Ebert) is amazing to me. When one's "fascinating" while doing nothing, and is then praised for it, I think someone should point out what that really means:you are lazy and you lack range. If doing nothing is what is now considered acting, sign me up. I can do nothing with the best of them. Expand
  30. johnj.
    Sep 3, 2005
    6
    Most of the movie was fine but the Worst ending of any movie ever.
  31. StephenJ
    Jan 12, 2006
    0
    I wish I could give this a negative score. Very disappointing and a waste of time. At the end, you will wonder "What were they thinking?"
  32. DanC.
    Jan 4, 2006
    9
    I really enjoy this movie. Although the character acted by Bill Murray evokes the one he made in Lost In Translation, they are totaly similar.
  33. PaulW.
    Jan 8, 2006
    8
    I enjoyed it...but can see why other may not.
  34. DanielJ.
    Feb 3, 2006
    9
    Refreshingly slow, honest and open ended. It's not a revolution, but it's good to see a film that is detailed, but not in a specific or convenient way- i.e. only to move the plot along. I didn't 'realise', if that is the word, that this was a comedy. But, it's definitely not a downer- just light hearted in a completely non middle-of-the-road way.
  35. Dr.Alano
    Mar 14, 2006
    1
    lame, tired existentialism. great premise wasted. stupid ending. not worth the investment (money or time).
  36. Andrew
    Mar 5, 2006
    8
    Sometimes a movie is more about what is not shown than what is and what it does not say. Should a movie always entertain? No. Should a movie always force you to think? No. Bu,t either one or the other done well is worth the time, providing you know and appreciate the difference.
  37. John
    Aug 7, 2006
    1
    You`ve got to be kidding!! This is Hindemith to Mozart. Intellectual masturbation. A downright stupid film attempt. Pink--more like a pink slip!!
  38. JoelP.
    Sep 8, 2007
    1
    Terrible, boring film. This is not entertainment.
  39. zztop
    Oct 11, 2005
    8
    Perfect.
  40. Joanne
    Oct 2, 2005
    6
    Bill Murray does Lost in Translation all over again. So this is the guy everyone finds irresistible? And Jarmusch, yes, you HAVE gone mainstream. Unlike your previous films, this is not a movie only you could have made.
  41. MarieM.
    Aug 11, 2005
    4
    It dragged. And the ending was uneventful and disappointing. Murray was good at playing a numb person, but ... there was really no great acting or story to keep one interested.
  42. Triniman
    Aug 14, 2005
    7
    Broken Flowers is the latest film from director Jim Jarmusch. Don (Bill Murray) is a seemingly retired person, who made a fortune in the computer business. One day, he receives a letter with no return address or signature, claiming that he fathered a child with the writer and that the child, almost 19 years old, is now one his way to find his unknown father. With the help of his would-be Broken Flowers is the latest film from director Jim Jarmusch. Don (Bill Murray) is a seemingly retired person, who made a fortune in the computer business. One day, he receives a letter with no return address or signature, claiming that he fathered a child with the writer and that the child, almost 19 years old, is now one his way to find his unknown father. With the help of his would-be detective novelist neighbour (Jeffrey Wright, someone we should see more of in film), Don embarks on a trip to unexpectedly drop by a few former girlfriends, to try to figure out who sent the letter and who his child is. There are too many quiet, contemplative moments that worked in Lost In Translation, that don't quite work here. It's true that sometimes less is more, and that much can be communicated without relying on a lot of dialogue. But after a while, the numerous quiet moments made the film seem tedious. There are also parts that are meant to titillate, always involving females, but they don't really add to the story in any germane way, with the exception of playing on men's interest in attractive women. Was this some type of social commentary on the director's part? Probably. The real estate agent former flame (Frances Conroy)looked embarrassed and the dinner scene was painful to watch. However, it was also realistic. We've all been in situations with that type of tension. Jarmusch also tried to juxtapose the dry real estate agent and her bourgeois lifestyle with the hippie that she used to be when Don knew her. The change is apparent without having it trumpeted. The animal communicator on one hand seemed loopy and self-important, but on the other hand, stand-offish. Real people are like that: more complex than mere stereotypes. The redneck former girlfriend (Tilda Swinton)and her reasons for reacting to him upon his surprise visit, didn't develop any intrigue and didn't contribute to the story in a positive way. Broken Flowers is not predictable, and that is one of its strong suits. It's slow moving pace and ending may turn off mainstream audiences, however. Those with different tastes may find this to be one of the best films of the year. I can respect this film for trying to be different, but I don't think I would see it again or recommend it to everyone. Winner of the Grand Prix prize at the 2005 Cannes Film Festival. Expand
  43. [Anonymous]
    Aug 21, 2005
    2
    Remember the story of "The Emperor's New Clothes?" The critics are way off on this slow moving pointless story. Bill Murray's performance is catatonic, not nuanced. I think that the reviewers believed that they had to give this movie a rave review. Why????
