IMDb > Gigli (2003) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Gigli
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Gigli More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 41:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 406 reviews in total 

206 out of 261 people found the following review useful:

Critics, we owe you an apology

1/10
Author: Greg (gregmoroberts@yahoo.com) from Oakville, Ontario
18 January 2004

`Awful', `Hopeless', `Terrible', `Benifer's Gate'.

These are the words I read from some of North America's most respected film critics in my research before viewing the debacle Gigli starring Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez. At first, I wondered aloud 'how bad can it be'. After all, how often does the common public agree with the harsh words of a critic. Besides, Pacino and Walken in the same film should be enough to generate even one star out of even the sternest critic, right. Right?

Gigli is about two unbelievable gangsters who are assigned the task of kidnapping and watching over a prosecutors mentally challenged brother while also keeping an open eye on each other to ensure the success of the operation. Ben plays Gigli, an accent challenged goon who is as believable as Madonna in a nuns uniform, and Jennifer plays Ricky, a lesbian gangster who is primarily hired to ensure that Gigli doesn't screw things up.

Along the way, plenty of bit characters and ridiculous side plots stymie the progress of the mission. Ricky has an ex-lover show up at the house and attempt suicide, the gangsters ask for the thumb of the prisoner sent to the prosecutor, Gigli has to rush to his mothers house and learns that good ole ma knows all about lesbians and throughout the film we are constantly annoyed by conversations between Gigli and his crime boss, Lenny over the phone. I could go on, but what's the point.

Gigli was one of the worst reviewed films of 2003. So I began to wonder why this film in particular ended up on everyone's poop list even though there were plenty of worse films people were throwing good money at (Boat Trip, Bad Boys II, Masked and Anonymous). The answer became pretty obvious. Nothing was expected of these other entries, but Gigli had the star power of the two most talked about celebrities in Tinseltown. Throw in director Martin Brest who has had incredible success with Scent of a Woman, Midnight Run and Beverley Hills Cop, and sprinkle in the veteran a-list power of Christopher Walken and Al Pacino. With a recipe as rich as these ingredients suggest, one's expectations are set to a higher standard. Gigli simply does not deliver the goods. The dialogue is so laughable that you expect this film to have midnight showings a la Rocky Horror Picture Show in the next ten years, and the characters are so eccentrically hysterical that you can't help but cringe in your seat in embarrassment for all those involved.

So now back to the critics. We, owe you an apology. Most of the year, we read your reviews and chastise your opinions, but every once and a while, a consensus amongst your peers keeps us from going in mass and spending our hard earned dollars on crap like this. A $6 million dollar domestic take for Gigli is an example of the power that you possess, and for that, I will keep reading.

Was the above review useful to you?

149 out of 189 people found the following review useful:

$54,000,000! Where did all the money go?

Author: caspian1978 from Boston, MA
16 June 2004

I saw this movie and hated about 99% of it. After I found out it cost $54,000,000 to make, I started to hate the other 1%. If this is considered a love story between Lopez and Affleck, may I ask...where was the love? A sex scene with no nudity, no passion, and no sound....why? Supporting characters like Christopher Walken and others were introduced and went no where...why? The story alone peeks when Pacino arrives and shoots one of the cast members. From there, i was hoping that Pacino had finished the job and killed the rest of the cast. If that happened, the movie would have been good. Instead, the movie drags and drags and drags. The audience is not going to care if the actors in the movie learn something or progress if they don't care about the characters. Lopez and Affleck's characters do not exist! Much like the ugly tattoos on Affleck's shoulder, the movie was not fun to look at. In my opinion, and I do not think I am wrong, if Lopez had a small nude scene and / or the movie was done as an independent film for under 2 or 3 million, Gigli would have been a giant success. Instead, we are left to wonder....why?

Was the above review useful to you?

171 out of 238 people found the following review useful:

You must never see it.

