Warner Bros. Pictures | Release Date: December 15, 2004
7.5
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 700 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
535
Mixed:
50
Negative:
115
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
4
GregMcCabeJun 26, 2012
Still amazes me that this got so much attention. Clint Eastwood is a great filmmaker and has made some masterpieces, but this movie was sluggish and simply too predictable. I love the surprises in Unforgiven and Gran Torino and severalStill amazes me that this got so much attention. Clint Eastwood is a great filmmaker and has made some masterpieces, but this movie was sluggish and simply too predictable. I love the surprises in Unforgiven and Gran Torino and several others, but this one was not even close to Clint's best. I even enjoyed J. Edgar better than this film. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
5
Spielberg00Dec 2, 2011
Bottom Line: Best Picture? Iâ
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
6
bobk.Feb 1, 2005
What I've loved about Eastwood eever since I saw him as a kid in "Paint Your Wagon" beside Lee Marvin, is his use of short power phrases, and long looks. This movie had me "at hello" , and I was on my way to delivering one of my best What I've loved about Eastwood eever since I saw him as a kid in "Paint Your Wagon" beside Lee Marvin, is his use of short power phrases, and long looks. This movie had me "at hello" , and I was on my way to delivering one of my best ratings ever. Then came the cathartic ending. True, this movie delivers a "punch", but imagine the "punch" if determination, and persistence would truly have paid off here: much moreso, I believe. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
4
DavidS.Mar 21, 2005
The best way I can describe "Million Dollar Baby" is that it is only pseudo-deep. I never felt the film became truly human. Perhaps this is because Clint Eastwood causes it to seem self-consciously "classical." Many consider it a masterful The best way I can describe "Million Dollar Baby" is that it is only pseudo-deep. I never felt the film became truly human. Perhaps this is because Clint Eastwood causes it to seem self-consciously "classical." Many consider it a masterful demonstration of "classical filmmaking," but in my opinion this attempt to keep things "stripped down" to the bare essentials has gone beyond "Mystic River" and actually affected characterization. None of the characters have any flaws, and thus provided me with no connection. I felt I was watching an interesting story that was well shot, and that was that. In the end, there is truly nothing special about "Million Dollar Baby." Even the Oscar-winning actors of the trio gave superficial performances (how in the world did Swank win over Imelda Staunton, Kate Winslet, and Annette Bening?). I think the only reason "Baby" exists is to give people a reason two years from now to complain about how Scorsese lost to an undeserving director yet again, because I'm sticking by my notion that a film this thin in true, honest humanity and this riddled with cliches will not stand the test of time. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
4
JoshCOct 9, 2006
One of Eastwood's worst movies, and one of the most overrated films in recent years. The plot was not orginal as Indira said. The film was formulaic and cliche ridden.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
4
BakerW.Feb 10, 2006
Good plot premise BUT...both Morgan Freeman and Clint Eastwood "mailed it in". They trotted out two-dimensional cliches of their characters. I doubt if director Eastwood was critical of any scenes either of them played in. Hilary Swank Good plot premise BUT...both Morgan Freeman and Clint Eastwood "mailed it in". They trotted out two-dimensional cliches of their characters. I doubt if director Eastwood was critical of any scenes either of them played in. Hilary Swank didn't look like even a woman boxer. The best performances were the actors playing the cheezy relatives playing for dough even as she realizes there is little hope. Eastwood should have been more self-critical & Freeman should have put more into his role. A mediocre effort from a talented ensemble. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
4
RyanM.Aug 18, 2005
This movie had a consistent tone that was effective in terms of mood. Unfortunately the only other bright spots seemed to be the acting of Morgan Freeman, who is one of the best at supporting roles, and clint eastwood, who reaches down deep This movie had a consistent tone that was effective in terms of mood. Unfortunately the only other bright spots seemed to be the acting of Morgan Freeman, who is one of the best at supporting roles, and clint eastwood, who reaches down deep to pull out a great and wrenching performance. but the movie was written poorly. filled with cliches' and predictability over the second half. and of course the beleivability and absurdness of the final fight was laughable. this movie proves once again that the academy, hollywood and the general population, are suckers for a formulatic tear-jerker. i certainly felt sucker punched. clint can do better than this. what a million dollar mistake. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