  44. Tanya
    Aug 20, 2005
    10
    Murray and Jarmusch, mastering the gravitas of the minimal, deliver a comtemplative film (often evoking the same mood as About Schmidt) that explores instead of explains. A great examination of half-hearted lament over something lost -- when you don't know what it is that was lost. We learn far more about all the characters surrounding Murray than about Murray himself, which provides Murray and Jarmusch, mastering the gravitas of the minimal, deliver a comtemplative film (often evoking the same mood as About Schmidt) that explores instead of explains. A great examination of half-hearted lament over something lost -- when you don't know what it is that was lost. We learn far more about all the characters surrounding Murray than about Murray himself, which provides an intriguing distance to watch his character plod reluctantly but disinterestedly through his past. Marvellous! Expand
  45. MarkG.
    Aug 22, 2005
    4
    Parts of the scenery were interesting making me wonder where the travelouge was taking Murray - a lot of flying to visit place after place that all looked alike. Of course Sharon Stone was good. Perhaps the critics are mailing this one in after the much more interesting 'Lost in Translation.' The ending made me say "That's It??!!" Apparently the message is that white men Parts of the scenery were interesting making me wonder where the travelouge was taking Murray - a lot of flying to visit place after place that all looked alike. Of course Sharon Stone was good. Perhaps the critics are mailing this one in after the much more interesting 'Lost in Translation.' The ending made me say "That's It??!!" Apparently the message is that white men over a certain age are comotose. Expand
  46. MovieMike
    Aug 22, 2005
    3
    Lost In Pretension. Director Jarmusch wrote this for film for Bill Murray and it is perfect for both of them. Neither have much to say. Too unclear in their own minds about a competent ending they edited the movie into an inkplot test with the message to the viewer, "Here you figure out what I wanted to say." Perhaps Murray was exactly the wrong choice for this role. Perhaps their was Lost In Pretension. Director Jarmusch wrote this for film for Bill Murray and it is perfect for both of them. Neither have much to say. Too unclear in their own minds about a competent ending they edited the movie into an inkplot test with the message to the viewer, "Here you figure out what I wanted to say." Perhaps Murray was exactly the wrong choice for this role. Perhaps their was more in the script that needed more acting than Buster-Kearton deadpan. Another belly flop that has charmed the critics. Expand