1/10
Author: David_Frames
25 May 2005

Smug and a self-adorned cine-sophisticate, I rented out Gigli with a friend ready to scrutinise it with the benefit of my enlightened view of film. It was going to be an hilarious two hours. I'd settled down in a very comfy armchair and had poured a glass of some Austrian glug. I couldn't wait to laugh at the stupid dialogue and that ridiculous script but the joke was on us because Gigli transcends the established limit of effective urine stealing. This is because its simply so horrible that you can forget trying to make yourself look intelligent and media literate by ripping the bladder evacuate because the scale of misguided conception baffles the mind and eventually shuts it down. It's like being hit by a sack full of bricks in the face for a full 114 minutes. There's a teasing little scene with J-Lo early on when she tells a bunch of unruly kids that there's a martial arts move that can gouge out the eyes and simultaneously destroy the visual cortex meaning that not only are you rendered blind but you'll never be able to remember anything you've seen. For the Gigli viewer this is like showing Charlie and the Chocolate Factory to a hall packed with diabetics. You're left to ponder the short term agony weighed up against the long term benefit as Martin Brest's story unfolds with the principle characters of a unlikeable, emotionally and sexually retarded thug with a soft centre (a fat Affleck), a lesbian who isn't really a lesbian because you can be converted to heterosexuality by an emotionally and sexually retarded thug and an actually retarded man who was probably supposed to be a Rainman-type character who redeems Affleck's arrogant meathead but is in fact a cringe inducing, self-harm facilitating caricature of the mentally handicapped. Look, many movies look good on paper and suffer from poor execution but what's head scratching about Gigli is that it's as dire on the page as it is on screen. Broadly it's supposed to be a romantic comedy, sort of Out of Sight meets Rainman meets Whats New Pussycat? but it's stillborn as a criminal caper, devoid of anything approaching sensitivity and has some of the worst battle of the sexes banter that ever crawled onto the screen. Brest, who directed the dire 16 hour remake of Meet John Doe, Meet Joe Black, shows that when it comes to misjudging material he's peerless. His crimes here are compounded by the fact that this is his own script. That script, incidentally is a roll call of on screen horror. Witness, if you can, the Penis Vs. Vagina scene in which Affleck argues the case for the male genitals or the tear jerking moment in which the soft hearted Affleck, having given the Mentally Handicapped Brian relationship advice, looks on like a proud father as his new friends woos an Australian bombshell during the filming of a Baywatch beach party. You'll envy the man who gets his brains blown out and eaten by goldfish or the horrendous girlfriend of J-Lo, who having realised which film she's in, slits her wrists...stupidly, the wrong way. Once its all over and you sit there open mouthed you're left to (briefly) ponder why Brest did it. Did the kidnapped brother have to be disabled? Surely there must have been a more effective way of facilitating Affleck's transition from idiot to slightly more compassionate idiot? Did J-Lo have to be a Lesbian? Sure, Affleck has to have some obstacles toward getting the girl and we all like a bit of sexual tension but gay viewers must have been flabbergasted that a man who describes men and women as "the bull and the cow" and does lovable things like warmly looking vacuous and endearingly been obnoxious should persuade a woman to er, "hop over the fence". And even if Brest was blinded by his own vanity what in the name of Beverly Hills Cop persuaded Christopher Walken and Al Pacino to cameo? None of it makes any sense. The bottle of wine I had with the film was good though but by the time I regained consciousness the bit left in the bottle was undrinkable.

Was the above review useful to you?

95 out of 122 people found the following review useful:

Rhymes with 'Really'. As in Really Bad.

1/10
Author: bigboybhatia
7 June 2004

I borrowed my friend's Gigli DVD to see if the movie was really as bad as the ratings and other comments here will indicate. The answer is yes. When the film first came out, it rocketed to number 1 on the bottom 100 list. That ranking was undeserved, as the movie does have decent technical aspects (editing, sound) relative to Manos and Future War. Its good to see Gigli settling a little further down the list. From the outset, I could tell the dialog was just horrible. It was unfunny 90% of the time, and contained useless overlong scenes. One example was the whole 'pleasing a woman' sequence where Lopez was doing Yoga on a mat while talking with Affleck. Just horrible. Jennifer Lopez has to win the award for most painfully miscast actress. She is totally unbelievable as a Lesbian girl gangster. She failed to convince me that she had ever broken the law in the past. 'I did some really bad things' -- yeah right. I would avoid this like the plague. 1/10

Was the above review useful to you?

95 out of 122 people found the following review useful:

Those Five dollars could've got me some chicken McNuggets!!!!

