Junior

United International Pictures (UIP) | Release Date: November 23, 1994

6.3	USER SCORE Generally favorable reviews based on 17 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

Steven1981Mar 20, 2020

Director Ivan Reitman (Ghostbusters) brings us Junior which is a comedy made in 1994... It reunites Twins (1988) stars Danny DeVito and Arnold Schwarzenegger. However Twins was mildly enjoyable even if some parts were stupid.... JUNIOR maybeDirector Ivan Reitman (Ghostbusters) brings us Junior which is a comedy made in 1994... It reunites Twins (1988) stars Danny DeVito and Arnold Schwarzenegger. However Twins was mildly enjoyable even if some parts were stupid.... JUNIOR maybe funny in parts, however the logic is this film is irrational. Arnold Schwarzenegger wanting to give birth and acting like a woman and Danny DeVito's boring performance and Arnie's camp acting abilities also given the fact this film is boring and too long make Junior a stinker of a comedy!… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

FilipeNetoOct 16, 2021

Not being a trilogy because they are unrelated to each other, this film has many points of contact with "Twins" and "Kindergarten Cop", two other comedies that Arnold Schwarzenegger starred in the turn of the 80s to the following decade, andNot being a trilogy because they are unrelated to each other, this film has many points of contact with "Twins" and "Kindergarten Cop", two other comedies that Arnold Schwarzenegger starred in the turn of the 80s to the following decade, and that mark the passage from this actor from hard-and-fast action films to a series of other varied works. For me, this film is a guilty pleasure: not being a high-quality film, it is notable for the way it entertains the audience. This has helped the film to stay alive and fresh, in the collective memory and on specialty TV channels.

In this film, Alex Hesse and Larry Arbogast, two medical researchers at a university in California, seek more funding to continue studying a new drug that promises to reduce pregnancy-related illnesses and the chances of miscarriage. However, when the project is cancelled, they resolve to continue secretly and proceed with the tests on humans: Dr. Hesse himself, who against all natural laws becomes the first man to become pregnant. However, when Arbogast wants to suspend the test, Hesse decides to carry her pregnancy to term, albeit risking his own health and academic career.

Well, the movie is not brilliant, many described the script as stupid... and I agree. It's stupid. There are too many problems of logic, coherence and scientific credibility. For example, the blatant subversion of human anatomy: the inexistence of a uterus in man is completely ignored and the perineum, where Arbogast installs the embryo, suddenly moves from the region between the virile member and the rectum to the lower abdomen. Issues of a moral and religious nature are equally discarded by the film, even though I understand that: being a comedy, these were subjects that would make the film too dense and heavy.

The film has a good cast: I liked the addition of Emma Thompson, an excellent British actress with a great talent for comedy, even though I consider her character to have been poorly conceived, turned into an imbecile and clumsy creature. I doubt the actress has a good memory of this character. Pamela Reed was also a good choice and Frank Langella is very good, although underutilized and has a clichéd and undeveloped character. Schwarzenegger is the protagonist and proved to be quite competent. He's a good actor, but he wanted to give a proof of versatility here. Personally, I think he did it. At his side, Danny DeVito steals the spotlight thanks to an inspired and witty performance.

Technically, the film is quite conventional and uninteresting: cinematography is standard and does not stand out rigorously, fulfilling its role, but not standing out; the sets and good choice of filming locations deserve praise, as does the soundtrack design. On the other hand, I think the film has some editing and pacing problems, with very long scenes without this being justified. Despite being a funny movie, it's not one of those movies that really makes us burst out laughing from start to finish. There are some forced jokes, and some really well conceived ones.… Expand