  47. MarkB.
    Aug 24, 2005
    4
    A vaguely well-to-do but endlessly unhappy permanent emotional burnout (Bill Murray) receives two pieces of news that would rock anybody else's world but barely causes a ripple in his: a son he never knew is now a near-adult and may be visiting him soon, and a typewritten, anonymous letter from the boy's mother--any one of several past lovers Murray's had--has just arrived. A vaguely well-to-do but endlessly unhappy permanent emotional burnout (Bill Murray) receives two pieces of news that would rock anybody else's world but barely causes a ripple in his: a son he never knew is now a near-adult and may be visiting him soon, and a typewritten, anonymous letter from the boy's mother--any one of several past lovers Murray's had--has just arrived. (The letter is typewritten, but the envelope is hand-printed, and yet he still has no idea who wrote it. I can instantly recognize the handwriting of several people I haven't seen in years or even decades; is Murray's failure to do the same an indication of his total lack of involvement or just a screenwriting glitch?) Cult director/writer Jim Jarmusch chronicles Murray's subsequent, heavily reluctant cross-country odyssey to lean which woman from his past (Sharon Stone, Frances Conroy, Jessica Lange, Tilda Swinton) owns the incriminating typewriter. Jarmusch's last effort, the multi-skit crazy quilt Coffee and Cigarettes was, to me, a smug, unbearably self-indulgent misuse of normally talented actors and intriguing personalities in a film that made me acutely aware that I have a pair of buttocks that can be subject to intensely wrenching pain under the right circumstances, which Coffee and Cigarettes certainly provided. I got into a lot of arguments about this (including on this website!), and since I've normally admired Jarmusch's past efforts (especially Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai and his alternately hilarious and poignant global jaunt Night on Earth) I really wanted to like this one. But I'm afraid Broken Flowers was pretty much more of the same, with no conversation in Jarmuschland existing without a 30-second pause filling in space between every line of dialogue, and lots longer dead spaces when only one person's in the room or on the road. (I mean, I love Marvin Gaye's hit "I Want You" as much as anyone, but I have no desire to hear the whole song while staring at Murray's lump-of-white-Play-Doh-dropped-on-the-floor-next-to-the-radiator-and-left-there-for-a-month puss the entire time it's playing!) Just because both this and the last two films of Alexander Payne, About Schmidt and Sideways, all involve journeys doesn't make comparisons between Jarmusch and Payne fly; Payne, an American Charles Dickens, loads his films with incredibly well-observed detail while Jarmusch fills his with blank spaces and emptiness. Only the amusing sequence involving Jessica Lange (don't call her an animal psychic!), Chloe Sevigny and Ramon the cat brings much life to the archly slow proceedings; Jeremy Wright as Murray's mystery-loving neighbor is so likable that he helps tremendously as well--but the rub here, as poster richard b. astutely indicated, is that with Wright's character Broken Flowers is pushing the facile stereotype that Black people are by definition all happy and uncomplicated while Whites are neurotic and empty-souled. (Donald Bogle calls this the "huckfinn syndrome", and it's subtly racist.) Pauline Kael once wittily described Michaelangelo Antonioni's films as "come dressed as the sick soul of Europe parties"; insert "White America" in place of "Europe" and you've got the essence of Broken Flowers. And, quite frankly, I'm getting awfully tired of watching Murray repeatedly play these lonely, pathetic, emotionally-stunted, ennui-infested closet cases: I treasured his performance in Lost in Translation partially because it represented a CHANGE OF PACE, but whether you're discussing his 1980s Stripes/Ghostbusters period or his current The Life Aquatic/Broken Flowers one, a rut is still a rut. If nothing else, Murray's work here inspired in me a desperate desire to race home, throw my What About Bob? DVD in the machine, and take some delightful baby steps. Expand
  48. SuzyW.
    Aug 27, 2005
    2
    Narcissistic movie with irritating plot frequently repeated by middle-aged auteurs: a man on a journey to discover himself that requires him to encounter simultaneously threatening and alluring women who have no real personalities. Thin on dialogue. Can't believe the mainstream reviewers are taken in by this as 'art.'
  49. FredW
    Aug 30, 2005
    10
    There's probably a reason reviews are so bifurcated; either you like minimalistic/philosophical perspective or you don't. This ain't Stripes or Caddyshack, and not even Lost in Translation. Murray has never been so understated and used so little in creating so much.
  50. SyK.
    Aug 30, 2005
    2
    Banality masquerading as the wistful and poetic. The major critics follow one another like sheep. Does anyone remember "Last Year at Marianband"? Pretentious and banal, the critics fell over themselves to praise it. Then it disappeared into oblivioun. Expect a similar fate for "Broken Flowers."
  51. PatG.
    Aug 5, 2005
    8
    Yes, this film feels slow at times. But it is intriguing, and Murray is always interesting. The slowness, the ever-present emptiness, are part of the point, I think. And the bouquet of actresses is a special treat. As for the ending--we do want more, but I agree that it is credible and has its own power.