1/10
Author: robojesus777 (robojesus777@yahoo.com) from J-LO Street
6 August 2003

I could've went to McDonald's with my five buck and gotten something to eat but INSTEAD I went and saw the new J-lo/ Ben Affleck puke bonanza titled; Gigli. God, I'm an IDIOT!!! The first ten minutes weren't so bad but then I realized I was in "Finding Nemo". When I made my way to the right theater- I was horrifed!This was Gigli? A J-Lo movie ALL ABOUT J-LO- Well I never! Anywho- there's only too things worse then this movie: 1, Burning to death and 2, burning to death while watching "Gigli"

for A movie titled "Gigli" -- I never laughed once! Total rip off! Horrible! I give it 4 stars **** ...out of 240!

Was the above review useful to you?

109 out of 152 people found the following review useful:

J-Lo and Ben: 2 of the most laughable characters ever

Author: MLDinTN from TN
10 June 2004

J-Lo and Ben were badly miscast as gangsters in this. Neither is believable.

We are supposed to believe Ricki (J-LO) is a gangster and mean just because she says so. She does absolutely nothing to make her seem dangerous. But, then it gets even funnier when she shows up in a crop top shirt, letting it all show, only to announce she's gay. What! J-Lo is just too famous for anyone to see her as gay, not to mention, she never acts like it in the film.

As for Ben, he's really bad too. He's uses this horrible accent and swears a lot. I guess that means we are supposed to believe he's a tough gangster from New York because of this. He doesn't have the stomach to cut off a finger and he lets a guy that owes money only pay half. No muscle man would act like such a wuss.

Then we get the mentally challenged guy that plays some role with the plot, but I'm not sure what because the plot never made sense to me. I never got the whole point of kidnapping the guy. Then there are the very bad dialogue scenes that have been mentioned many times. What was the writer thinking and how could Bennifer say those lines without laughing. And I still don't get why a lesbian would give that yoga speech to a guy in such a seductive way. So unbelievable.

The only thing that made me laugh was Gigli reading to the retarded guy. He read what's on tabasco sauce bottle and charmin toilet paper.

FINAL VERDICT: Gobble, gobble says it all. Overall bad acting and writing. But I have seen worse movies. I only recommend it for those who feel compelled to see J-Lo looking really hot for a couple of hours.

Was the above review useful to you?

93 out of 123 people found the following review useful:

I mean... why?

1/10
Author: canadude
10 February 2004

I can't exactly remember how or why I ended up seeing this movie, but here I am thinking of the film that stands next to Matrix Revolutions as the worst of 2003. It is that bad. Reasons? Well, for one, this movie contains a brutal depiction of Ben Affleck violently raping the acting craft. There is one reason. Two? There is hardly a plot, but old, cliche gimmicks to create a Rain Man feel in a hit man story. Does it work? Three? No. It does not. And I don't care if people write reviews stating that a lot of reviewers won't admit they liked the picture. I have nothing to hide. I hated it. I'll admit that the picture had two pluses. Christopher Walken's brief speech, and Al Pacino's. Those were the high points of the movie, and I have no idea how they got persuaded to participate in the film, but there it is. They were damn good. In scenes that had little to do with the story. Which had little to do with anything. I won't even touch on J-Lo's questionable lesbianism, or the random suicide attempt by her former lover (who shows up... why?). What can I say? Awful film.

Was the above review useful to you?

83 out of 109 people found the following review useful:

Suffered from Ben and J-Lo backlash and isn't as bad as many say, but is still an ill-formed, poorly judged shambles

Author: bob the moo from United Kingdom
15 February 2004

Larry Gigli is a hired thug for the mob in LA. When he is put on a job to kidnap the brother of the Federal DA, he takes the mentally handicapped Brian to his flat with the intention of the DA dropping charges against his boss. Later he is joined by another contractor, Ricki, who Louis has put with him to make sure he doesn't f**k the job up. His amorous approaches towards her are rejected when she tells him she is a lesbian, but the two have bigger problems with the job itself.

I rented this film because I had read all the harsh reviews, both professional and on this site, that just ripped into it and seemed to have more personal vendettas against the stars rather than objective points to make about the film. With this in mind I decided that I would have to check it out myself; I have no personal feelings about Lopez and Affleck - their relationship is not something I have had rammed down my throat as I don't read the gossips mags and my paper of choice is the Times, where they get rather limited coverage. Without this fatigue I was able to view the film as it came to me rather than seething with cruel and clever put downs even before the film started (as some critics clearly did).

