Metascore
25

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 24 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 24
  2. Negative: 17 out of 24
  1. 63
    It 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.
  2. Entertaining, full of laughs and, as far as chick flicks go, is a sweet, romantic trip worth taking for audiences so inclined.
  3. Reviewed by: Claudia Puig
    50
    A 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.
  4. 50
    When in Rome may fall flat in places, but at least it hasn't had all the personality manicured out of it.
  5. Bell, 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.
  6. Reviewed by: Joe Leydon
    50
    Predictable but pleasant comedic fantasy.
  7. Regardless of where its stars want to take it, all roads here lead to blandness and inanity.
  8. Certain 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.
  9. 38
    Bell, 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.
  10. Reviewed by: Adam Markovitz
    33
    Sounds mildly fun, be forwarned: When in Rome doesn't even offer that.
  11. Reviewed by: Stephen Farber
    30
    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.
  12. 30
    There are dull stabs at verbal wit that leave you baffled, bored or slightly grossed out.
  13. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    30
    A 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.
  14. Josh 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.
  15. 25
    Tale is anything but spellbinding.
  16. An inert comedy starring Kristen Bell as a workaholic unlucky in love, When in Rome is a rom-bomb.
  17. Reviewed by: Amy Biancolli
    25
    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.
  18. The 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.
  19. 25
    It winds up being predictably charmless and forgettable, even as a travelogue or iPod download.
  20. In the case of When in Rome, oh to do what the Romans used to do: Toss the bloody thing to the lions.
  21. Keep your coin far away from this toxic fountain of crap.
  22. 16
    It’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.
  23. 0
    Even by the extremely low standards of the genre, When in Rome gets failing marks for chemistry, credibility and even coherence.
  24. How do movies this bad still get made?
User Score
4.7

Mixed or average reviews- based on 57 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 22
  2. Negative: 11 out of 22
  1. Dec 31, 2011
    1
    Kristen Bell definitely does not save this cliche driven romantic comedy ( if it should even be called that. It should be a horror movie). She gives such a bad performance she almost steeps as low in acting quality as the supporting actors. When in Rome isn't funny or romantic. Please stay away. I give this movie 9%. Full Review »
  2. Jul 19, 2013
    0
    Walt disney deja peliculas bonitas pero al mismo tiempo ridiculas y mal hechas como esta..............................................................
  3. Dec 8, 2012
    3
    I watched this a second time and I have no idea what I saw in it the first time. Not only was the story so-so, but it wasn't even told well. The pacing was horrible! I felt like the two main characters met, then they were instantly in love, and then there was immediate conflict. Also, the supporting cast is exhausting and annoying. I hate Jon Heder! While I'll admit I liked this film the first time, it did not deliver at all the second time. Full Review »