  52. ATHoward
    Aug 8, 2005
    10
    This movie was brilliant and will be easily misunderstood. Bill Murray is the most interesting leading man in Hollywood right now. I hope he gets nominated for the Oscar and wins for his moving portrayal in this film.
  53. Josh
    Sep 11, 2005
    10
    Fantastic, hilarious, and touching movie. This is a movie people who like constant action will never understand, and thats too bad for them. Someone needs to give Bill Murray an Oscar.
  54. Derek
    Sep 10, 2005
    5
    This has all the makings of a good movie...focus features, Bill Murray...and then, what a letdown. It has the pacing and dry humor of a potentially classic indie. Then, blah. What was the point?
  55. JayneR.
    Sep 15, 2005
    1
    I thought it was an obvious and very boring attempt at "hollywood cool" that most of us regular folk can't relate to even though we gave it a shot. The ending left me wanting my admission price of 8 bucks right back in my billfold. I refuse to spend one more dollar on Bill Murray's dead pan, it's boring now. I loved him and now he depresses me. I will not pay to be I thought it was an obvious and very boring attempt at "hollywood cool" that most of us regular folk can't relate to even though we gave it a shot. The ending left me wanting my admission price of 8 bucks right back in my billfold. I refuse to spend one more dollar on Bill Murray's dead pan, it's boring now. I loved him and now he depresses me. I will not pay to be depressed, I can turn the news on for that, thank you. My group began to attempt to make sense out of it all by philosophizing some kind of understanding to justify the 100 or so minutes we clung to each scene trying to derive meaning out of "pink things" and other subtle inuendos. To no avail, it just stunk and that's that. Expand
  56. MichaelG.
    Sep 16, 2005
    1
    Only one funny chapter (Sharon Stone). Bill Murray is getting tiresome playing a depressed person.
  57. RDawg
    Sep 28, 2005
    4
    Boring, nothing gets accomplished. and I love bill murray, but could you at least try to show emotion??
  58. AnneM.
    Sep 3, 2005
    2
    The emperor has no clothes! This movie was absolutlely NOTHING wrapped up in the pretentions of 'artsy', 'indie', ' minimal'. Well, it's definitely minimal.
  59. AlejandroR.
    Sep 4, 2005
    0
    This movie is astoundingly awful. Don't waste your time. What is wrong with these critics who write such glowing reviews? There's nothing here that's original, humane, or even witty. I haven't felt this angry after seeing a movie since "Very Bad Things" - nuff said.
  60. NigelW
    Jan 10, 2006
    7
    Bill Murray put in a wonderfully restrained performance and each of his leading ladies shone in their own way, albeit briefly. I enjoyed the quietness and how the desperateness of Murray's character came through from what was not said. Great music and some laughs from Jeffrey Wright. However I can totally understand why this film did nothing for some. Overall I wanted to like this Bill Murray put in a wonderfully restrained performance and each of his leading ladies shone in their own way, albeit briefly. I enjoyed the quietness and how the desperateness of Murray's character came through from what was not said. Great music and some laughs from Jeffrey Wright. However I can totally understand why this film did nothing for some. Overall I wanted to like this movie more than I actually did. Expand
  61. ScottM.
    Jan 15, 2006
    10
    I saw people walking out on this film...and note some giving zero scores here..to love this film you need to have some life experiences that youth cannot give...however this is as close to Tolstoy in a film i have seen..and it doesn't get any better than that.
  62. BobA.
    Jan 16, 2006
    9
    A great movie destined to never be accepted by a mainstream public that can't stop wondering what happens next and simply enjoy what's happening now.
