The Number 23

New Line Cinema | Release Date: February 23, 2007

6.1	USER SCORE Generally favorable reviews based on 93 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

moviebuff_420May 19, 2012

I've watched many Movies of Jim Carrey.When he did something different than comedy in Man on the moon ,The Truman Show,Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind,These movies were so great.
When i watched the trailer of this movie. My expectationsI've watched many Movies of Jim Carrey.When he did something different than comedy in Man on the moon ,The Truman Show,Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind,These movies were so great.
When i watched the trailer of this movie. My expectations got high.
After watching the movie i was disappointed.Clearly it is a psycho-thriller movie with neo-noir style.I quite liked the visual elements and Jim Carrey did a good job.Despite of the good concept.The movie is not that good.
It has a promising start but when Walter starts to read book,slowly slowly everything goes wrong and somewhat boring.
It's plot is too thin and movie is unimpressive in many parts.
Cheesy dialogues bring it down and movie is never that creepy the way it should be.
Overall, it delivers a rambling, confusing narrative with only a few stylistic elements thrown in.it could have been much much better as for JIm Carrey
But i liked it in parts.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

RolentoFeb 19, 2014

Jim Carrey's performance was amazing, reminding us once more that he's not all funny faces and slapstick humor. Unfortunately for him the movie could be better. It's kind of well done from a stylistic point of view I guess? I'm not savvyJim Carrey's performance was amazing, reminding us once more that he's not all funny faces and slapstick humor. Unfortunately for him the movie could be better. It's kind of well done from a stylistic point of view I guess? I'm not savvy about technicalities, but other than a slight inconsistency between the noir not-so-side story and the main plot which may very well be intentional/alternative, it wasn't bad. The idea was good too, I guess I can kind of relate to the numbers obsession in a way due to some sort of slight OCD I have when it gets to numbers and stuff. But yeah, the plot was kinda forced and had very weak points and minor nonsense.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

JohnnyStephensAug 31, 2013

Jim Carrey to play in a psychological thriller??? No sir!! The movie could have been better if the role of Jim Carrey was played by someone else. There are so many actors to play this role and they chose Jim???? NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

RobertBroganOct 5, 2015

It was difficult to tell if the Number 23 was an intentional joke or no. After the first hour I thought it was intentional spoof of the genre and came off as odd, but mildly interesting on account of the oddness. Then the film appears toIt was difficult to tell if the Number 23 was an intentional joke or no. After the first hour I thought it was intentional spoof of the genre and came off as odd, but mildly interesting on account of the oddness. Then the film appears to become more serious as a mystery / thriller before making a strange turn at the end. If it was some intended cleverness, it was too clever for me, and if not then it was not clever enough.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

JP32Mar 25, 2020

With a middling to bad script in The Number 23, [Schumacher] is lost. This film treads way too close to Lifetime movie territory.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

FilipeNetoNov 25, 2018

We know that the so-called "conspiracy theories" have become popular. To their fans, there is virtually no detail of our everyday life that isn't likely to be associated with any weird conspiracy. In this case, the film associates this ideaWe know that the so-called "conspiracy theories" have become popular. To their fans, there is virtually no detail of our everyday life that isn't likely to be associated with any weird conspiracy. In this case, the film associates this idea with numerical obsessions and the search for patterns and relations between totally distinct occurrences. The concept explores the surreal, and is quite original, in that it's uncommon in thrillers (at least, I don't remember any thriller with this recipe before).

The screenplay tells how Walter, a perfectly ordinary man, begins to feel threatened and chased by a number after reading a disturbing book. He seeks, and finds, these number attached to different facts and situations, and we begin to question ourselves about his sanity. The film starts well: the initial credits, graphically elegant, were an original way of introducing the theme to the audience and giving it some credibility. I also liked the way Walter is introduced, and how the film emphasized his normality. He's just a guy just like any other, with values and integrity, trying to get his life, who ends up getting caught up in an obsessive whirlwind. His transformation is evident and, at that moment, we're already attached to him because we gain some sympathy for Walter, and our curiosity is fed by every discovery.

However, certain things become too predictable... for example, it's clear from the outset that Fingerling will be a negative alter-ego of Walter. Predictability should have been avoided and corrected, but it's still a minor problem... the biggest problem is the end, which leaves the guiding line too long and ends up having a disappointing and anticlimactic result. A more built and less conventional ending would have made this movie exceptional. At that point, it was a missed opportunity.

I have nothing to say about Joel Schumacher's direction. He's far from being a very good director but has succeeded here. On the other hand, I have a lot to talk about Jim Carrey. I am increasingly convinced that this actor has been underestimated. He became popular thanks to comedies and got very attached to them in our head, so we were surprised when we realized that he can also be a great dramatic actor. But let's be honest: it wasn't his first dramatic film, on the contrary. He seems to be making an effort to show us versatility, and it's up to us to realize that. He was very good here, made a solid and well made work... and I believe I realized, I can see better the potential of this actor. Harder to swallow were the sex scenes. In fact, I felt that, sometimes, they were left in the film. But it's alright. Virginia Madsen also did a good job here, as a dedicated wife and companion or a fiery Italian, with somewhat nymphomaniac outlines (the two actors played two characters, ego and alter ego).

Technically, the film has some brilliant moments. Cinematography begins with warm tones but suffers a violent concussion with Fingerling, carrying itself of cold tones, light-dark, emptiness and shades. From then on, as the obsession progresses, everything becomes colder. I also noticed some excellent camera shots, including the intelligent use of reflexes.

This movie is one of those that can get us mad... it had everything to be very good. An original idea, excellent actors, an able director and good production values. The script started well and was convincingly developed... but when they should have put the cherry on the top, everything collapsed like a house of cards. Frustrating.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews