User Score
8.6 out of 10

Universal acclaim- based on 142 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 15 out of 142

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. Aug 12, 2010
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is one of the masterpieces of the early 20th century, in my opinion. Every aspect of the film works perfectly: make-up, costumes, editing, directing, the score and, of course, the acting. Besides the perfect score by Philip Glass, one cannot but focus on the breath-taking performances that all of the actors have given us. Nicole Kidman is just mesmerising as Virginia Woolf and is literally unrecognisable. Very moving performances, that gives us a glimpse of what a genius' inner struggle could have looked like. Julianne Moore as well - perfect as the 50s housewife who goes through a life crisis of her own. Meryl Streep is just herself. Always good, with a devastating breakdown scene in her kitchen. The supporting cast is also spectacular - especially Ed Harris and Toni Collette. And I must say that the film is very faithful to the book, which is praise-worthy. The screenplay was written so well, that one cannot but congratulate David Hare for it and wonder how he did not get more recognition for it, for he surely deserves it. All in all - the best film of 2002, if not of the entire decade: 10/10. Expand
  2. BronxvilleFilmFan
    Jan 2, 2003
    8
    A powerful, haunting film. The plot develops nicely, if a bit slowly. Nicole Kidman is absolutely incredible as Virginia Woolf. Props to Stephen Dillane for portraying her husband Leonard. Their scene at the train station is one of the very best in the entire film. Meryl Streep and Julianne Moore are also outstanding. Moore, in particular, has to work overtime: her storyline is written rather vaguely, so it's up to Moore to make her housewife's suffocation corporeal. She does just that in brilliant fashion. The score is sometimes intrusive and the screenplay is very good, but maybe too ambitious. Still, under the direction of Stephen Daldry, the film develops quickly into something quite extraordinary. Kudos to Daldry and his fantastic cast. Expand
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  3. NandoP.
    Mar 4, 2003
    9
    A beautiful piece of art that puts you on the first row of the intense and uninterrupted drama of life of Virginia Woolf... and her legacy over the time. Even if you don't like the story of happiness conquered by intimate suffering and fatal choices in life, it's almost impossible, I mean if you really love film, to not be touched by the sensitive and marvellous work of Nicole Kidman, Meryl Streep and Juliane Moore. Philip Glass and the curious screenplay are another two strong virtues of this masterpiece. Expand
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  4. EinarJ.
    Apr 27, 2008
    10
    After having read Mrs. Dalloway by Virginia Wolfe, I decided it was time to watch the critically acclaimed, the Hours. I've heard of its supposed monotony and depressionista egotism. But, the performances are beautiful on nearly every level. Nicole Kidman transforms herself entirely, fearing her isolation, and her self-control. True, the characters reveal themselves as foolishly ignorant and self-important. Julianne Moore, with her crumbling visage, shows losing her artificiality which she copes with every day and plans for her own happiness and veers from any insanity. Meryl Streep portrays someone needing something, that she will never obtain for herself, almost crashing into the whole mess of things. All the characters portray that behind closed doors, things aren't as perfect as they seem. The script and score perfect the movie, along with the effectively chosen supporting cast. Classic beauty. Expand
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  5. GeorgeM.
    Aug 11, 2003
    5
    Although well done--the film carries off the intense drama of these three downward spiraling lives--this drama itself may be the primary problem. Virginia Woolf, in her life and her writing, was far from this stereotypical rendering. Energetic with a sustaining strength, she was not "mad" but rather suffered from four primary breakdowns. These occurred in 1904, 1913, 1915, and 1941. She was not, however, constantly on the "edge" of suicide; nor did she need to be "watched" constantly for such possibilities. The Hogarth Press was indeed started as therapy for her nervousness; but then she herself built the press into one of the major avant garde publishing effort of the Modernist Period. The film works as a film, but fails rather miserably as biography. And in so doing, it perhaps sends the wrong signal to viewers about writerly lives, about women in each of these historical periods, and mostly, about the overly cliched notion of "madness" as a catch-all phrase for existential crisis. Expand
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  6. May 27, 2011
    10
    I just saw it and all I have to say is that I am really speechless. a truly beautiful film. one of the best films I've ever seen. ****
  7. ZanetC.
    Jun 22, 2003
    9
    Bouleversant. Une interprétation magistrale. un film référence...