  63. NickH.
    Jan 16, 2006
    9
    In Broken Flowers, it
  64. Yinkotsu
    Jan 22, 2006
    3
    Seriously, the humour in this movie was SCARCE. Also, incredibaly slow. ''Whoopdeedoo, what an awesome film, lets all watch some guy being zoomed in on while he's on an airplane, slouching.'' Five minutes later, then pops on the Travel Music. Kinda catchy, but it really started to PEEVE me off after it's repeats. The only funny part was with Sharon Stone. Oh, Seriously, the humour in this movie was SCARCE. Also, incredibaly slow. ''Whoopdeedoo, what an awesome film, lets all watch some guy being zoomed in on while he's on an airplane, slouching.'' Five minutes later, then pops on the Travel Music. Kinda catchy, but it really started to PEEVE me off after it's repeats. The only funny part was with Sharon Stone. Oh, and an absolutely WONDERFUL (Sarcasm!) Ending. But I guess it kind of does fit. Then, afterwards when the screen turned balck, I said to myself : "It better not be the end, or I might have to strangle myself with my hair." Well, what d'you know? Here comes the credits. This film was pointless. Expand
  65. SusanG.
    Jan 22, 2006
    5
    Bill Murray was completely implausible as an alleged Don Juan type personality. He certainly doesn't boast those looks and in Broken Flowers his almost sedated performance covers up any wit or charm.
  66. miker.
    Jan 2, 2006
    10
    The most heartfelt and soulful film of the past year.
  67. ChrisS.
    Jan 27, 2006
    9
    After watching this movie with my girlfriend, we discussed what it meant and how we felt about it for a good hour. When was the last time a movie sparked a conversation like that for you? I guess the better question is "do you want to have a conversation like that after a movie"? If the answer is yes, then this movie is right for you, if not, continue down the aisle at your local movie After watching this movie with my girlfriend, we discussed what it meant and how we felt about it for a good hour. When was the last time a movie sparked a conversation like that for you? I guess the better question is "do you want to have a conversation like that after a movie"? If the answer is yes, then this movie is right for you, if not, continue down the aisle at your local movie store to the "hollywood - business as usual" section. If your idea of a good movie is wacky humor, action, formulaic plots, well, this is not for you. I attributed this movie to a good short story that makes you think about the characters past and how they got to where they are, rather than spelling it out word for word. I think those of you out there that are rating this movie below a 6 are probably missing the point. Sometimes less is more. Expand
  68. MeghanR
    Jan 9, 2006
    6
    A movie that thinks it's better then the rest. those involved obviously think they are higher then most people. the movie aims to be simple and meaningful, but in the end, a self-centered movie is produced that offers no meaning. could have been so much better. bill murray turned in a one note performance that resembles a mock "lost in translation" performance. he is much better then this.
  69. RichardR.
    Feb 16, 2006
    2
    Funny? This bowl of bilge? Yo, Bill Murray was the funniest SNL guy by far, and he did some real funny movies afterward. But here he's just depressed and dull, with a real down soundtrack to boot. This should have been called Dead Man Just Barely Walking, Just Barely Managing a Pulse. I love Jim Jarmusch's movies, too, but this seemed like it was shot in a 9 square mile area, Funny? This bowl of bilge? Yo, Bill Murray was the funniest SNL guy by far, and he did some real funny movies afterward. But here he's just depressed and dull, with a real down soundtrack to boot. This should have been called Dead Man Just Barely Walking, Just Barely Managing a Pulse. I love Jim Jarmusch's movies, too, but this seemed like it was shot in a 9 square mile area, with the same boring freakin' landscape in every scene. And top it off with almost everyone's at home when this dork knocks! What are those chances, my Jimmy the Greek! OK, I'll admit seeing Jessica Lange (sooo hot! yet sooo cool!) was worth the whole movie, but man oh man, let's put this guy in a comedy next time! Expand
  70. Joe
    Feb 27, 2006
    2
    When is Bill Murray going to break out of his catotonic state? What a bore and what a lousy ending.
  71. JohnW.
    Feb 3, 2006
    6
    Very poor follow up to Lost in Translation for Murray and an almost completely humorless film. This film' s story is utterly pointless and I strain for reasons to care about any of the characters.
  72. MikeC.
    Feb 7, 2006
    3
    it really is quite unconvincing. it could have been great it someone just had spent longer then 8 hours writing the script.
  73. AndreasD.
    Apr 24, 2006
    9
    One of the best movies last year. It deserves a good rating... This movie has no ending, which is only one reason to watch it.
