User Score
7.7 out of 10

Generally favorable reviews- based on 9 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 9
  2. Negative: 0 out of 9

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. GaborA.
    Jun 28, 2004
    6
    There are a lot of movies about con artists. More importantly, there are a lot of movies about con artists better than this one.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  2. EloiP.
    Nov 30, 2002
    10
    Annette Bening was amazing in this. And the ending is a doozy... a must see!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  3. PatC.
    Jan 7, 2004
    8
    The problem with being amoral is that one cannot refer to an amoral compass. They are perenially off course & trying to cover their tracks. And if that sounds vague, you can bet this film will explain it. It's about unpleasant people, but there is pleasure in watching them interact from a safe distance (do not touch the glass. do not approach the glass).
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  4. YoonMinC.
    Sep 28, 2003
    6
    Well written but mechanical exercise in noirishness. Annette Bening is irritating as usual , Cusack's role is unconvincing and flabby. Only Huston sizzles but not enough to cook this dead fish of a movie.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
Metascore

Universal acclaim - based on 18 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 18
  2. Negative: 0 out of 18
  1. 100
    The performances are all insidiously powerful.
  2. The movie is pulp, yet it attains a surprising emotional power-especially when Anjelica Huston's Lilly, a survivor who'll do whatever it takes to master her surroundings, is on-screen.
  3. Reviewed by: John Stone
    100
    [Frears] has not only captured the bleak qualities of the old film noir melodramas but supplied an undercurrent that is as sly as it is unsettling. [25 Jan 1991]