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  8. DaserR.
    Mar 13, 2003
    1
    It is so hard for me to understand what world people are living in when this gets a Best Picture nomination (same goes for Gangs of New York, which was the only movie I have ever seen that I hated more than The Hours). This movie was terrible. I have not the words to describe how bad it was. It was surreal how bad it was.
    • 0 of 1 users said yes
  9. KatieP.
    Jun 24, 2003
    10
    A brilliant masterpiece. Julianne Moore and Nicole Kidman were fantastic. Can't wait to buy the DVD when it comes out today!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  10. WAKOJAKO
    Jun 3, 2003
    8
    After seeing this film three times, I wish I were watching it on DVD so I could skip the Meryl Streep parts and watch the Nicole Kidman and Julianne Moore segments over and over again. A well-deserved Oscar win for Kidman. In a perfect world, Moore would have won too. And the music...THE MUSIC. My God, I must own that soundtrack.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  11. Steve
    Apr 7, 2006
    1
    Typical overhyped Hollywood crap. "Let's stare at screwed up people for two hours while they talk about how screwed up they are" Oh, and they're better be gay people involved or someone might be offended. When will Hollywood get over themselves.
    • 0 of 4 users said yes
  12. JamesS.
    Jan 10, 2003
    1
    Blatantly manipulative and exploitative made-for-awards movie.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  13. Pitugus
    Oct 26, 2003
    10
    Excellent! One of the best movies i have seen.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  14. BarryR.
    Jan 3, 2003
    9
    Every once in a while a picture comes along where the acting, directing, writing and editing all are in synch and it becomes a wondrous film to watch. Such an experience awaits you when you go to see--- and you MUST GO TO SEE ---"The Hours". Based upon a book that everyone said could never be made into a movie, the movie succeeds over the doubting Thomas' and their skepticism. The acting of Nicole Kidman, Meryl Streep and Julianne Moore are, to say the least, extraordinary. These three ladies play their parts so well that any one of them could (and I'm sure will) be nominated for an Oscar. They are breathtaking in their performances and thrilling to watch. The quality of this movie lies in the fact that three different women in 3 different time eras weave in and out of the screen with a smoothness and ease of pace that makes you wonder at the editing and directing that brought this miracle about. The music, for the most part composed by Philip Glass, is likewise to be applauded for it is so much a part of the photoplay that you are almost unaware of its individuality or severablility. The little boy who plays Julienne Moore's son (I forgot his name) is a scene stealer and a star in his own right. Although aware of W.C.Field's comment that you should never play a scene with a charming child, Ms. Moore more than holds her own. This is a movie you must not only watch but participate in. It is an exciting experience that requires focus and concentration. It won't be an effort to do it, more like a labor of enjoyment. These are real characters with lots to say and feel and, thanks to the aforementioned talent, they are brought to life and then some. You'll hear a lot more about this movie when the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences makes its nominee announcements early next year. Certainly, directing, acting, writing, editing and music will be some of the categories noted. Watch, too, for a special award for prosthesis effects since this is also an area where the technical staff that worked on the movie really excelled. I am pleased to give this movie 3 and 1/2 stars and a strong recommendation that it be seen by all who enjoy watching really good films. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  15. Neil
    Jan 4, 2003
    0
    Pretentious hooey.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  16. NandoP.
    Mar 4, 2003
    9
    A beautiful piece of art that puts you on the first row of the intense and uninterrupted drama of life of Virginia Woolf... and her legacy over the time. Even if you don't like the story of happiness conquered by intimate suffering and fatal choices in life, it's almost impossible, I mean if you really love film, to not be touched by the sensitive and marvellous work of Nicole Kidman, Meryl Streep and Juliane Moore. Philip Glass and the curious screenplay are another two strong virtues of this masterpiece. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  17. DavidS.