DavidB.Aug 9, 2005
I gave the movie a 5 because of the acting which was good, but I don't see how this movie won the Oscar. They made the final fight see like a WWF bout with the liver/sucker/illegal blows. The should also do a little bit of medical I gave the movie a 5 because of the acting which was good, but I don't see how this movie won the Oscar. They made the final fight see like a WWF bout with the liver/sucker/illegal blows. The should also do a little bit of medical research. I thought I was watching a soap opera with the medical mistakes. One can not speak nearly as clearly on a ventilator without a device to assist this. Swank also looked very nice for being a bed ridden patient. Eastwood's view of voluntary euthanasia is a bit over the edge as a physican was not involved in the process. There are ethical/psyhchological issues to be discussed before a person is removed from life support. A family member can not just go uplug/unhook the device and not be charge with a crime. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
4
CarlyG.May 19, 2007
Really not as good as it is described. Only in the mainstream Oscar industry it is. Compared to a independant film about euthenasia, million dollar baby is nothing.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
BillC.Jan 8, 2005
Good movie, but a little to slow for my liking.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
DeanD.Jan 20, 2005
This movie had all the cliches and tear-jerking moments that were characteristic of movies in the 40's and 50's. OK, I won't give away the ending, except to say that it was too long in coming. The fight scenes were of the This movie had all the cliches and tear-jerking moments that were characteristic of movies in the 40's and 50's. OK, I won't give away the ending, except to say that it was too long in coming. The fight scenes were of the "Rocky" type: haymakers that in real life would have killed a bull but in this movie just send her to the corner so Clint can tell her to suck it up. And of course she does. I saw a few damp eyes in the theater, so if you are a sucker for a tear-jerker, this flick is for you, but if you like more sophisticated, realistic movies, like Mystic River, take a pass. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
KevinT.Feb 4, 2005
A little overrated. A good movie, but outside of Hilary Swank (who is terrific) I don't see a whole lot that impresses me. Eastwood's directing has countless flaws, the cinematography is horrendous, and Eastwood's musical A little overrated. A good movie, but outside of Hilary Swank (who is terrific) I don't see a whole lot that impresses me. Eastwood's directing has countless flaws, the cinematography is horrendous, and Eastwood's musical score leaves a lot to be desired. No wonder this movie didn't cost a whole lot to make. Eastwood used half of the budget to pay the movie critics. This is NOT a "great" movie. Good, but not great. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
M.WalkerFeb 6, 2005
I feel like I've seen this story on the screen too many times. It's just predictable. Not as good as Rocky, and not even in the same league as Raging Bull. I like when movies move me emotionally, and I welcome and desire it, but I feel like I've seen this story on the screen too many times. It's just predictable. Not as good as Rocky, and not even in the same league as Raging Bull. I like when movies move me emotionally, and I welcome and desire it, but this movie did nothing for me. Hillary Swank was the only bright spot, in my opinion. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
AmyMar 4, 2005
[SPOILER...of sorts] A decent movie, but highly (and imcomprehensibly) over-rated. This movie starts out like Rocky and ends up like Terms of Endearment. It would have been a more enjoyable film if Eastwood had chosen one path or the other. [SPOILER...of sorts] A decent movie, but highly (and imcomprehensibly) over-rated. This movie starts out like Rocky and ends up like Terms of Endearment. It would have been a more enjoyable film if Eastwood had chosen one path or the other. It's just not good enough to do both successfully. I can enjoy melodrama and cliches when the movie doesn't take itself so seriously. But Million Dollar Baby aims for high art and high art it ain't. That said, Swank is very good -- and she and her archnemesis ("The Blue Bear") look fabulous! I'd love to have (and be able to afford) their personal trainers. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
LeeD.Mar 6, 2005
