User Score
5.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 31 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 31
  2. Negative: 11 out of 31
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. Nov 12, 2012
    1
    You can't just take a novel, no matter how great, and translate it to script word for word. Chances are, you'll need to make adjustments. Because if you don't, you get an indolent, sporadic lump of doo-doo like this. Insufferable.
  2. Mar 29, 2014
    10
    incredible..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................incredible....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Very Good Expand
  3. ChadS.
    Feb 5, 2008
    5
    "Love in the Time of Cholera" flunks its litmus test. Audiences aren't supposed to laugh when Florentino(Javier Bardem) tells Fermina(Giovanna Mezzogiorno), in all seriousness, that he'd been saving himself for her. Even though Florentino got lucky more times than the alpha male in a tribe of black howler monkeys, those women(622 to be precise, but who's counting? "Love in the Time of Cholera" flunks its litmus test. Audiences aren't supposed to laugh when Florentino(Javier Bardem) tells Fermina(Giovanna Mezzogiorno), in all seriousness, that he'd been saving himself for her. Even though Florentino got lucky more times than the alpha male in a tribe of black howler monkeys, those women(622 to be precise, but who's counting? Florentino, apparently, that's who.) were encounters that, albeit fun, left him unfulfilled and lonely. It's not a lie exactly, but it sounds like one, when in fact, Florentino's pillow talk is supposed to be a declaration of love, and that's the major reason why "Love in the Time of Cholera" tickles our funny bones instead of touching our hearts. Florentino is supposed to be tortured. Each woman he beds is not Fermina, but he doesn't seem sufficiently tortured. Maybe the film needed more cholera; more dead people. Sex, then death; sex, then death. You never feel the spectre of cholera hovering over the characters in this movie like you do in the Gabriel Garcia Marquez novel. Ultimately, you don't get the sense that Florentino's life was all that horrible. He got some. He didn't get cholera. Expand
  4. LuisP.
    Mar 12, 2008
    7
    A good attempt to adapt one of the greatest books of all time, but fails exactly where t shouldn't. We don´t feel the poetry, the passion or the love that comes through in the book and that is the worst thing it could happen to these magnificent characters. The fact that in the movie the character of Dr Juvenal Urbino is nothing more than an arrogant day time soap opera dandy A good attempt to adapt one of the greatest books of all time, but fails exactly where t shouldn't. We don´t feel the poetry, the passion or the love that comes through in the book and that is the worst thing it could happen to these magnificent characters. The fact that in the movie the character of Dr Juvenal Urbino is nothing more than an arrogant day time soap opera dandy doesn't help either despite the excellent work from the actors involved. A movie like this deserved someone like Giuseppe Tornatore behind it as this anglo-saxonic approach almost sinks the whole thing due to an absolute lack of emotion. Although the last 15 minutes are really very good and that, the cinematography and the actors save the film. Nevertheless if you forget there´s a book behind , the movie is a nice romantic story. You just have to get over those "speedy gonzalez" accents that plague the dialogues. Nice attempt but i hope someone outside Hollywood makes a remake of this someday as this story deserved to be as emotional as Cinema Paradiso was on the screen and unfortunately this time it´s not. But if you like the book, you must see this anyway, so don´t expect to much and you´ll enjoy it nevertheless. Expand
  5. CarolB.
    Apr 13, 2008
    9
    Loved it. A beautiful love story. Javier Bardem is imazing in that he can play the patient, kind lover in this movie and the crazed killer in "No Country for Old Men". Incredibly talented actor.
  6. ThomasQ.
    Nov 16, 2007
    1
    Read the book, skip this treadfully bad film. Poorly conceived and even more poorly executd. Just bad, especially up against the WONDERFUL novel.
  7. JerryM.
    Nov 17, 2007
    0
    If I had to choose between sitting through this movie again or cholera, I'd choose cholera - it's less painful. The story is missing large amounts of plot, skipping forward without explanation and the acting is on par with a bad telenovela. I found myself envying the characters who died in the movie.
