For all its pretension and artiness, Blindness is more like M. Night Shyamalan's "The Happening" (which at least had the decency to be fast-paced and short), right down to its upbeat and inane conclusion.

See this movie for Douglas and Bacall, ignore the dialogue and just bask in their star chemistry, still strong after all these years.

The Great Debaters keeps things on the surface and pushes the obvious buttons, hoping you won't notice its distinct lack of depth.

Winds up making a very good case for never going out of your way to help anybody.

Observe and Report conveys an essential truth about Rogen: Like every other actor on the planet, he needs good material to do good work.

The latest work from director-producer-writer John Hughes is a muddle. Hughes has packed the movie, the story of a young couple's marriage, with amusing sight gags and jokes. What he has failed to offer are palatable characters, original insights or smooth storytelling. Worst of all, he has tacked on a deplorable teary finale. [5 Feb 1988, p.C4]

Fever Pitch is surprisingly devoid of jokes, or romance, or any of the other basic elements you'd expect to find in a romantic comedy. The only thing the Farrellys get right is the obsession.

Aside from a disturbingly graphic depiction of a drowning, there is also death by fire, electrocution and giant falling objects.

The truth is, Jet Li has gotten soft in his old age. While fans of the "Once Upon a Time in China" star will be pleased to learn that at least half of Fearless is action, what they may not realize is just how mushy everything else is.

The most interesting aspect -- the only interesting aspect, really -- of Housesitter's creaky script is the concept of the psychopathic liar, as played by Hawn, who can invent whole life stories under pressure. It's the film's central conceit that the capacity to delude others with long and preposterous fabrications is the one sure sign of character. [12 June 1992, p.G7]

Carlito's Way reminds you a little of De Palma's remake of Scarface -- it has that jazzy, coke-frazzled bang and crash to it, the feeling of too many people chasing too many highs. But it's nowhere near as successful. It's not as shocking. It even feels . . . dated. [12 Nov 1993, p.G5]

The film's one great asset, a real surprise, is Robert Downey Jr. in the title role. He grabs something of the Little Tramp's innate grace and anarchic wit, and he runs with it -- pratfalls with it and waddles off into the sunset with it. [08 Jan 1993, p.G5]

The running character of a dim-bulb scientist of Indian or Pakistani extraction, who is prone to malapropisms, badly accented English and Carson-esque wink-and-giggle innuendo, might not seem offensive in a better film. Here it seems designed only for cheap laughs. The laughs come. They are cheap. [09 May 1986, p.D5]

If Andrews oozes regal poise and Hathaway radiates movie star allure -- and they do -- credit the actresses, not this flimsy fairy tale.

The film just has no edge, that's all. Brooks lets it go maudlin in the first half-hour or so, and for the balance we're left wondering what ever happened to the guy who made Blazing Saddles. [29 July 1991, p.C1]

A decent ride. It has a boogeyman, exploding teen-agers and blood by the vat; it's part of the oeuvre. It is also, alas, no significant advance of the sub-genre some of us feel, however improbably, attached to. Teens-and- slash may be a form full ofhack work and dim bulbs, but so long as that form stays within reach of young and relatively unsullied directors, there is hope. [6 March 1985, p.C5]

There are 10 minutes of animation in the film, and it could have used a few more: They have a spirited, inventive energy that the rest of this well-intentioned but awfully melodramatic movie lacks.

The Wedding Planner dissolves into a mopey, leaden romance that piles on the contrivances before limping to its foregone -- and rote -- conclusion.

So. All this virtuosity, lots of thumps and crashes and even a few empty moments in the desert night. Signifying: Not so much. Not in the movies, which throw a glare even into the corners, which are empty here. Fool for Love has the look of a project that was a lot of work for director, writer and actors. It's not so much fun for the rest of us, either. [28 Feb 1986, p.D3]

This huge, unwieldy movie is busy and overcrowded.

The film lacks the menace and danger of Sendak's book, along with the beautiful simplicity and delicated, understated portrait of a lonely, misunderstood boy.

The movie runs short of material and loses its comic edge about halfway through, but it's still just jumpy enough to keep you interested -- though the rap-video parodies are almost indistinguishable from the real thing. [15 Mar 1993, p.C6]

Trailers make it seem as though Radio is all about football, but it's not, and once the film leaves the fall sport behind it wanders around in no particular direction until it reaches an abrupt, poorly executed ending.

Inside Benny and Joon, a love story that celebrates dysfunction and the cutes, though not necessarily in that order, there's a character drama whispering to be let out, but that's no help. Long before you get around to liking this little movie, you'll hate it. And that's always a problem. [16 Apr 1993, p.G5]

Amiable, sporadically amusing farce.

Isn't a total crock.

The film's highlight is that rarest of action sequences, the boat-car chase (happily for River Rescue, there's a good highway right by the water!). Striking Distance, which was directed by the aptly named Rowdy Herrington (Road House ), has few other surprises. [18 Sept 1993, p.G5]

The actors, many of them now in their mid-30s, look understandably fuller in the face and thicker around the waist. The jokes, too, are starting to show their age: They wobble.