  74. SoiD.
    Apr 26, 2006
    5
    Seems like people either think this film is genious or a total bore. I'm inclined to go with the 'bore' side. The pacing is too slow, there's no resolution, the story doesn't hold together - it's all pretty senseless. It has good moments, but makes a point of making every scene as dull and uncomfortable as possible. Also? Free Bill Murray! He's trapped Seems like people either think this film is genious or a total bore. I'm inclined to go with the 'bore' side. The pacing is too slow, there's no resolution, the story doesn't hold together - it's all pretty senseless. It has good moments, but makes a point of making every scene as dull and uncomfortable as possible. Also? Free Bill Murray! He's trapped here. In Lost in Translation, he was near perfect; here his stone face, on which camera lovingly lingers for hours, conveys little; there's zero believalibility that this guy can be - or can ever have been - a Don Juan. Expand
  75. CherylR.
    Mar 13, 2007
    0
    What a total waste of 2 hours! I am highly unimpressed over wasting my time watching a movie that has no end!!!!
  76. Clay
    Apr 12, 2007
    6
    It's very slow, and many scenes feel like the cameraman took a lunch break during a shot. However, there are several interesting moments, like the crazy mom and daughter.
  77. LindaL.
    Nov 20, 2005
    5
    I'm a big fan of Bill Murray, but felt I had seen this character before -- in all his recent movies, in fact. Don't expect a midlife "High Fidelity," with the guy gaining all kinds of insights through women from his past. Murray's hangdog character asks little, reveals little and learns nothing.
  78. NickS.
    Nov 27, 2005
    9
    I must say that I really enjoyed the film. My favorite part is the ending.... there is something to be said for films that leave you to try and finish the story parhapse this is forshadowed in Winston's love of detective novels?
  79. NigelP.
    Nov 28, 2005
    3
    Difficult one, as my wife loved it but I hated it. Far too slow and pointless for me. I kept asking why? His girlfriend walks out on him, why? A young girl walks into the room stark naked, why? It ends up inconclusive, why? Why the hek did I watch it?
  80. ElwynC.
    Dec 29, 2005
    9
    OK. I think the advertisement that proclaims this to be a "laugh out loud" movie will annoy many people but the Winston moments were mainstream LOL. I think that for most people, it may be too subtle... and I don't even know what to say about the bit when Don rolls his eyes. The ending is really unsatisfying but leaves you wondering long afterwards.
  81. AlistairD.
    Oct 23, 2005
    10
    Very similar to Wes Anderson stuff and lost in translation, but couldn't hope for any more with this film.
  82. TimD.
    Oct 31, 2005
    7
    I wanted this film to grab me more than it did. As it was, it had me for about the first two-thirds of the ride, providing many nicely subtle touches and some extremely funny passages. It began to lose steam for me, though, during the third and fourth encounters, and by the end I believed it all less than I did earlier and found myself caring less. Regardless, kudos to Bill Murray (and to I wanted this film to grab me more than it did. As it was, it had me for about the first two-thirds of the ride, providing many nicely subtle touches and some extremely funny passages. It began to lose steam for me, though, during the third and fourth encounters, and by the end I believed it all less than I did earlier and found myself caring less. Regardless, kudos to Bill Murray (and to the rest of the cast!) -- may we get the pleasure of seeing him do this kind of deeply-felt, offbeat work far more often. Expand
  83. BillyBob
    Aug 14, 2005
    9
    This is a movie about itself, a movie about interpreation. It's very cool.
  84. MarkP.
    Aug 15, 2005
    3
    Generally favorable reviews led me astray on this one. Bill Murray wears his now omnipresent deadpan expression throughout and the plot is very thin- frankly its a tedious, empty film.
  85. GregG
    Aug 24, 2005
    0
    Where is a flashlight when I need one? My wife and I wanted to play gin rummy! Come on, Bill! This is beyond subtle. This is beyond deadpan. This is beyond the beyond! Don't waste your money.
