- Critic Score
- Most active
- Publication
- Most clicked
-
63It is neither deep nor intelligent, but it's not intended to be either. The saving grace of the otherwise generic product is that Bell's vivacity and Duhamel's rakish charm allow the viewer to root for them.
-
60Entertaining, full of laughs and, as far as chick flicks go, is a sweet, romantic trip worth taking for audiences so inclined.
-
50A little bit of charm is precisely what this movie has to offer. A small dose is better than none, but you can't help wishing there was more to go around.
-
50When in Rome may fall flat in places, but at least it hasn't had all the personality manicured out of it.
-
50Bell, unlike Katherine Heigl and Sandra Bullock, who executive-produced their big-screen debasements of 2009, brings enough effervescence to the film that she's able to spark believable chemistry with a usual dud like Josh Duhamel.
-
50Predictable but pleasant comedic fantasy.
-
40Regardless of where its stars want to take it, all roads here lead to blandness and inanity.
-
38Certain scenes in When in Rome signify nothing less than the death of screen slapstick, but I'm hoping it's one of those fake-out movie deaths where it's not really dead, not forever.
-
38Bell, a petite, pretty blonde, may or may not have the Meg Ryan-Julia Roberts-Sandra Bullock goods. When in Rome, a leaden variation on that rom-com recipe, fails utterly to make her case.
-
Sounds mildly fun, be forwarned: When in Rome doesn't even offer that.
-
The latest demonstration of the impossibility of making a good movie from a bad script is provided by When in Rome, a romantic comedy approved by the previous regime at Disney.
-
30There are dull stabs at verbal wit that leave you baffled, bored or slightly grossed out.
-
30A picture that registers between Abysmally Awful and Mildly Mediocre. Such a one would be When in Rome, which is possible to sit through without wanting to stick darts in your eyes or frag the screen. Call it medi-awful.
-
30Josh Duhamel plays the smitten sports reporter who helps her mount her big art show, "Pain"--a fitting title, given the agony induced by this godawful comedy.
-
25Tale is anything but spellbinding.
-
25An inert comedy starring Kristen Bell as a workaholic unlucky in love, When in Rome is a rom-bomb.
-
It boasts only loose ties to the 1954 romance "Three Coins in the Fountain." And it's best not to even think of "Roman Holiday," the gold standard for hanging, and driving, and doing as Romans do. Rent that instead.
-
25The problem is not the credulity-stretching script. Or even that much of the movie just isn't all that funny. The problem is that it thinks it's freakin' hilarious.
-
25It winds up being predictably charmless and forgettable, even as a travelogue or iPod download.
-
25In the case of When in Rome, oh to do what the Romans used to do: Toss the bloody thing to the lions.
-
20Keep your coin far away from this toxic fountain of crap.
-
16It's the kind of wretched embarrassment that may leave viewers trying to suspend the belief that they're still sitting in the theater watching it.
-
0Even by the extremely low standards of the genre, When in Rome gets failing marks for chemistry, credibility and even coherence.
-
0How do movies this bad still get made?
prev
next
Page:
- 1
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 9 out of 19
-
Mixed: 2 out of 19
-
Negative: 8 out of 19
-
SamS10
-
RickA8