User Score
6.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 207 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 35 out of 207

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. Jul 5, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. What a disappointment. This film is confusing at best, boring at worst. I really don't know what it was trying to say.
    The visual effects were pleasant, but in reality almost irrelevant to the main plot. There was little to no connection to the characters; you could not feel the pain of the grieving mother (or see the exact reasoning behind any of her actions), you could not feel the drive of the father to find his daughter's murderer, and heck, you were not sure what is was that you where suppose to be feeling for Susie! Her anger towards her murderer? Peace as she lets go? A sense of closure? I really don't know.
    The sub-plot regarding Susie and Ray was also distracting, and offered nothing to the main plot, and the same could be said about Susan Sarandon's grandmother; no idea why they where there.
    It was not the acting at fault here, seeing as most did an adequate job. Saoirse Ronan was acceptable, but not mind-blowing (in fact I preferred the acting of Rose McIver who did a convincing transition from younger sister to older, focused, driven teen). If you wanted an excellent performance in this film, you needed to look no further than Stanley Tucci's creepy Mr Harvey, a performance that overshadows everything in this film.
    What was missing in this film was the intensity or the drama you would expect in scenes like when the father sees his daughter through the window or hears her voice on the streets (honestly, you were suppose to be getting chills down your spine in such scenes, but instead I found myself wondering if I locked the front door before leaving the house).
    Overall the lack of empathy with the characters, the distracting, unnecessary scenes and characters, and the inconsistent pace made this film very bland.
    Expand
  2. Jun 28, 2013
    0
    Peter Jackson should hang it up big time along with his buddy Speilberg. What was this?? It was stupid trash, that is what it was.Don't waste your time with this trash.
  3. Mar 7, 2011
    3
    After watching this movie I wanted to through it out the window, all of the characters seem brain dead, I mean come on you've got the proof of the murder TELL YOUR PARENTS DON"T JUST STAND THERE LIKE A RETARD!!!! and it's just an unenjoyable movie, I mean it's a good concept, that if improved upon could make a great movie, but for now it sucks.
  4. Jan 29, 2011
    1
    Entirely too long. Entirely too stupid. Entirely too boring. There was less drama in the OJ Simpson trial. I'll never get this time back. I would have gladly chopped off one of my own lovely bones to forget I ever saw this movie.
  5. Nov 24, 2010
    3
    I have waited over a year to watch this move, the reason you ask: well after reading and loving the book, I couldnt wait for the movie and with baited breath caught the first trailer for it on tv, it started well enough with Susie salmon declaring she was dead and then the next scene was of a massive ship breaking out of a even bigger glass bottle and trees turning into birgs...WTF...So II have waited over a year to watch this move, the reason you ask: well after reading and loving the book, I couldnt wait for the movie and with baited breath caught the first trailer for it on tv, it started well enough with Susie salmon declaring she was dead and then the next scene was of a massive ship breaking out of a even bigger glass bottle and trees turning into birgs...WTF...So I gave it a miss!! So after a year of walking past it countless times at the video shop I finally gave it a go...and I wasnt wrong to wait for DVD!! Peter jackson in all his incredibleness (yes that is sarcastic) has fallen into the biggest directors trap (ahem...Steven Spielberg and A.I.) and that is, "just cause you can do something...DOESNT MEAN YOU SHOULD!!! The whole heaven concept is ridiculous and a simple voiceover would have sufficed and focused more on the real story, that of her family and longings!!This movie could have been magical and fantastical had it trusted our imaginations, as the book did. Mr Jackson has taken out all its magic and force fed us with fantasy scenes that belong more in Disneys fantasia than in a tragic story such as this!!! What kills me is that this movie could have just been so good...oh well, lets wait for the swedish to remake it!!! Expand
  6. Sep 28, 2010
    2
    Whether or not it may be positive or negative, Peter Jackson will be remembered as one most prominent directors of the 21st century - I am not of course discounting his work in 1990's Heavenly Creatures. After directing perhaps an unsurpassed trilogy of Tolkien's Lord Of The Rings, Jackson once again attempts to recreate literature, but now approaches a work that is more contemporary withWhether or not it may be positive or negative, Peter Jackson will be remembered as one most prominent directors of the 21st century - I am not of course discounting his work in 1990's Heavenly Creatures. After directing perhaps an unsurpassed trilogy of Tolkien's Lord Of The Rings, Jackson once again attempts to recreate literature, but now approaches a work that is more contemporary with The Lovely Bones. But unlike the success in which he recreated the Lord of the Rings to near perfection, Jackson completely misses the mark on this one.