    May 7, 2003
    1
    I am a film buff. I like to think I have fairly sophisticated taste. I think all the actors in this production did fine work. I have no bias against stories focused primarily on women. BUT... I absolutely hated this movie. I did not care one whit about the story or it's characters. It was a complete waste of my time and money. If you want a story about 'real' women, try Real Women Have Curves. If you want artistic stimulation, see Adaptation. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  18. KenG.
    Jan 20, 2004
    9
    An engrossing, time-tripping story of three women who are connected to each other through their loves, anxieties and hopes. Nicole deserved the Oscar, but Julianne Moore gives a stunning performance in a role spanning 50 years. In the end you don't know whether you admire or despise her.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  19. DaveC.
    Oct 3, 2004
    4
    Are these critics for real? All three of these women were walking cliches. The film's style is grim, melodramatic, pretentious and self-important, the photography is too glossy and sanitised to really convey the bleak situations that these women are in and all three of the lead performances were blatantly forced (I'd never have thought that I'd be so underwhelmed by Meryl Streep's acting). Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  20. KikiS.
    Apr 20, 2005
    10
    This film is perfect from frame to frame. Oscar well deserved for Nicole Kidman, I can't get over how perfect she really is. Best performance ever. Not exaggerating.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  21. AlanG.
    Jun 13, 2005
    10
    Wonderful! The movie may come across as depressing at first, but after repeated viewings, it's really a movie about hope and choosing to live your life as you wish. As Stephen Daldry said in an interview, "The height of discontent is the start of choosing life". Highly recommended.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  22. JonatanD.
    Sep 20, 2005
    10
    This movie is brilliant, Kidman gave the best performance ever in a film, every move she made, every word she said every look she gave were so amazing acted, and that train scene just hilarius... Moore also shines and makes this movie amazing, that bath scene is really good... I liked Streep performance but its not her best thats a pitty she has very good lines "Why is everything wrong" i loved that one... Amazing screenplay and so beautifuly directed. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  23. NickA.
    Sep 8, 2006
    10
    Well where do you begin? Quite simply one of those movies that restores your faith in modern film. The performances of the three leads is irresistible although in all honesty the oscar should have gone to Julianne Moore who in my opinion gave the best performance of any actress in recent years. The director manages to bring the lives of the three together beautifully in an astonishing finale, the supporting cast are also wonderful and the score compliments this masterpiece beautifully, the themes it touches upon tug at your heart and leave you emotionally drained at the end but its worth it because cinema doesnt get any better than this. Put simply brilliant, sensational, a modern masterpiece. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  24. Nadie
    Jun 16, 2007
    10
    This movie makes you really believe that cinema is the 7th art form. The magnificent script is complemented by astonishing performances that are very well directed and edited to perfection. The cherry on top: Mr. Glass music. “Come to bed Laura Brown…” represents much more than a line. Everyone knows a person that is trapped in a life where it doesn’t belong. This movie teaches you that you can change your life the instant you decide to do it. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  25. Mike
    Dec 31, 2002
    10
    As an avid move fan I thought this was on of the best, if not the best, film I've ever seen. The acting was superb. Even though I kept reminding myself it was Streep, Kidman, and Moore I kept getting sucked into the story. The directing brought all of the story lines together in a way that made sense, and the music set the mood appropriately. Considering the subject matter and the somber mood of the film I felt it was perfect in every aspect. This is truely why movies are made. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  26. TylerG.
    Jan 11, 2003
    0
    Torturous, in-patient-dogma. Somebody got paid off for this one, because there is no excuse for this irreverence. Give me Magnolia or Orlando instead. The suicide rate in this country is going to increase as a result of this movie. Marylin Manson and Doom are a walk in the park compared to this movie.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  27. RyanM.
    Jan 12, 2003
    10
    This is great filmmaking! One of the best pictures of the year.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  28. NolanB.
    Jan 17, 2003
    3
    I wish I could have the two "hours" back that this movie robbed me of...
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  29. RyanE.
