User Score
3.8 out of 10

Generally unfavorable- based on 14 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 14
  2. Negative: 7 out of 14

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    10 out of 10
    Rate this:
    out of 10
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  3. Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000

  1. MikeyG.
    Aug 3, 2003
    6
    This was all over the place. Naomi Watts switches between looking stunningly beautiful and a friggen' wreck all throughout the film. Kate Hudson is great as the younger sister, but that haircut they gave her halfway thru was atrocious!! She should have been given extra money for having to look like that! It's a Merchant Ivory film, which means it's a talkie and it's slow. However, there are no period costumes as this is modern-day Paris. Special ups to the French actor from The Dinner Game that takes Kate as his mistress. Matthew Modine's part is crazy and funny, but not in the way the filmmakers intended, I'm sure. Too much stuff in this movie. If they had cut it by a half hour, it would have been a lot better. It's being sold as a romantic comedy, but it's far from it. Except for Naomi Watts and Kate Hudson fans, there's not much here that the general public will enjoy. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  2. JerryH.
    Aug 4, 2003
    7
    Maybe because it's quite faithful to the book, this film's all over the place, but some of the books black comedy is missing, as well as Eurodisney. There are some great performances -- kate hudson continues to shine in average (or worse) material, thomas lennon (who i think plays the brother) is dead on hilarious, and everyone else -- too many to name. The script, however isn't able to give us full rounded characters as a book might. They are mainly types - the acting elevates these types, but can't make them disappear. I did enjoy this mess, mainly because of the cast. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  3. PawA.
    Apr 1, 2004
    2
    I can only assume Merchant Ivory thought of this as a modern day comedy of manners. While it might have been pithy or poignant given a known set of ethics or manners in play, there are no moral or societal codes evident in this disjointed failure of a movie. My expectations were low, thinking this would be a bit of froth decorated by Watts and Hudson, but I did expect some character devolpment of the barest sort. Nope, sorry. There is no particular reason for almost any of the behaviour, nor do we really care about any of the cast. The only emotion I could muster was annoyance. While Naomi Watts looked ravashing in one or two scenes she disappeared for most of the second half, leaving the screen to a puffy Hudson in a bad wig. The climactic scene on the (i'm not kidding) Eiffel Tower (there's an original idea) was totally no climax at all and just underlined that the movie made no sense. As if to completely give up we are given a flying purse to try to tie nothing to more nothing. The fact that 1/3 of the movie requires reading English subtitles for the French spoken, just adds more tedium. Go rent virtually anything instead of this. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  4. Triniman
    Oct 16, 2003
    7
    Pleasant, funny clash-of-cultures film. Makes the French seem different in a funny sort of way. Pretty good acting by the supporting cast. Naomi Watts and Kate Hudson are good in their roles, but these are not Oscar-worthy performances (and probably not Oscar-worthy actors.) A nice way to spend an evening, but not a must-see film.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  5. NickS.
    Aug 4, 2003
    4
    Usually when I watch a film based on a bestseller that I haven't read, I run out to buy the book. Seabiscuit is a good example. I understand how tough it is to adapt a book but this film made it look impossible. The film couldn't decide what it was about. I went in thinking that it was a romantic comedy but there was hardly any romance and no comedy!! I could count how many times I laughed on one hand. Throw in an attempted suicide, some murders, and depressed women and call that a comedy?!?! I don't think so. Matthew Modine was the only funny character in the film but I'm pretty sure that he wasn't supposed to be. Kate Hudson plays the same character she always does and Naomi Watts was just plain ordinary. I did enjoy the portrayal of the American family, especially when they were in Paris. Overall, I wasn't impressed with this film at all and thought it wasted a lot of talent and a gorgeous location with a mediocre script that couldn't decide what it wanted to be. Merchant-Ivory should go back to period films because they have no idea how to make something else. But if you're fan of the book, it supposedly stays relatively true to it and other fans in the audience enjoyed the film. If you're not a fan of the book, go see Bad Boys II. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  6. Carrot
    Mar 8, 2004
    2
    Qu'est-ce que vous avez tous contre les français?
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  7. AdrianaA.
    May 1, 2004
    1
    This movie should have been called "what length hair will Kate Hudson wear?" Her hair went from cropped short to very long all throughout the movie! It was very distracting! Also the movie is very boring and things just seem to happen out of nowhere... no character development ... movie not funny at all. So many plots were happening and the sad thing is you never really got to care about any of the characters. This really is the worst movie I have seen in a while. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  8. brianp.
    Feb 4, 2005
    1
    This movie sucks! boring and a complete waste of my time. the french actors were annoying and lame. and the americans were horrible as well. the movie's pace was so slow that i almost fell asleep and the plot went nowhere. do yourself a favor and pass on this one.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  9. PaulD.
    Jun 16, 2005
    5
    Nice look at Parisian style and food, but that's about it, other than a good performance by Glen Close.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  10. RobC
    Nov 9, 2007
    0
    So loaded with feminist propaganda that every development left me in no suspense as to its purpose and outcome. Reminiscent of old Soviet movies. Excruciating.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  11. joe
    Aug 30, 2009
    1
    Horrifying little movie by someone who is probably the sort of person who still calls french fries "freedom fries." For all the eye candy on the screen, everyone manages to come off extremely ugly. Avoid.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  12. Mindi
    Jul 19, 2005
    7
    The movie was definately a chick flick that would quickly become a movie you and the girls could enjoy together.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
Metascore

Mixed or average reviews - based on 36 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 36
  2. Negative: 5 out of 36
  1. Is this just silly filmmaking, or have Ivory and Jhabvala succumbed to the Francophobia that gave us "freedom fries" in the congressional cafeteria?
  2. 75
    Acted with relish by a note-perfect cast -- a romantic comedy of true sophistication. There's a sting in every laugh.
  3. A thin and unsatisfying concoction that somehow manages to make one of the richest and most durable sources of culture-clash comedy into an occasion for dullness.