Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Phillipa Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

donnielapoinde-54225 One of the few truly good cancer dramedies I have seen - watched it with one of my best friends and hugged her so hard after. Good to see men being there for each other and the performances are nice and natural unlike most movies on this topic. Solid screenplay and the fact that its based on a true story is so impressive. I really recommend.

Trey Yancy If it were not for Seth Rogan doing what he does best, this would have been a great film. Of course, his role is not fiction but it is about his real-life self in what is based on a true story.As for Love-Hewett - he is just as great as he always has been. He is one of those who can expect to have a very long and productive career. Howard and Kendrick are good in this film, essentially playing characters very similar to those in previous roles. It's nice to see Huston, Frewer and Hall as well - all of whom turn in their typically great performances.The direction is also great. As indicated above, it would have been nice if Rogan's character were not such an annoyance. Humor and wackiness are great, but an obnoxious, crude character is not a plus, even if the character is real.

rossnye For me this movie raises two questions. 1. How does this movie get classed as a comedy? I cried more than I laughed. Just because there is a few laughs and Seth Rogen is in it doesn't make it a comedy. 2. How come it's scored so low? I thought it was a brilliant movie. Great story flawlessly executed by a brilliant cast. I can't recommend it more highly.

zkonedog While watching "50/50", I had the strange experience of being an "outsider looking in" at the events transpiring on the screen. Having never battled cancer myself, I found it difficult to make any judgement on the actions.For a basic plot summary, this movie sees a young man (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) diagnosed with a rare form of cancer. As he struggles to cope with the diagnosis & treatment of his disease, he is "helped along" (in a variety of different ways) by a greenhorn therapist (Anna Kendrick), his smothering mother (Anjelica Huston), and his "best bud" (Seth Rogen).There are times when this movie seems downright ridiculous and seems to veer from any coherent narrative. However, there are also moments that will bring tears to your eyes. It is a very strange flick in that sense.The reason for the strange-ness? The crazy collection of characters present. Levitt himself proves me than capable of carrying the show, and his relationship with "Kendrick" provides probably the best moments in the film. But then there are the auxiliary cast, who you will alternately hate and appreciate in equal doses. I'm usually a fan of complex characters, but in "50/50" I would actually use the word "uneven" to describe them.Thus, I have to give this film a middle-of-the-road rating for now (perhaps at some other point in my life I will appreciate it more/less). It's like those personality tests you take in college that ask you to rate something on a "scale of 1-5". When you aren't quite sure how you feel, you give it a three.