    Jan 18, 2003
    10
    This movie was amazing in everyway. The acting (especially Kidman), directing, editing, score, makeup, and everything else was top-notch. Not for everyone, but I feel it's one of the best of the year.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  30. RoyD.
    Jan 18, 2003
    0
    A sick chick flick.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  31. ChadS.
    Jan 18, 2003
    10
    "The Hours" is such compelling viewing, it's impossible to say which of the three women's stories stand out the most. All that's missing from Nicole Kidman's section is a long take of her Woolf at work. If you've read Mrs. Dalloway, there's tremendous fun to be had here because the novel's plot points are all over the place. It offsets the dreariness of Michael Cunningham's material. If you haven't, you may find this movie just plain depressing. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  32. A.P.
    Dec 5, 2003
    1
    Good film-making, AWFUL story.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  33. MichaelM.
    Feb 10, 2003
    9
    It makes me laugh when people call movies like this "Chick" Flicks or "Awards" movies. Did they think it would be an action movie when going in? Were they disappointed because the movie was about People and not explosions? All you do is have to look at the poster of the movie and you pretty much know what type of film you are getting. A minority of the public thes days are used to watching lite fluff so its no surprise that these same people dont like movies like this. Ashame really. This is the best movie I have seen all year. Amazing! Its about "People" and "Life" and Emotions. Yeah, its deliberately pased but it goes by faster than you would think. I was in awe of these performers and will go see it again. Life isn't all neat like most movie represent these days, take some time and go see it, you wont be sorry. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  34. ThePoetActs
    Feb 12, 2003
    10
    Who says you need action and special effects for a film to be intense? This is about as emotionally harrowing as movies come - not necessarily one that jerks your tears, but is just... depressing. Or should I say moving? It will stay with me forever.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  35. AaronL.
    Feb 17, 2003
    9
    A richly rewarding film experience. Has the best ensemble acting of any film in recent memory. Everyone is pitch perfect. If you truly love great acting, excellent writing, and overall outstanding cinema, run to see this. If you just like "play in Peoria" popcorn movies, then don't waste your time - run to catch your cheap matinee of Shanghai Knights.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  36. HenryH.
    Feb 19, 2003
    8
    Perhaps what's disturbing is that every actor tries to hard to impress the viewers...
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  37. LeeP.
    Feb 22, 2003
    9
    A beautiful,sad, and powerful film.Everything about it is excellent. Despite its deep and heavy theme, in the end you get a sense of catharsis and closure.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  38. Elijah
    Feb 22, 2003
    10
    I agree with Brian. This is the movie that moved me the most from the past year. Sure, it's depressing, but it explains the subtlety of depression and how sometimes its motive is too abstract to fully rationalize. The performances here are truly remarkable, and I hope it cleans up come Oscar night.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  39. JoshuaW.
    Mar 3, 2003
    10
    This was the first movie I've seen in over a year that actually made me leave the theater wanting to better myself. This is a rare and beautiful film. Everything was great. Phillip Glass' score was beautiful and Julianne Moore was to me the star. Kidman was great, but the Oscar nominations should have been switched for the two. Julianne gave the best perfomance in the film, and in almost any film I've ever seen. Kidman and Streep, who were both amazing were still only supporting actresses to Moore. What a great film. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  40. SamuelH.
    Apr 11, 2003
    10
    The Hours got the best ensemble in the SAG awards, probably because we don't see a single actor/ actress shine through the whole movie. Just like Chicago, Every cast members get at least some screen time. Nicole Kidman is just one of the actresses in this movie that's " It" Meryl Streep, Julianne Moore and Nicole Kidman form the perfect ensemble in expressing the fears, the purpose of living, and the reason of happiness in life. The three women's lives are all intertwined with David Hare's magnificent prose and Philip Glass' great score. Ignore what you hear about the homosexual content of this film, and people not understanding what is going on. We should acknowledge Stephen Daldry's great adaptation of Michael Cunningham's novel of the same title. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  41. SamuelH.
