Closer

User Score
8.2

Universal acclaim- based on 470 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 54 out of 470

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream 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

User Reviews

  1. Jul 4, 2016
    6
    Movie about broken people. Wasn't as good as I remembered in the past. Not very realistic...........................................................
  2. May 25, 2013
    5
    Based on an award winning play Closer tells the story of four lovers across a four year period. The movies theatre origins are apparent throughout with its small cast and succession of two person scenes. While this is not necessarily a bad thing, most scenes are certainly well written and performed admirably by the cast, it can make their story seem very isolated from the outside world onBased on an award winning play Closer tells the story of four lovers across a four year period. The movies theatre origins are apparent throughout with its small cast and succession of two person scenes. While this is not necessarily a bad thing, most scenes are certainly well written and performed admirably by the cast, it can make their story seem very isolated from the outside world on occasions.

    Despite these excellent performances however the biggest problem I had with Closer is that, with the possible exception of Alice (Portman), it is very difficult to feel any sympathy for any of the characters and their predicaments. Throughout the film their behavior makes them continually come across as totally unlikable to the point that by the films conclusion the ongoing drama between them becomes closer to irritating than interesting.
    Expand
  3. JeffC.
    Aug 1, 2005
    6
    I am puzzled by the many summaries and reviews that use the word "funny" to describe this movie. It is a brutally honest and stark look at random behavior and consequences. Very good performances rescue the thin character development that kept the movie from being rivetting as opposed to curious.
  4. PatC.
    May 23, 2005
    5
    This show appears worth another look, and Julia Roberts continues to develop her depth aas an actress, so I'll catch it again sometime, but as an expose' about characters unable to transcend their rampant hormones I found it predominantly vulgar and uninspiring.
  5. billym.
    Apr 23, 2005
    6
    This movie would be a prime time movie to pick up chicks with, but is really somewhat boring if there are no chicks around. Now, please be aware that you should be prepared to see some extremely hot shots of Natalie Portman as a stripper, and I would personally say that this would be worth the price of a rental. Clive Owen is awesome, and Portman is also quite entertaining, though Jude This movie would be a prime time movie to pick up chicks with, but is really somewhat boring if there are no chicks around. Now, please be aware that you should be prepared to see some extremely hot shots of Natalie Portman as a stripper, and I would personally say that this would be worth the price of a rental. Clive Owen is awesome, and Portman is also quite entertaining, though Jude and Julia aren't the worst. Also there is a cool Simths song, How Soon Is Now? somewhere alonh the line as well. Expand
  6. dant.
    Mar 1, 2005
    5
    Natalya Portman was nominated and I though she was a phony who can't act. I have mixed feelings about the film. My wife asked me what the film was about. I said, "It is a film about bonking" She laughed. You don't see anyone get in the sack which is a rarity these days. The script was so fast paced. Iwent for a cup of teaa and they had already hitched up and were in bed with Natalya Portman was nominated and I though she was a phony who can't act. I have mixed feelings about the film. My wife asked me what the film was about. I said, "It is a film about bonking" She laughed. You don't see anyone get in the sack which is a rarity these days. The script was so fast paced. Iwent for a cup of teaa and they had already hitched up and were in bed with each other and then they were splitting up and getting ack to gether. It left me breathless. It is not dull there is a fast pace to the movie. Still I wondered about the script it was too condesned. Can anyone tell me what Natalya Portamns chacter was? Was she Julie or the other person. I left the theatre confused. What happened? She told Jue her name was Julia but at the end of the film he is llooking at a name on the wall. I don't get it. I thought the actors were miscast. Portaman should be playing teenager parts. Julia Robers was too old for her part. I though she was a Mother rather than a vixen women. Judd was out of his depth. The only real actor was the doctor he played his chacter well. Collapse
  7. anneh
    Jan 24, 2005
    5
    Badly developed theme but carried out by excellent actors who manage to keep you interested.
  8. Lizbeth
    Jan 8, 2005
    5
    An intriguing movie--very difficult to watch.
  9. ChadS.
    Dec 19, 2004
    6
    "Closer" gets off to a very strong start; kinda like "Before Sunset" with engaging dialogue. Jude Law and Natalie Portman have more chemistry than any movie couple we've seen all year. But "Closer" is about adultery, and seems to be, wait, let me google: Nichols, Pinter, "Betrayal", "Closer"; yes, it's similar to Harold Pinter's "Betrayal". Too bad, because a great "Closer" gets off to a very strong start; kinda like "Before Sunset" with engaging dialogue. Jude Law and Natalie Portman have more chemistry than any movie couple we've seen all year. But "Closer" is about adultery, and seems to be, wait, let me google: Nichols, Pinter, "Betrayal", "Closer"; yes, it's similar to Harold Pinter's "Betrayal". Too bad, because a great romantic-comedy could've been built around Law and Portman. It becomes an endurance test, as scene after scene gives us people behaving badly, talking dirty, and acting as if they're in a movie based on a play. Expand
  10. TeeD.
    Dec 8, 2004
    6
    It was a tad bit too cynical for me, and I usually prefer 'realistic' movies to contrived happy endings. The characters all seemed to have strong feelings for each other, but you never saw anything positive between them to understand why. All the scenes seemed to be designed to have critics rave about how good the acting is, and there was little else to make me interested in It was a tad bit too cynical for me, and I usually prefer 'realistic' movies to contrived happy endings. The characters all seemed to have strong feelings for each other, but you never saw anything positive between them to understand why. All the scenes seemed to be designed to have critics rave about how good the acting is, and there was little else to make me interested in what was going on between these caricature-like characters. Expand
  11. Rick
    Dec 6, 2004
    5
    Slooooooooooooow going. You feel guilty finding it boring until you finally realize that it IS boring. Everyone is quite attractive and seems to take it all very seriously though so it is relatively painless. Don't go short of sleep though or you might not make it.
Metascore
65

Generally favorable reviews - based on 42 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 28 out of 42
  2. Negative: 2 out of 42
  1. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    70
    The caustic wit and brute force of Patrick Marber's acclaimed play come across with a softened edge in Mike Nichols' bigscreen version of Closer.
  2. Determined to be faithful to the strong, often shocking language and in-your-face drama in Marber's mannered writing, Nichols and his actors find no way to lift Closer into a realm that enlightens.
  3. 88
    Mike Nichols' haunting, hypnotic Closer vibrates with eroticism, bruising laughs and dynamite performances from four attractive actors doing decidedly unattractive things.