Cortechba Overrated

2freensel I saw this movie before reading any reviews, and I thought it was very funny. I was very surprised to see the overwhelmingly negative reviews this film received from critics.

Joanna Mccarty Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Ezmae Chang This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

vincentlynch-moonoi All my life I pretty much avoided films starring Jeff Bridges (although I really liked his brother Beau). Looking back, it was more due to the movies Jeff Bridges appeared in, which didn't suit my taste. Here, however, Bridges is excellent as the somewhat befuddled math professor who is afraid of intimacy. The other reason I didn't watch this film until now (and it has been out for 20 years) is that I somehow had no idea it was essentially a light romantic comedy. And, it's a very good one.But I think there's a huge flaw in this film -- the Streisand character seems totally inconsistent in terms of behavior. And I'm not even talking about how the character changes when her life situation changes. I'm talking about inconsistent in terms of being an ebullient college profession by day and a near shut-in by night. Nope. I don't buy it.Lauren Bacall is interesting as the mother; quite stereotypical, but still interesting. George Segal has a rather mundane role as a friend for Bridges. Pierce Brosnan and Brenda Vaccaro have significant, though not interesting roles as friends who move the plot along.It's good, but not great, overly long, and very nice fluff. Not one of Streisand's best, but not bad. ehhhhh

stevenball2 Or is he playing Fred McMurray? Barbra Streisand plays Barbra Streisand & she is in every scene. Lauren Bacall plays Lauren Bacall & received an Oscar nod - but she had to settle for a Golden Globe instead. There are some nice location shots of New York City. But mostly we have to endure a weird sexless marriage - scenes that go on for too long & go nowhere. Barbara then turns into a va-va-voom girl & every man has to have her. This is a very bad movie poorly photographed by two distinct cinematographers. Some scenes are well lit & others have a sepia tone. All of Ms. Streisand's directorial efforts are vanity projects beginning with Yentl in which she plays a male rabbinical student. Her worst movie she directed was probably the second remake of A STAR IS BORN in which she wears a very bad afro in every scene & in which her co-star Kris Kristoferson looks like a Manson Family reject.

fedor8 Where do I even f****** begin with this piece of trash?First of all, this formulaic garbage for lonely middle-aged spinsters features two of the most notorious witches (you can also replace the "w" with a "b") in the history of Hollywood, two arrogant, unlikable ogres: Streisand and Bacall. Streisand, the ugliest major actress for so many decades now (although Aniston, Barrymore, and Tea Leoni are hot on her heels) has made yet another self-indulgent piece of crap. The movie isn't about love in general, it's specifically about Barbra's undying, limitless and infinite love toward herself - though like most narcissists, that is probably largely based on a deeply repressed sense of low self-worth. (Aren't I a great from-the-distance psycho-analyst?) In this dumb movie she is supposed to be younger than Mimi Rogers, which is so extremely pathetic that it isn't even funny any more. In reality Mimi is FOURTEEN YEARS younger than the old the-way-we-were Marxist hag. In fact, Rogers looks 20 years younger, simply because ugly women like Streisand always look automatically older than they are. And anyway, even though Mimi is nothing to shout about (apart from the phenomenal breasts) she is a goddess next to Streisand, hence if they're to play sisters, I demand an explanation in the plot as to what DNA screw-up happened when their parents were making Barbra, having previously (ha-ha) made a normal-looking human female.Equally pathetic/funny/ridiculous is the fact that Barbra gets to smooch with Pierce Brosnan and Jeff Bridges, two guys who would in reality sooner vomit on her ugly nose than kiss it. Pierce, the most effeminate Bond ever, looks like a school-girl next to this Loch-Ness monster. The two of them kissing and flirting was like something perverse straight out of a manga comic or something. I was half-expecting her to grow tentacles out of her breasts and choke Pierce with them. Of course that would be a dumb horror film, but that would be much better than a cheesy romantic comedy that is just as predictable as one would expect. It was predictable that it would be predictable.Bridges is 7 years younger than our singing ghoul, and Brosnan is a whole 10 years her junior. What a strange way for Barbedwira to want to appeal to audiences: by showing yourself to be a deluded egomaniac! There is an unintentionally funny scene in which Bridges lists why he is so attracted to Barbra: he says something like "I love her eyes... her mouth... " and at this point he made a pause as if he were thinking about the nose! Of course, he doesn't mention the nose, as I'm sure that anyone on the set of any BS movie would get torn to shreds if they so much as even mention the "n" word. Bridges, whom I don't consider to be great actor (merely solid), should have gotten an Oscar for this role, and both him and Brosnan deserved no less than a Purple Heart each for the bravery they showed in the face of such... a face.It's pretty ironic that this overlong snooze-fest is based on a 1958 French film, because in French movies we usually have a 50 year-old man ogling and eventually molesting a 14 year-old girl (the French viewers apparently love that pedophilic stuff).The movie was made in 1996... Hmmm... Where did Barbedwira get the confidence, the CHEEK, to make this kind of embarrassing, self-adoring crap? Could it be due to her alleged brief romance with tennis star Andre Agassi, which was only a few years earlier around 1992? Did this romance give her the courage she needed to make "The Mirror Has Two Faces"? Of course, it's very easy for us to laugh at Barbra in hindsight; after all, she didn't know back then that Andre is attracted to big-nosed uglies! (Hence his marriage with the hideous Steffi Graf.)

foxycat-1 I just saw this film again the first time since 1996. The production values for this film were great, but the sentiments are false. First I have to say that the acting is superb, especially Streisand and Bacall. Their mother-daughter revelation scene is wonderful, a gem shared by 2 consummate actresses.Here's the dishonesty: In the first half, we see that everyone who's attractive is also defective in some way. Husband is a jerk, sexless, a bore, mother jealous and vain, sister has no personality. In fact, why is Streisand so madly in love with a man who's such a jerk? Streisand shines as funny, intelligent, personable, well-liked by everyone. And our view of what's pretty has changed a lot since Streisand came along in the 60's. Meryl Streep's long nose or Jolie's oversize lips would never have been acceptable before Streisand. OK, she doesn't know how to dress, but is certainly printed as attractive. The camera, as usual, loves her. And in real life Streisand has always been attractive to attractive men.After showing us that physical beauty is not that important, the film then goes on to prove that the same woman, made more physically beautiful, can now attract her cold jerk of a husband and her sister's shallow ex. Husband even tells her that he's always found her sexy, it's just that he hadn't been interested. Such inconsistency in the writing.