  86. MikeM
    Aug 24, 2005
    3
    If you read the good reviews of the critics, all of them say nothing, just like this film. At the end of this film you could hear guffaws from the audience not believing what a lazy farce this is. "Minimalism" might work well in your living room but it's boring for over 100 minutes. Loads of characters but no insight into any of them. What was the point of this film? What is so funny If you read the good reviews of the critics, all of them say nothing, just like this film. At the end of this film you could hear guffaws from the audience not believing what a lazy farce this is. "Minimalism" might work well in your living room but it's boring for over 100 minutes. Loads of characters but no insight into any of them. What was the point of this film? What is so funny is reading Tanya's review here -- if the main character couldn't care less about his past... why should we? We won't especially when the main character isn't particularly likeable and is as sullen and lifeless as a rotted log floating in the river. Expand
  87. RonW.
    Aug 27, 2005
    1
    Nothing happens, then nothing happens, then Alexis Dziena appears fully nude, then nothing happens, then nothing happens, then it ends. Huh? Sorry, Bill, this one really IS lost in translation.
  88. JakeH.
    Sep 11, 2005
    9
    Absolutely wonderful. An a emotionally satifying film that leaves you think about life.
  89. JeffJ.
    Sep 16, 2005
    4
    A man goes on a journey of self-discovery -- a journey which goes around and around to end up nowhere and discover nothing. Slowly. I liked a lot of things about this movie, many moments and scenes are great, but in the end it adds up to nothing. Bill Murray's performance is so ultra-understated that I couldn't engage with his character at all. Why is he doing all this? What A man goes on a journey of self-discovery -- a journey which goes around and around to end up nowhere and discover nothing. Slowly. I liked a lot of things about this movie, many moments and scenes are great, but in the end it adds up to nothing. Bill Murray's performance is so ultra-understated that I couldn't engage with his character at all. Why is he doing all this? What does he feel? What has he learned? Who knows? He's so opaque, it's impossible to tell. He is supposed to be this "Don Juan" who apparently has wooed countless beautiful women, but we don't see why. This movie was almost brilliant, but some crucial part is missing which makes the whole thing fall flat. Sorry. Expand
  90. MADirck
    Nov 6, 2006
    6
    A road movie that meanders so much that it gets lost and never finds its way. Interestingly enough, Bill Murray is the one character who doesn't hold your interest.
  91. TimK.
    Feb 16, 2006
    1
    Another movie hyped by the paid critics. They should call this 'Lost In Translation 2' or 'Lost In America'. The movie was joyless, dragged on like pulling a sliver and had an ending that made me want to scream. Save 106 minutes of your life and stay clear of this 'movie'.
  92. TedC.
    Feb 21, 2006
    9
    A great movie, possibly my #1 for the year. One of the best endings to a movie I've seen in ages, and a great soundtrack to boot. The kind of movie that sticks with you for a long time after watching it. It will go down as one of Jarmusch's finest and possibly Murray's best late-career performance.
  93. BarbD.
    Apr 11, 2006
    0
    So boring. So senseless. Total waste of time and money.
  94. JeffM.
    Aug 11, 2006
    8
    Delightfully low-key. Could have been a truly great film had there been more insight into Bill Murray's character, but as it is, it's still a subtle charmer.
  95. LowCompanion
    Aug 26, 2006
    3
    This mighty be the most overpraised movie of the last 5 years. IIt's wafer-thin, oppressively slow, condescending. The non-hipster-identification-symbol-characters are all small, sad & mean-spiritedly written. It as if this was crafted by a college kid with sleep apnea. If this thing didn't have Bill Murray, it might completely worthless.
  96. JohanS.
    Jan 31, 2007
    9
    Every human being is an island. No matter what you do. Bill Muray shows this unbearable loneliness in a superb way.