    Apr 11, 2003
    10
    The Hours got the best ensemble in the SAG awards, probably because we don't see a single actor/ actress shine through the whole movie. Just like Chicago, Every cast members get at least some screen time. Nicole Kidman is just one of the actresses in this movie that's " It" Meryl Streep, Julianne Moore and Nicole Kidman form the perfect ensemble in expressing the fears, the purpose of living, and the reason of happiness in life. The three women's lives are all intertwined with David Hare's magnificent prose and Philip Glass' great score. Ignore what you hear about the homosexual content of this film, and people not understanding what is going on. We should acknowledge Stephen Daldry's great adaptation of Michael Cunningham's novel of the same title. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  42. KevinF.
    May 29, 2003
    10
    An amazing film about three women facing crucibles in their lives. Beautifully acted by main and supporting actors. I was really taken by Nicole Kidman's performance. She truly transformed into the Virginia Wolff character. Amazingly edited and told. A movie I will own when it comes out on video.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  43. [Anonymous]
    Jun 9, 2003
    10
    Definitely one of the year's best films. Quite shattering performances from Kidman, Streep, Moore and Harris. With a superb supporting cast. Scenes that will remain forever in my mind - Kidman's gifted grasp of the desparation and pain that Woolf must have been experiencing at this period of her life - staring with vacant gaze at lifeless bird...... confrontation at railway station with a pre- occupied husband...... writing...alone..lost in thought. Kidman manages to bring to life, in minimum screen time, Virginia Woolf. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  44. MichaelH.
    Jul 14, 2003
    2
    Are there that many people out there that are so suicidal and miserable with their lives that they would make this movie a big hit? Scary notion. I found every character dislikable to the point of being uncaring as to their outcome. At one point, the author states that she must "kill someone". The remaider of the movie, you are whating for that person to die. Someone, anyone, it didn't matter as long as something happened. I spent most of the movie looking for the edges of Kidmans fake nose. The Hours.....wasted watching this move! Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  45. DanielG.
    Sep 9, 2003
    10
    THE BEST FILM OF THE YEAR... DEEP AND TOUCHING. Kidman, Moore and especially Streep (the best actress EVER) gave AMAZING PERFORMANCES. Great Directing and Writing Too. The Hours is priceless...
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  46. TimW.
    Mar 29, 2004
    10
    Absolute perfection, Meryl Streep is simply amazing!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  47. D.Rock
    Apr 15, 2004
    0
    [Sigh] Oh, the horrors of female oppression. Pure feminist trash certain to give a multitude of women something else to bitch about.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  48. DaniG.
    Nov 15, 2005
    10
    The best picture of the year.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  49. AlexR.
    Mar 20, 2006
    10
    This is one of the movies that either you get and love or you don’t get and completely hate. I guess you need to have an idea of the seeming senselessness of depression to appreciate any of these woman's portraits of a day. If you don’t have such an idea, you are just gonna feel this is pretentious melodramatic soap opera fare with a sophisticated acting, photography, and soundtrack. I guess its all about chemicals in your head and the way the work, but if you haven’t tasted them, you cant understand what this movie is about and just regard it as nonsense, which is very respectable of course. For that user who recommended watching other movies if you wanted to see movies about women or movies that pretended to be artistic, I got to say that The Hours does not attempt to be either type of a movie! This movie is not about women, it is about people going through a painful existentialist phase. This movie is not trying to be artistic in the way Adaptation or Mullholland Drive do, it attempts to rapture the viewer into that sad micro cosmos and maybe give him/her some hope (as ironic as that might sound for those who just cannot relate, critics and users alike). So again, if you don’t know what depression is, be happy about it and don’t see this movie, enjoy your life, you'll have enough problems in it without trying to even think about it much. If you do know (which does not make you better) this might not only be an enjoyable experience, but one that can even give you a somewhat comforting message woven within. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  50. BernardoS.
