Btexxamar I like Black Panther, but I didn't like this movie.

Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Twilightfa Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

Ketrivie It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

SnoopyStyle Gregory Larkin (Jeff Bridges) is a math professor at Columbia. His students are bored. He is always distracted by beautiful women. His ex Candy shows up for his book signing and he is completely flustered. He asks adult phone sex operator Felicia for advise and he puts up a personal ad with "Physical appearance not important!". Rose Morgan (Barbra Streisand) is an ugly duckling, Yankees fan, and English Lit professor at Columbia. Her beautiful sister Claire (Mimi Rogers) marries her ex Alex (Pierce Brosnan) whom she still holds a flame for. Their mother Hannah Morgan (Lauren Bacall) is inappropriate and pushy. Claire answers the ad for Rose. Gregory finds her intelligence and lack of sex appeal perfect for him.Their relationship is cute and Rose's struggling sexual desire is funny. I don't really buy Rose completely as an ugly duckling but the movie is filled with pretty girls and she's ugly by comparison. The first half is a mildly amusing romantic comedy. Then the flow cracks with the big blow up. The amusing little romance takes on some ugliness. Neither characters come off well from the conflict. Both become less appealing and so does the movie. The only fun part of the post break-up is Rose's students seeing her new look. This is a rom-com that doesn't quite fit the formula and suffers from it.

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

susansmoose The Mirror Has Two FacesWhen our local cable company started running this film a month ago, I had almost forgotten that I had seen it in the theater when it first came out. I was reminded of how much I had missed the film and started watching it again. I was surprised and pleased to find that I still enjoy it and I've watched it faithfully every time that it's shown.Jeff Bridges plays a Columbia University mathematics professor, Gregory Larkin. He is good looking but a boring, lonely man, whose relationships with beautiful women never work out. He wants one that is platonic, which is founded on respect, intelligence and a passion for ideas. Inspired by a television ad, he takes out his own personal ad and finds several applicants, which includes another Columbia University literature professor Rose Morgan through her sister, Claire, who answers the ad. Gregory calls her one night after visiting her class and asks her to dinner where the two of them hit it off. Three months later, Gregory proposes and explains the arrangement, although, he tells her that if she wants sex, given enough of a warning, he'll be able to provide that. Rose accepts, even though she wants more. She gets her chance after she helps Greg with his teaching and he asks her if he can return the favor. And that's when things go horribly wrong.While I'm not a big fan of Barbra Streisand, I find this romantic comedy to be witty and intelligent. The acting is sensational on all fronts, especially from Barbra Streisand, Jeff Bridges and Lauren Bacall who are its standouts. The chemistry between Ms. Streisand and Mr. Bridges is perfect and their romantic scenes are wonderful to watch, especially the final scene.

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.