Beystiman It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Bessie Smyth Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Cassandra Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

pearvert This movie omits the key to the entire story, the opening scene of the book. The world goes through a nuclear war and was totally destroyed. Then George fell asleep and dreamed it back into existence.By eliminating this opening scene, this version takes on some other meaning (which I am still trying to figure out.) Everything George did in the book was due to him being the only person in the world to know the Earth had been destroyed and everyone was supposed to be dead. That's an important part that is missing here. Total and absolute guilt.Go read the book for a good story. Do no waste your time on this pseudo version.

zoso68-1 I was surprised to see this film remade(considering how much of a cult status the original had.) I had high hopes condiering A&E was involved, but my hopes were in vain.Despite having good actors, the rewritten script is horrid and misses a lot of the points of the original.James Cann is wasted in the role of the Dr. Did they tell him to play it stupid? Save yourself a lot of grief, and rewatch the 1980 version again.Although I think this film could be well done (as a remake) with a big budget, well acted, hollwood version. Using the original novel or the 1980 teleplay would make it worth seeing.

xyzzy-10 It is seldom that I see a movie I really hate. The first movie version of The Lathe of Heaven was awesome, made for a pittance, and captured the ethereal nature of LeGuin's most enigmatic novel. This movie was just terrible. It was slow, didn't include anything even remotely like the novel, and completely left out the cool aliens from Aldebaran! The jellyfish motif was the only thing analogous. Also, is it too much to ask that in a movie about dreams that change reality, we might see the dreams themselves? This was one of the most effective concepts in the original version.James Caan delivered the most wooden and disconnected performance of his career, and Lukas Haas was a big lump. I like Lisa Bonet, her talent was completely wasted.TO GO IS TO RETURN! But to watch this farce is excruciating and an utter waste of time. Rent 'The Bride of Chucky' instead.

flonesaw Having read LeGuinn's book and seen PBS's excellent rendering of her story this new version is a crashing disappointment. The first problem is that there is so little left of the story that much of its impact is missing. In spite of being light on effects and budget the earlier PBS production makes much better use of its resources to communicate LeGuinn's apocalyptic drama to the viewer.What happened to the space aliens? They seem to be replaced by David Straithorn's character who occasionally pops into scenes with sage verbiage. Unfortunately, so much has been stripped that there is no tissue left to connect him to what little plot remains after the producers and directors finished their hatchet job on content and context. Who knows why they did that?What's left is a nothingness rivaled only by Jor-Jor's apocalyptic reality. In order to understand what's going on here, one might want to read the book, or view PBS's 1980's telling of the story. Please don't waste your time with this turkey, especially since the PBS version is available on DVD.