|
Showing all 28 reviews...
|
|
 |
I was looking forward to some comedy... got very little.
5/10
11.3.2006 -
dlin102004@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
First of all, this is NOT a comedy! In my opinion Nurse Betty is a drama because there's no funny scenes and the story is very sad. It's not a masterpiece but the movie is original in many ways and it's pretty entertaining.
7/10
23.5.2005 -
krayzie_lady@ - age: 18-25
| | | | |
Not very good. Very weak on storyline, and action.
5/10
16.2.2004 -
patnkat@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
I thought this show was light but still a fun movie to see. It still had a theme to it too. Enjoyed it.
7/10
28.4.2002 -
hesson@
| | | | |
Sucks huge!
1/10
4.5.2001 -
lukes101@ - age: 26-35
Funny sweet movie. Good date movie, not too heavy, but warm hearted.
7/10
2.1.2001 -
dawn@ - age: 26-35
Bad trailer + Renee Zellweger should equal bad movie. Yet this is not the case with Nurse Betty! This is a surprisingly good dark comedy, a perfect blend of fantasy and harsh reality. I think a lot of credit needs to go to director Neil LaBute for keeping control on a story that could have easily lost it's direction. Morgan Freeman and Chris Rock give exceptional perfomances, their sense of timing is fantastic. This film is definitly an "acquired taste", you'll either love it or hate it. The best way to view the film is with no pre-conceptions.
7/10
3.11.2000 -
cdsmall@ - age: 18-25
One of the worst movies I have seen all year it was sooooooo boring, I left the theatre before the end of the movie.
2/10
2.11.2000 -
dabergel@ - age: 18-25
I liked this movie because two of my favourite actors are in it: Morgan Freeman and Greg Kinnear. Chris Rock is like a cross between his usual role and Joe Pesci from Good Fellas or Casino. Not for everyone, but I liked it a lot.
7/10
30.10.2000 -
newscott13@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
I really loved this movie, it was pretty good, I wasn't expecting it to be that good, but it's not like all the other american movies that does the same story over and over again, it's really good, if you like something different then this movies for you!
10/10
21.10.2000 -
prepygirl@ - age: 13-17
What a great movie!! I wasn't expecting much from it but it was really good. Very fresh and original with some twists I wasn't expecting. It's worth the $$$$$$ folks!
9/10
13.10.2000 -
baergp@ - age: 26-35
I saw this with my mom. 20 min. Into it I was thinking "My poor mom, I talked her into seeing this". At that exact moment my mom nudged me and said: "You know, if we leave now, they'll give us our money back". Doesn't that say it all?
4/10
4.10.2000 -
gagmor@ - age: 26-35
Best american movie I have seen in a long time.
8/10
30.9.2000 -
ggadbois@ - age: 50+
This is a different movie than your "typical" Hollywood release which is perhaps why so many of the reviews here are negative. I found the characters very interesting and the parallels in the story were excellent. It is comedic in parts but again should not be labelled a "comedy". It was a fascinating movie and one of the better movies I've seen this year.
8/10
29.9.2000 -
houdini@ - age: 26-35
Hmmm, the expectation far exceeded the real thing. Though Renee Zellweger played the character wonderfully, and there were a few scenes that were very funny, something was just a little off. I don't regret seeing it, I only wish that I had waited for it to be on video. I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it. It's a "renter".
6/10
26.9.2000 -
lesleyj@ - age: 18-25
I liked it.
8/10
18.9.2000 -
satan047@ - age: 36-49
Too bad for those who aren't smart enough to realize that Betty and Charlie are in fact parallel characters in the same movie. This movie follows none of the usual clichés and is not at all predictable. It was almost perfect!
9/10
15.9.2000 -
elaryea@ - age: 26-35
Good comedy. I enjoyed every moment of it.
8/10
13.9.2000 -
as_sc@ - age: 36-49
I did'nt like the movie at all and it was'nt funny at all. It was waste of money and time. They should't have made the movie at all. No real story to it. I found it non sence and weird and sickening.
1/10
13.9.2000 -
mitrachan@ - age: 26-35
This was by far the worst movie I've seen in a long time. I felt as if I wasted 2 hours of my life watching the wretched thing! I was appauled that Morgan Freeman, agreed to be cast in such a terrible movie... I cannot understand how this movie even got produced, much less how it acctually got to the big screen! It is another one of Hollywoods attempts at an off the wall/dark comedy and once again, Hollywood has failed dismally.
1/10
13.9.2000 -
foxaneg@ - age: 18-25
It has been a long while I have not walked out in the middle of a movie. Well now I have!!! This thing is not funny and does not hold together in spite of the major star cast. What a major FLOP!!!
4/10
13.9.2000 -
o_racy@ - age: 26-35
The movie had Morgan Freeman doing an off the wall role that you would have never expected his interaction with Chris Rock is what held this movie together. Other than that the script was rather weak and Zellweger's character could have been portrayed by anyone. The scenes that were funny were hysterical, but I wish there were more.
6/10
12.9.2000 -
valentino,a@ - age: 18-25
| | | | |
Great movie, very refreshing, original storie line. The acting made the movie, you can see that these guys have a lot of experience. Everybody in the theatre was laughing out loud. One of the best movie in the last couple months. See It! Chris Rock is a riot!!
9/10
11.9.2000 -
jlville@ - age: 26-35
This movie is not excellent. I think the producer is prolly hooked up on coke or acid! It's funny by parts, but not excellent. A good alternative, but not a primary choice to recommend.
5/10
11.9.2000 -
magnifico@ - age: 18-25
Good movie, alot of funny scene, worth seeing but is not a must.
7/10
10.9.2000 -
paulins@ - age: 18-25
It was such a bad movie. If you want something that is funny, this movie isnt it. Hardly anything funny about a girl that is psychotic beyond belief tryin to meet a soap star. It should not be branded as a comedy but rather a stupid drama.
2/10
10.9.2000 -
chowda@ - age: 18-25
The only reason I give it a 2 and not a 1, is because of Chris Rock.
2/10
9.9.2000 -
loserdave@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
This movie was not well made, the acting, was poor even with the large group of known actors. I think the producer and director did a poor job and my 5 year old nephew could have done better. It has alot of boring dialogue and I wonder why they call this a comedy. If you want me to compare this movie to an existing one, I think that Aladin 3 which only came out on tv overclasses this movie by far. It was not only a waste of my money, time, but it also made me a lesser person to see it.
1/10
9.9.2000 -
patricia@ - age: 26-35
| 