  8. AaronL.
    Nov 22, 2007
    8
    A sweeping movie across generations, filled with poetry, beauty, and love. Tickling, thought provoking and ultimately romantic.
  9. KatieM.
    Dec 30, 2007
    2
    I haven't read the book, but I am familiar enough with Marquez's other works to know what kind of atmosphere the director was attempting to recreate. Needless to say, the attempt failed miserably. What resulted was a shmaltzy and tedious storyline that even Javier Bardem couldn't redeem. I will also never understand why directors insist on close-up shots when their actors I haven't read the book, but I am familiar enough with Marquez's other works to know what kind of atmosphere the director was attempting to recreate. Needless to say, the attempt failed miserably. What resulted was a shmaltzy and tedious storyline that even Javier Bardem couldn't redeem. I will also never understand why directors insist on close-up shots when their actors are plastered with comically bad geriatric makeup. Where was the editor?? I'm giving it two stars because at least it made me laugh. Collapse
  10. StephenH.
    Dec 5, 2007
    8
    The cinematic interpretation of Gabriel Garcia Marques' novel "Love in the Time of Cholera" is a wonderful exposition on the theme of the virginal soul: that essence of himself that the protagonist [played by Javier Bardem] saves for his true love. What the film lacks in passion it makes up for with a brilliant musical score, photography, sets and faithful attention to the The cinematic interpretation of Gabriel Garcia Marques' novel "Love in the Time of Cholera" is a wonderful exposition on the theme of the virginal soul: that essence of himself that the protagonist [played by Javier Bardem] saves for his true love. What the film lacks in passion it makes up for with a brilliant musical score, photography, sets and faithful attention to the novel's main theme. After all, who can really come close to the range of emotions, passionate intensity and overall texture of this great novel? Expand
  11. AshleyG.
    Mar 19, 2008
    1
    I just watched this awful movie on video. Anyone who manages to assemble this wonderful and mostly Latino cast but have them speaking English with horrendous accents about a story taking place in the heart of Spanish-speaking America is condescending. Condescending towards English speaking peoples who otherwise may not "understand" the story. Condescending towards Spanish speaking peoples I just watched this awful movie on video. Anyone who manages to assemble this wonderful and mostly Latino cast but have them speaking English with horrendous accents about a story taking place in the heart of Spanish-speaking America is condescending. Condescending towards English speaking peoples who otherwise may not "understand" the story. Condescending towards Spanish speaking peoples who otherwise may think less of the film. A missed opportunity. Read the book as it respects language, whatever it may be. Expand
  12. CaladoniaK.
    Nov 17, 2007
    0
    Terrible. Empty and apathetic film.
  13. SheilaP
    Nov 17, 2007
    8
    I read the book and found it to be superb. I thought the movie followed fairly closely. A book certainly always has more flesh than a movie but I absolutely do not agree with the low comments. I heard all positive comments upon exiting the theater. It was a well done, well crafted and beautiful film.
  14. Feb 4, 2015
    3
    First 1 hour is very very boring.I didn't watch rest of the movie.Some one was saying it better towards the end.......................................
Metascore
43

Mixed or average reviews - based on 29 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 29
  2. Negative: 7 out of 29
  1. Reviewed by: Sura Wood
    60
    Shot on location in vibrant Cartagena, the film's strong suit is aesthetic. Cinematographer Alfonso Beato, designer Wolf Kroeger and costume designer Marit Allen evoke aged exotic locales, rugged rural settings and dimly lit period interiors. A closing, aerial image has a breathtaking, spiritual beauty.
  2. 80
    It’s a well-crafted, handsome period piece, and pleasant to watch, but the intensity of an obsessional style--something that matches Florentino’s crazy single-mindedness--is beyond Newell’s range. The director of “Donnie Brasco” and “Four Weddings and a Funeral” doesn’t paint with the camera; he doesn’t seize on certain visual motifs, as he should, and turn them into the equivalent of a lover’s devotion to fetishes.
  3. Reviewed by: John Anderson
    50
    Despite a magnificent performance by Javier Bardem, the film not only falls short of the novel's magic, but fails to generate much of its own.