Christian Science Monitor's Scores

  • Movies
  • TV
For 3,841 reviews, this publication has graded:
  • 56% higher than the average critic
  • 2% same as the average critic
  • 42% lower than the average critic
On average, this publication grades 3.9 points higher than other critics. (0-100 point scale)
Average Movie review score: 66
Highest review score: 100 Sideways
Lowest review score: 0 Wild Hogs
Score distribution:
3841 movie reviews
  1. I don't mean to imply that this film is any good or that it contains an ounce of genuine insight. But as a template for the big-baby genre, it's invaluable.
  2. The more the picture reveals, the less interesting it gets, transforming its hero from an intriguing mystery man into a standard-issue screen vigilante -- and steadily upping the violence, complete with harrowing torture scenes, in a lame effort to keep our juices flowing.
  3. Potter's trademark devices are all present, including the way characters burst into songs lip-synced to vintage recordings on the sound track.
  4. Based flimsily on a minor F. Scott Fitzgerald story, it's an anecdote stretched to would-be epic proportions.
  5. There's a little humor, a little suspense, and not a hint of reality. You'll tune out quickly, unless you're 11.
  6. The story's can-do attitude and moments of soaring music make it a must-see for moviegoers seeking positive visions on the screen.
  7. Kevin Kline has some amusing moments, but Meg Ryan's acting runs out of energy, and Lawrence Kasdan's directing is too laid-back to help her out. [7 Jul 1995, p.13]
    • Christian Science Monitor
  8. Less a heart-stirring historical study than a nostalgic fantasy, built on a foundation no firmer than Cruise's superstar persona.
  9. Takes a humane look at an episode in recent history that's received little attention.
  10. I know we’re supposed to think that Besson’s daffy cinematic calisthenics are entertaining because at least they are not boring. But I was bored. It didn’t help that Morgan Freeman shows up as a brainy scientist explaining everything to us in his deepest intonations. When was the last time Freeman, a great actor, really acted?
  11. The message is plain: Men, especially rich men, have all the power. So be sure to do what they tell you, and maybe they'll treat you nicely… It's not one I like to hear. [27 Apr 1990, Arts, p.10]
    • Christian Science Monitor
  12. This exceedingly romantic comedy begins with flair but lapses into clichés long before the sentimental (and predictable) finale.
  13. There's something relentlessly superficial about the movie, and in one area that cries out for sensitivity - the treatment of racial differences among the characters - it falls down badly. [22 Aug 1990, Arts, p.11]
    • Christian Science Monitor
  14. The only real acting in this movie comes from Janet McTeer and Charles Dance as Will’s aggrieved parents. They bring some ballast to this blubberfest.
  15. The dramatic situations aren't intense or knotty enough to match the moral issues behind them, however.
  16. The last scenes etch one of the most revealing depictions of capital punishment ever put on the wide screen.
  17. Ultimately more exasperating than rewarding.
  18. There is nothing magical about seeing one’s umpteenth car chase. Mark Ruffalo plays the weirdly scruffy FBI agent on the case, while Morgan Freeman, in super-slow mode, plays a famous magic debunker. He’d make the ideal critic for this movie.
  19. The meandering story doesn't gather much momentum and Vittorio Storaro's camera work is less awesome than usual.
  20. Nicholson's over-the-top acting gives an entertaining edge to the plot's feel-good manipulations.
  21. Diane Keaton directed this ragged but lively comedy-drama from Richard LaGravenese's imaginative screenplay.
  22. The pace is a little too languid, and the vulgarity a little too frequent, for the movie to work as intended.
  23. For most of its two-hour running time it simply flings a barrage of horrors at the audience, enhanced with the most imaginative science-fiction atmospherics this side of "Dark City," which incidentally was a far more original picture.
  24. The film is almost three hours long and precious little of it feels new – not from Scorsese or from anybody else.
  25. Wants to appear bold and liberated, but it seems awfully solemn about the subculture it explores.
  26. The film would work better if its story unfolded more swiftly and if its twists were more unexpected. The acting is solid, though.
  27. Any resemblance (except qualitatively) to "An Officer and A Gentleman" is strictly unaccidental.
  28. Along with the lapses of taste that have become standard in pictures aimed at teen audiences, filmmaker John Hughes offers moments of wit and warmth.
  29. The writer-director Andrew Niccol is best known for writing "The Truman Show," another movie that got carried away by doomsday deep-think. The deep-think here is even sillier.
  30. The package would be more enticing if it didn't fall so squarely into overused Hollywood formulas.

Top Trailers