    May 23, 2006
    10
    This is definetely my favourite movie ever. The performances and the script are flawless. It kept me looking at the screen without even blinking for the whole movie.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  51. WillP
    Apr 27, 2009
    9
    Touching and thought-provoking. The three leads are fantastic, with an excellent supporting cast, particularly Toni Collette, Ed Harris & Miranda Richardson. The direction is great and the screenplay is perfect, especially the scene with Nicole Kidman and Stephen Dillane at the train station.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  52. SteveL.
    Dec 26, 2002
    10
    A masterpiece in every aspect.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  53. JohnE.
    Dec 29, 2002
    10
    Every performance is right on. A movie which will remain with you.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  54. BenW.
    Oct 28, 2003
    10
    It's depressing, yes, but the film is so brilliantly acted, you can be depressed right along with it.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  55. RobertN
    Dec 9, 2003
    0
    This must be the worst movie I have ever seen. I have read the book, seen the movie, and studied them for a good long time. The directing was fine but the story and idea behind the movie makes me sick. A movie that supports acts of suicide through depicting it as something that makes you "free". Another idea states that we, as people, do not impact the world and we cannot take choices in life, they just come to us. The view of every charecter in this movie is so pessimistic. The movie is surrounded with death. Only simple-minded people who do not see the big picture could ever say this was near good. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  56. PatC.
    Oct 31, 2003
    5
    This is a movie about women who are missing breadth of perspective. This happens, but I can't conclude that this shared experience somehow en-nobles women and makes the liberated ones special. This is ultimately a well-acted visually-soothing dissertation on lack of significance. The suicidal should view this movie, as it will make them feel better about their own situations.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  57. Brian
    Feb 16, 2003
    10
    Excellent. I want to see it several more times to pick up on anything I may have missed. The one movie this year that truly moved me.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  58. KeithK.
    Mar 15, 2003
    10
    "The Hours" is nothing short of a masterpiece. It absolutely flies in the face of all expectations and challenges our very understanding of movies. For example, you know how in most movies, something happens? Well, "The Hours" bravely looks us in the eye (actually, "looking" implies more action than actually takes place, so think more metaphorically) and says, "I'm not just any movie." This is the most powerful and emotional film of this or any other year. It puts the "moving" in "moving picture," while also taking the "motion" out of "motion picture." Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  59. AndreaM.
    Mar 19, 2003
    9
    The Hours is a pleasant suprise for anyone with a smidgen of background information on Virginia Woolf and her amazing life. If your looking for another crumby, action packed, badly acted, predictable generic film the hours is not for you. If $9 is worth challenging yourself to understand the lives of women in more complicated and depressing situations than your own, spend it. It is an eye opener and you will leave the theatre wanting to be close to the ones you love the most. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  60. SamuelH.
    Apr 11, 2003
    10
    The Hours got the best ensemble in the SAG awards, probably because we don't see a single actor/ actress shine through the whole movie. Just like Chicago, Every cast members get at least some screen time. Nicole Kidman is just one of the actresses in this movie that's " It" Meryl Streep, Julianne Moore and Nicole Kidman form the perfect ensemble in expressing the fears, the purpose of living, and the reason of happiness in life. The three women's lives are all intertwined with David Hare's magnificent prose and Philip Glass' great score. Ignore what you hear about the homosexual content of this film, and people not understanding what is going on. We should acknowledge Stephen Daldry's great adaptation of Michael Cunningham's novel of the same title. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  61. SamuelH.
    Apr 11, 2003
    10
    The Hours got the best ensemble in the SAG awards, probably because we don't see a single actor/ actress shine through the whole movie. Just like Chicago, Every cast members get at least some screen time. Nicole Kidman is just one of the actresses in this movie that's " It" Meryl Streep, Julianne Moore and Nicole Kidman form the perfect ensemble in expressing the fears, the purpose of living, and the reason of happiness in life. The three women's lives are all intertwined with David Hare's magnificent prose and Philip Glass' great score. Ignore what you hear about the homosexual content of this film, and people not understanding what is going on. We should acknowledge Stephen Daldry's great adaptation of Michael Cunningham's novel of the same title. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  62. YamahaW.
    Apr 14, 2003
    10
    Definitely the best movie of 2002. Amazing story, characters, and acting. Non-linear storytelling at it's best.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  63. ChrisM.