  97. jw
    Aug 11, 2007
    9
    (9.5) Those not familiar with Jarmusch, perhaps anticipating a reprise of life-altering happy sadness in the vein of Lost In Translation, were probably disappointed. They are similar in some important ways, though. Both achieve realism by way of non-resolution, for one. Compare it, on the other hand, to Shopgirl (which I believe tried for the same airspace as Lost In Translation) and I (9.5) Those not familiar with Jarmusch, perhaps anticipating a reprise of life-altering happy sadness in the vein of Lost In Translation, were probably disappointed. They are similar in some important ways, though. Both achieve realism by way of non-resolution, for one. Compare it, on the other hand, to Shopgirl (which I believe tried for the same airspace as Lost In Translation) and I think you'll find that Broken Flowers succeeds in all the ways that movie, I think, failed. Jeffrey Wright - whose characters are typically very busy with everything from redefining postmodern art to diligently defending the interests of big oil companies - seems to have an abundance of time on his hands here. His hyper-interest in Murray's affairs is hilarious, his meddling a direct countercurrent to the rest of the movie's listless forward drift. While the episodic, cameo-driven quality of Dead Man and Coffee and Cigarettes remains intact, there are no (or few) intricate arcs of mysticism swivelling overhead. This makes the movie almost unbelievably real and modern, I think. So does the blatant (considering Jarmusch) use of color, in everything from the mysterious pink letter to the name of the lovely young florist, Sun Green. The soundtrack is typically strong, and stray shots of overgrown typewriters, etc. delight throughout. A meaningful, if quiet, performance by Murray is punctuated by a scene in a graveyard. In a film mad with unanswered questions and dead ends, this scene has beautiful resonance, dignity, and despite itself, explanatory power that entire dialogue-heavy movies of greater ambition failed utterly to achieve. Expand
  98. Nov 2, 2010
    8
    I love Bill Murray. With that out of the way you might want to take my review with caution because it seems not everyone thinks this movie is great. I find slow depressing movies very touching and I simply like the way I feel and connect with these type of films. If you can relate to this then you need to go rent or even buy this movie ASAP.
  99. Apr 30, 2015
    8
    This one is slow and I can get why the audience is a little mixed on it, but the critics hit this one right on. Bill Murray is excellent in this one, as is Jeffrey Wright in a supporting role. A tale about a man going on a journey to discover if he has a son and if so, which woman is the mother of that child, this one is simply a slice of life type of film. Nothing extraordinary happensThis one is slow and I can get why the audience is a little mixed on it, but the critics hit this one right on. Bill Murray is excellent in this one, as is Jeffrey Wright in a supporting role. A tale about a man going on a journey to discover if he has a son and if so, which woman is the mother of that child, this one is simply a slice of life type of film. Nothing extraordinary happens and it is debatable as to if anything happened at all. However, I really do enjoy these type of films for the insight they provide for the characters presented. In Broken Flowers, you really get to really understand Murray's character and his problems and really, you feel bad for him since he is so alone, though he has always been surrounded by people. In addition, Jim Jarmusch's direction is brilliant. He really manages to capture the beauty of life by emphasizing the beauty of the landscape that Murray transverses. Much like life, the beauty is in the details and this film really underscores that. A subtle film that is so subtle it will not really touch a lot of viewers, this one really was moving. On top of that, the comedic moments were well done and actually really funny, but you had to pay attention to catch them. As a whole, Broken Flowers is a very good film that works on multiple levels. Expand
  100. Mar 9, 2014
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. If you want a movie with no plot progression, setting, or acting this is a movie for you.
    If you ever wanted to watch Bill Murray sit on the couch silently for minutes at a time, you my friend are in for a treat.
    If you want to accentuate the monotony of life by watching a movie where nothing happens, and nobody goes anywhere and like life has no conclusions stop right here you found the one.
    If you want a movie that actually entertains then stop reading this and go find any other movie.
    Expand
Metascore
79

Generally favorable reviews - based on 39 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 34 out of 39
  2. Negative: 0 out of 39
  1. Reviewed by: David Ansen
    90
    Funny, bittersweet, its understatement yielding surprising depth charges, Broken Flowers is a triumph of close observation and telling details.
  2. 88
    Broken Flowers may be too low-key for laugh junkies, but Jarmusch fills his sharply observed comedy with wonderful mischief. The mix of humor and heartbreak brings out the best in Murray.
  3. It skips merrily along the surface with its over-the-top vignettes but never seems to arrive at a destination. Nevertheless, the journey is more than half the fun as every actor attacks his role with relish.