A sharply-made but tired drama that reveals nothing to you though it succeeds in making it look like it should. Not a bad effort, but undeserving of the reviews and awards it's getting.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
jjorisvlaminckxMay 6, 2005
Overrated, definitely. Go see Maradentro.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
AlbertoC.Aug 2, 2005
Way, way overrated. The worst movie I've seen win a Best Picture Oscar. The Everlast promotion is blatant (every single boxer in the movie is wearing the more expensive Everlast gloves, for example). The cheap shots in the boxing Way, way overrated. The worst movie I've seen win a Best Picture Oscar. The Everlast promotion is blatant (every single boxer in the movie is wearing the more expensive Everlast gloves, for example). The cheap shots in the boxing matches make the sport look like wrestling, as the ref misses all of them, and they still give the fight to the one who broke the others neck with a sucker punch! Absurd. It takes away a lot from the second half of the movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
MarcK.Jan 19, 2005
I've obviously seen a different version of MDB than most of the critics. This film was completely mediocre, and as the Salon critic said, overwrought with cliche piled upon cliche. I think Hilary Swank's performance in "Boys I've obviously seen a different version of MDB than most of the critics. This film was completely mediocre, and as the Salon critic said, overwrought with cliche piled upon cliche. I think Hilary Swank's performance in "Boys Don't Cry" is among the best I've ever seen in any movie, but why anyone thinks she deserves an Oscar for this is beyond me. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
TomCJan 25, 2005
Nice story, great look, but a bit clunky. The bit where they visit London is a masterpeice of stereotyping. I saw it in Covent Garden and people were laughing.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
jamesp.Jan 31, 2005
Interminably long drawn out ending.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
brianBFeb 1, 2005
A very disappointing and depressing experience. Eastwood is totally unconvincing and very wooden. Here's hoping this is his last movie; there is no need to further taint the memory of the actor he once was. Swank does a good job, but A very disappointing and depressing experience. Eastwood is totally unconvincing and very wooden. Here's hoping this is his last movie; there is no need to further taint the memory of the actor he once was. Swank does a good job, but the movie is so manipulative and contrived that the tears are jerked out with a sledgehammer. The actual boxing part of the movie (first half) did have some appeal, but it fell apart from there. Odd lighting; high school level script; don't bother! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
PhilBFeb 13, 2005
The characters were all clichés and bad cliché
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
mitchm.Mar 1, 2005
[***SPOILERS***] Solid and predictable filmmaking. And while any flick that ends with amputations, feeding tubes, and Kevorkian-like mercies, earns my respect, her injury was a little hard to fathom. Plus, her character was impossibly [***SPOILERS***] Solid and predictable filmmaking. And while any flick that ends with amputations, feeding tubes, and Kevorkian-like mercies, earns my respect, her injury was a little hard to fathom. Plus, her character was impossibly saintly, humble, and sexless. Just like all the other boxers I've come to know. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
marcoc.Apr 28, 2005
A cliched, sentimental and self important film with some very good performances which however cannot hide its derivative nature. not reccomended.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
IsabelCJul 16, 2005
My first complaint is that the film is too long - badly needed editing. I enjoyed Hilary Swank and Eastwood. Both performed admirably. Although I'd love to see Swank in a role that's not a tomboy goody-two-shoes (Boy's My first complaint is that the film is too long - badly needed editing. I enjoyed Hilary Swank and Eastwood. Both performed admirably. Although I'd love to see Swank in a role that's not a tomboy goody-two-shoes (Boy's Don't Dry, etc.) I'm surprised that anyone would think the writing in this movie is good. I found that it was often facile and amateurish. Many of the secondary characters were charicatures...and yes, we get it, hillbillies are uncouth and dumb. Thank-you Hollywood for reminding us of this. It's definitely a downer but it wasn't bad overall. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
NCosteDec 23, 2004