    Apr 15, 2003
    10
    When Hollywood seems to take no trouble in (spewing forth from every hole) manufactoring one trash movie after another, it's painful to still rely on them to HOPEFULLY be glad I payed $5 out of my paycheck to entertain myself. Movies are movies, and while the percentage of indie/foriegn films that have kept me happy (about 98%), movies made to bring in the money (about 55% satisfy me) can still be good. The Hours is one of those times when you have to forget you gave AOL Time Warner money, ignore the reviews, swollow your youthful pride and kick your ego out the door. A good movie doesn't have to be trash BECAUSE of "glitz". "Glitz" is all about glossing things up, and in this case, it does. The Hours is one of the few movies in the past 3 years that have TRULY been important, as important as a movie can rarely be. The acting, the directing, the music, the script and so much more satisfied my need for a good film. Say what you will, but in my world (the only one that counts when it comes to opinions on the little things in life) I'm happier for seeing it. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  64. BrianB.
    Aug 12, 2003
    10
    This movie is really good. I really like the score. I'm surprised that a lot of people hate it.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  65. Kristian
    Aug 14, 2003
    9
    Although The Hours was a different sort of film, I found its mood very Woolfish. I liked the little details, the way the film focused on such small things as baking a cake and buying flowers and ginger that all the big things seemed irrelevant. The music was fantastic.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  66. Layne
    Jan 18, 2004
    9
    Nicole Kidman is the most versatile actress in the business. Her performance in this film is fierce and intense, and it is amazing how well Kidman taps into this brilliant author's mind. She does not just act the part of Virginia Woolf, she embodies her. It is a feit of epic proportions, and it is also one of movie cinema's gretest and most complex performance on a level with Meryl Streep's work in any film she does. Nicole Kidman illuminates the madness of the author Virginia with such a passionate and impeccable range that its resonation and lacerating intrigue is not like to be matched by any living actor for some time... if not ever. Nicole Kidman is far and away my favorite actress of all time. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  67. SlavisaM.
    Jun 29, 2004
    10
    This is the best movie of 2002! Nicole Kidman and Julianne Moore made this film one of the best world classics! Screenplay-exellent Makeup-remarkable acting-best ever other stuff-brilliant! This is the best drama of 2002-surtenly!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  68. OrlandoC.
    May 25, 2005
    10
    What else can I say?, I was truly touched by the movie. It's nearly perfect, greatly written and the acting is absolutely amazing. You can feel the pain of the 3 characters just by looking at them, while the supporting roles are incredibly good, specially the kid who played Julianne Moore's son, pure magic. The movie is about life, what it is and how you deal with it and with death. How sometimes you just got to do things just to feel better with yourself, to get the pain out. A true masterpiece, I'd watch over and over again, jsut to see al the fine details. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  69. CaseyA.
    May 16, 2006
    10
    Easily one of the best movies of all-time.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  70. Oct 31, 2011
    7
    A fine crafted drama picture which contains great performances from it's cast. The plot line never gets confusing and is blended together magnificently. Nicole Kidman's portrayal of Virginia Wolf is a miraculous accomplishment and we can feel the pain and frustration of Virgina through Nicole. Julianne Moore plays the depressed mother brilliantly well. Meryl Streep is also good, but gets easily overshadowed by Ed Harris, who does the performance of a lifetime. In Small roles Toni Collette & John. C Reilly both shines radiantly. Expand
Metascore

Universal acclaim - based on 39 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 34 out of 39
  2. Negative: 0 out of 39
  1. 90
    It's an astonishing Kidman who contributes the film's -- and maybe the year's -- most inspired turn.
  2. Ms. Kidman, in a performance of astounding bravery, evokes the savage inner war waged by a brilliant mind against a system of faulty wiring that transmits a searing, crazy static into her brain.
  3. The links and resonances remain largely abstract -- to understand them isn't necessarily to be moved by them -- while the individual dramas of those three lives are often stirring, and the three starring performances are unforgettable.