    The Lovely Bones is a film adaption of Alice Sebold's novel of the same name. Bones is a story of a teenage girl, Susie Salmon (Saoirse Ronan), who is killed and watches her family from heaven, where she must let go of her past in order to achieve true nirvana. While the movie and the novel seemingly share the same premise, the message of "letting-go" that was conveyed in the novel was evidently lost in the film. Peter Jackson fails to recreate the true essence of the book, only emulating the exterior of Sebold's work.

    Besides the off-target plot, The Lovely Bones is undoubtedly a mess. There are so many transitions between Salmon's heaven and the 'real word,' that an attempt at being stylish turns into a muddle of confusion. The film is a CGI nightmare, as it possesses an endless amount of effects that is incredibly unnecessary. Originally simple in the novel, Salmon's heaven seems as if it comes from a laughable cartoon. Additionally, the film creates an uncanny amount of uncalled for instances of suspense and drama. While the film does succeed at some points, most of the melodrama employed fails.

    The only redeemable aspect of the movie is the acting. Stanley Tucci, who plays the spine-chilling murderer, plays his character in an aptness manner, creating a sense of uneasiness within the audience. Saoirse Ronan (who played the strange sister in Atonement) does an adequate job in narrating and reprising a role of a common teen. While Ronan and Tucci excel, Mark Wahlberg performs a less than average job acting as a disgruntled father. I do not expect much from Wahlberg's acting (does anyone remember The Happening?), so I do not feel the need to expand on my opinion.

    The Lovely Bones is downright disappointing. People watching the film without any knowledge of the novel will question the thousands of readers who have. Even though the adaptation does recreate some of the novel's finest moments, it really should have stayed on the bookshelf where it belongs.
    Expand
  7. Sep 25, 2010
    0
    A really bad film! the characters had no depth, the scene seemed to go from bad to worse and dragged on and on. Coupled with a lack of realism and what looks like and LSD job, the movie fails to deliver completely.
    There's instances where you feel drawn in, but then the story just throws you out again, even the end doesn't seem to be a conclusion, just something left cos the director had
    A really bad film! the characters had no depth, the scene seemed to go from bad to worse and dragged on and on. Coupled with a lack of realism and what looks like and LSD job, the movie fails to deliver completely.
    There's instances where you feel drawn in, but then the story just throws you out again, even the end doesn't seem to be a conclusion, just something left cos the director had his pizza delivered. A real hack job of a movie, although I hear the books isn't much better.

    Something to watch while you're having a lobotomy, cos it'll feel like you've had one after watching this.
    Expand
Metascore
42

Mixed or average reviews - based on 36 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 36
  2. Negative: 10 out of 36
  1. Reviewed by: Ian Freer
    80
    Like “The Lord Of The Rings,” The Lovely Bones does a fantastic job with revered, complex source material. As terrific on terra firma as it is audacious in its astral plane, it is doubtful we’ll see a more imaginative, courageous film in 2010.
  2. Reviewed by: David Ansen
    50
    How do you literalize heaven? It's a problem moviemakers have struggled with forever, and Jackson hasn't solved it.
  3. Jackson and his team tell a fundamentally different story. It's one that is not without its tension, humor and compelling details. But it's also a simpler, more button-pushing tale that misses the joy and heartbreak of the original.