The picture often rambles as aimlessly as its characters, but its vivid depiction of alienation and self-destructiveness among suburban youth has much cautionary value.

The overall effect is imaginative but overambitious, though Troche unquestionably has cinematic talent.

A change from summer fare, but it doesn't make the picture compelling to watch. You won't find the detail of the "Godfather" films or the psychological complexities of Martin Scorsese's gangster movies. The plot holes are big enough to hide Al Capone's illicit millions in.

It's surprising that so much material, so many moods, and such an interesting cast end up making such a small, unmemorable splash.

The story is rarely as touching or funny as it wants to be, but children may enjoy the fantasy elements. [24 Dec 1998]

The picture is equally long on eye-dazzling camera work and New Age sentimentality.

Some of his theories seem cockamamie compared with current intellectual norms, though, so it's too bad the filmmakers don't give him time to make a coherent case.

Written and directed by Deepa Mehta, this Indian production is not filmed very interestingly, but reveals much about conflicts between traditional and modern attitudes in Indian society.

Having written a book about being fired, Annabelle Gurwitch has now made a documentary as well, and it's something of a mess.

Witherspoon fills the screen with bright-eyed bounce. The rest of the cast is as forgettable as the flimsy story.

Eddie Murphy does his patented routines effectively, and the dialogue has some pungent moments, but the movie doesn't succeed as the "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" update it would like to be.

A bit too neat and calculated to make the emotions ring really true.

This sensationalistic tale doesn't delve very far into the issues it raises.

The performances, especially by Hugh Dancy as a sexually confused rich kid, are overwrought, and the script, which Michael Cunningham ("The Hours") wrote in collaboration with Minot, is slack.

Parents will yawn, but younger children may enjoy the fun. [09 Aug 1985, p.24]

Far from a great film, but it certainly stretches the envelope.

Old-fashioned storytelling.

Its ideas are worth pondering, but as a movie it's less memorable than its interesting cast suggests.

Flashy but uninvolving crime thriller.

Christopher Hampton's film conveys the basic plot of Joseph Conrad's sinuous novel but loses the book's sardonic tone and psychological depth.

As directed by Hugh Hudson, the movie isn't workaday for a second, with its epic scale and awesome vistas and all. Instead of enhancing the story, though, the niggling details and dignified touches just slow things down. [12 Apr 1984, p.33]

Despite his fascinating subject and an impressive cast -- Sayles lets his story drift in too many directions, as if he'd lost his Florida road map somewhere along the way during his travels.

The settings and visual effects are imaginatively done, but the dialogue is silly and the plot is a mishmash, with echoes of everything from the "Aliens" movies to Michael Crichton's novel "Sphere," which pushes similar buttons a little more intelligently.

Barely engaging spy thriller.

By turns jokey, portentous, and pretentious, the movie immediately sizes up each of its protagonists and never budges from that assessment.

The most startling aspect of this slow-building horror movie is how unexpectedly it morphs from a quietly romantic suspense yarn to a flat-out tale of terror that may have some viewers hiding under their seats.

Solid acting helps the story stay earthbound when Aronofsky's filmmaking gets addicted to its own flashy cynicism, but the picture sometimes seems as dazed and confused as the situations it wants to criticize.

Meant to be a romp in the old Ken Kesey tradition, it's more like a dull drive with a bunch of leftover flower children.