Disappointing. Some good scenes and acting, but some weak scenes and acting by all, too. Didn't buy the banter between Clint and Morgan--it seemed forced to generate drama. I did like Hilary's naive drive to "become somebody, Disappointing. Some good scenes and acting, but some weak scenes and acting by all, too. Didn't buy the banter between Clint and Morgan--it seemed forced to generate drama. I did like Hilary's naive drive to "become somebody, instead of the white trash which is what I am." But what happens to her after the big fight constricted the dramatic possibities thereafter and made the ending predictable and agonizingly slow, rather than moving...which it seemed to be for many (based on the reviews) but not for me. Collapse
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
KyleA.Jan 28, 2005
Starts out wonderfully, smoothly, then kicks you right in the crotch for the most drawn out, depressing final act in a film since - hey, Mystic River! Dear Clint, take some Zoloft.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
DanaB.Mar 17, 2005
[***SPOILERS***] Strong characters, lovely cinematography - but what's up with the anti-female stance? A young woman following her dream - great story. But young woman following her dream, makes it to the biggest day in her career only [***SPOILERS***] Strong characters, lovely cinematography - but what's up with the anti-female stance? A young woman following her dream - great story. But young woman following her dream, makes it to the biggest day in her career only to break her neck, become a paraplegic begging for euthanasia? What's up with that? I'm all for art imitating the cruel reality of life - but come on... another female bashing movie? Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
TelyS.Mar 25, 2005
Million Dollar Baby is the perfect Oscar movie, popular with the masses and completely mediocre. Let it join ranks with the other recent Best Picture Oscar winners that have already been forgotten like American Beauty, Gladiator, A Beautiful Million Dollar Baby is the perfect Oscar movie, popular with the masses and completely mediocre. Let it join ranks with the other recent Best Picture Oscar winners that have already been forgotten like American Beauty, Gladiator, A Beautiful Mind, Titanic, and so on, and so forth. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
NickH.May 19, 2005
Other than Swank's acting, this movie was an abortion. Rife with cliches, one-toned acting, contrived dialogue, and a self-impressed suckerpunch ending. Could use a diet. That it was America's favorite bespeaks our desire to be Other than Swank's acting, this movie was an abortion. Rife with cliches, one-toned acting, contrived dialogue, and a self-impressed suckerpunch ending. Could use a diet. That it was America's favorite bespeaks our desire to be moved by the ever more formulaic big budget Hollywood set. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
MarkM.Jul 29, 2005
A brilliantly directed and nicely acted string of Hollywood cliches.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
J.C.RamseyDec 16, 2004
Very depressing. It certainly is though-provoking, but tremendously melodramatic. I liked it but I kind of felt that I wasted my $12.99. I wanted something a little more triumphant and the movie ended heart-breakingly tragic. It did have Very depressing. It certainly is though-provoking, but tremendously melodramatic. I liked it but I kind of felt that I wasted my $12.99. I wanted something a little more triumphant and the movie ended heart-breakingly tragic. It did have some deep, overriding messages - make the most of your life, do what you want, life has to be lived etc. - and I appreciated this, but it wasn't the kind of movie I would want to watch again. I wonder what might have happened to Swank's character is she'd chosen running or swimming instead of boxing. Even before her catastrophic injuries, I kept thinking how stupid boxing was. How could someone what to train him/herself to go into a ring and punch someone to unconsciousness while getting their face smashed in?! I don't see the appeal. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
markymarkDec 4, 2015
SPOILER

Such an overrated film. Tired narrator device (narrator!!! we'll get Morgan Freeman to play the same role he's played 345 times before), woefully unconvincing and contrived plot and possible the worst, tension-killing,
SPOILER

Such an overrated film. Tired narrator device (narrator!!! we'll get Morgan Freeman to play the same role he's played 345 times before), woefully unconvincing and contrived plot and possible the worst, tension-killing, stereotypical characterisation of a family in cinematic history. Second half of the film is intensely boring as the ridiculousness of the writing killed any emotional impact that was supposed to be felt. I was so happy when she finally died because it meant the film was going to end. Gets a 4 because Eastwood (in particular) was great and Swank was very good - not their fault the screenplay was so atrocious. Worst winner of a Best Picture Oscar in my time (although Braveheart came close).
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews