WHAT'S HOT?
Home > Movie > M > Monster-In-Law > Reviews

Monster-In-Law Reviews

Monster-In-Law

Overview


Genre :

Comedy

Release Date :

May 06, 2005

MPAA Rating :

PG-13

Director :

Robert Luketic

Starring :

Jennifer Lopez, Jane Fonda, Michael Vartan, Wanda Sykes, Adam Scott

REVIEWS RATE:  Critics  Nothing's perfect, but it's worth seeing.    Readers  5 of 5 [Rate It]

4.5 of 5

“..you will be surprised by just how clever and enjoyable the film actually turns out to be..”
by Dan Deevy [The Cinema Source]
1.5 of 4

“..too silly for anyone in it to be regarded as even a caricature of a living person...”
by Jack Mathews [New York Daily News]
2.5 of 5

“..The story has moments of entertainment... but and it's a big one the writing is mostly empty..”
by [The Movie Chicks]
2 of 4

“..The comedy is broad and the story is too clumsily calculated to maximize its star power..”
by Wade Major [Boxoffice Magazine]
1.5 of 4

“..one of the least entertaining..”
by James Berardinelli [ReelViews]
2.5 of 5

“..more harm is done than good..”
by Lisa Schwarzbaum [Entertainment Weekly]
5 of 10

“..Monster-in-Law isn't bad, and it's even occasionally funny, but there are so many missed opportunities for real humor..”
by Joshua Starnes [Comingsoon]
3 of 10

“..Monster in Law isn?t worth your time or money...”
by Tamika Johnson [Movie-Vault]
2.5 of 5

“..it's a shame this film can't come up with something more original..”
by Rod Gustafson [Grading The Movies]
3 of 5

“..it contains few original quirks but still manages to entertain..”
by Sean O'Connell [Filmcritic]
2 of 4

“..Fonda makes a stunning comeback...even though her vehicle is so shaky it seems constantly ready to collapse under her..”
by Michael Wilmington [Chicago Tribune]
4 of 5

“..fiendishly good fun..”
by Stella Papamichael [BBC Films]
1 of 5

“..fails on so many levels..”
by Peter Sobczynski [EFilmCritic]
2 of 4

“..another generic concept-driven romantic comedy that is high on concept, low on comedy..”
by Duane Dudek [The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel]
2 of 5

“..a halfway decent little comedy..”
by Eric Lurio [Greenwich Village Gazette]
5 of 10
Reviewed by Gary Panton [Movie Gazette]
3.5 of 5
Reviewed by Philip Wuntch [The Dallas Morning News]
3 of 4
Reviewed by Chuck O'Leary [Fantastica Daily]
3 of 5
Reviewed by Matthew Turner [ViewLondon]
3 of 4
Reviewed by Barbara Vancheri [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette]
3 of 5
Reviewed by Clint Morris [Film Threat, Hollywood's Indie Voice]
3 of 4
Reviewed by Peter Travers [Rolling Stone]
2.5 of 5
Reviewed by Jeff Farance [The Daytona Beach News-Journal]
2.5 of 4
Reviewed by Brooke Holgerson [The Boston Phoenix]
2.5 of 4
Reviewed by Tim Knight [Reel]
2.5 of 4
Reviewed by Ed Blank [Pittsburgh Tribune-Review]
2.5 of 5
Reviewed by Rebecca Murray [About]
2 of 4
Reviewed by Wesley Morris [Boston Globe]
2 of 4
Reviewed by Terry Lawson [Detroit Free Press]
2 of 5
Reviewed by Liz Braun [Jam! Movies]
2 of 5
Reviewed by William Arnold [Seattle Post-Intelligencer]
2 of 5
Reviewed by Peter Debruge [Premiere Magazine]
2 of 4
Reviewed by Amy Biancolli [Houston Chronicle]
2 of 4
Reviewed by Jeff Vice [Deseret News, Salt Lake City]
2 of 4
Reviewed by Sara M. Fetters [MovieFreak]
2 of 4
Reviewed by Kit Bowen [Hollywood]
1.5 of 4
Reviewed by Jeff Wilser [Latino Review]
1.5 of 5
Reviewed by Marc Savlov [Austin Chronicle]
1.5 of 4
Reviewed by David Nusair [Reel Film Reviews]
1 of 5
Reviewed by Lew Irwin [ShowBIZ Data]
1 of 5
Reviewed by Andrea Chase [Killer Movie Reviews]
Reviewed by Stephanie Zacharek [Salon]
Reviewed by Ian Grey [Baltimore City Paper]
Reviewed by Kirk Honeycutt [The Hollywood Reporter]
Reviewed by Carol Cling [Las Vegas Review-Journal]
Reviewed by Bill Muller [The Arizona Republic]
Reviewed by Dan Callahan [Slant Magazine]
Reviewed by Sarah Keenlyside [Georgia Straight]
Reviewed by Bill Gallo [Dallas Observer]
Reviewed by Glenn Whipp [L.A. Daily News]
Reviewed by Peter Knegt [Exclaim!]

Reader's Reviews


Screen Name
Rate This Movie
Please Enter   
Comment
 
 
 
RSS
FB
Twitter

LATEST REVIEWS

45 YEARS :

“..it is supremely intelligent and moving and Rampling and Courtenay are superb..”
by Peter Bradshaw [The Guardian]

A WALK IN THE WOODS :

“..A Walk in the Woods is a jolly good time, sparking dozens of chuckles and a few strong laughs. Nothing special cinematically, it still provides a welcome showcase for wonderful star..”
by Todd McCarthy [Hollywood Reporter]

WAR ROOM :

“..are so heavy on broad pulpit pounding that it's challenging to get swept along by the story's message..”
by Tom Russo [Boston Globe]

ZIPPER :

“..on all counts, "Zipper" comes up short..”
by Katharine Pushkar [NY Daily News]

7 CHINESE BROTHERS :

“..feels like an homage to the early work of Wes Anderson with its plinky soundtrack, solipsistic banter and emphasis on uniforms..”
by Sara Stewart [New York Post]

TURBO KID :

“..it feels like amateur hour, but for fans of low-rent thrills it's kind of fun..”
by Soren Andersen [Seattle Times]

WHEN ANIMALS DREAM :

“..rich with tone but otherwise lacking bite..”
by Jordan Hoffman [NY Daily News]

POD :

“..a highly effective tale of terror that does a nice job of setting an unsettling tone from the onset and very rarely lets up until the film's conclusion..”
by Heather Wixson [Dailydead]

#LUCKY NUMBER :

“..obviously "#Lucky Number" will not appeal to everyone but for those that do find it entertaining, they will not be disappointed..”
by James McDonald [Irish Film Critic]

Z FOR ZACHARIAH :

“..the dramatic tension considerably less, in a movie that feels stranded somewhere between serious artistic ambition and the dystopian franchise-building of "The Hunger Games," "Divergent," et al..”
by Scott Foundas [Variety]