However, the critics were mostly right, even if they overreacted to the extreme. The film starts reasonably well and you can see the potential, or at least you can see what they were thinking when the film was being put together. Sadly, as the film continues, the thin strands holding it together are slowly unravelling until almost nothing is left of value. Some of it works well; how many times have the audience embraced a comic crime caper with hit men in the lead roles? Here the film does have some of that type of humour (particularly in the jokes about Gigli's masculinity) but the music used to set the tone begins to grate after a while because there is nothing to support it, and everything else is flawed.

The main plot is so very full of holes and stupid plot devices that it is difficult to be involved by it. For a crime comedy, the plot doesn't need to be perfect - but it needs to be good enough so that it doesn't take away from the film, here it is so weak that it damages the film at it's core. The other side of the plot is the romance, and it is absurd! I'm sure if I were a lesbian that I would be offended by the `I'll turn her' approach of the film, but I'm not so I'll leave that for others to debate. However the romance between the two is unrealistic and uninvolving, the lesbian thing just makes it worse.

The characters themselves are poor. Neither Gigli or Ricki ever seem like killers - in fact even a hint of violence and they look terrified and out of their depth. His personality seems to change to whatever the scene requires (one moment impatient, the next sensitive, the next angry) while Ricki is just sweetness and light. Affleck and Lopez must take almost all the blame for this, their performances are as misjudged and lacking as the script. Affleck is actually not that bad - he is willing to send himself up, it is the jumping script that makes him appear to be all over the place. Lopez is awful; someone who has done this crime comedy style movie before should have been much better but she acts like she is in a simpering rom-com. What is surprising is just how little chemistry the two have considering they are a couple now; they just don't do the job at all.

Bartha gives a dumb Rain Man impression to the point where I kept expecting him to say `I'm an excellent driver'. His character is just a joke and I even wished for Lopez to come onto the screen whenever he was on - at least I could just stare at her body and ignore him! The two main cameos are actually very good but unfortunately serve to show up the rest of the film. Walken is good but his character appears and disappears without reason, Pacino is much better simply because he does his menacing `woo-ha' thing and is very effective.

Overall this is not the `worst film ever made', those who tell you that have clearly have a limited viewing experience; many of the reviews were made harsher by the back lash against the whole Bennifer thing. However that's not to say they are wrong - only overly harsh. The film is poorly judged in almost every aspect and is too hard to enjoy as a result. Has about 3 good moments in it, but it is an overwhelming shambles.

Was the above review useful to you?

67 out of 84 people found the following review useful:

A Flat, Lifeless Lump of a Movie

1/10
Author: CTS-1 from USA
3 January 2005

A truly cynical person might think that the whole J-Lo/ Ben Affleck relationship was a publicity stunt designed to help this movie along. After all, if a couple was in the midst of a passionate affair, it is reasonable to expect some on-screen chemistry between then, right? That kind of chemistry is sadly lacking in the J-Lo/ Affleck interactions.

Ms. Lopez appears to be either in over her head as far as acting ability, or realized that she was in a "take the money and run" failure; I did not buy her as the character she was supposed to be. Affleck was just leaden, although he had nothing to work with in terms of character or dialogue. He has not always been bad (I liked "Chasing Amy"), but here, his scenes crawl along at a painfully slow pace. The "retarded kid" (and that is all he deserves to be called) is playing a high-school play version of "Rain Man" with all the annoyance but none of the nuance, complexity, or charm. The less seen, the better. Forgettable cameos top the mess.

The worst thing about Gigli is the endings. Imagine a painfully bad film, where you want to sit it through to the end, just because of all the pain and suffering it has put you through ("this film is NOT going to defeat me"). You get to the end. Then, there is another ending. Then, another ending; then, an ending involving the retarded kid. Then, an ending not involving the retarded kid. Then another... You get to a point where you sincerely believe that the editor should be forbidden from ever working in film again. Along with the director and the choad who did the bizarrely inappropriate music, as well.

The colorful, in-your-face awfulness of "From Justin to Kelly" was a picnic compared to the leaden, meandering awfulness of "Gigli." And, to think of how much this film cost, for so little...

Was the above review useful to you?

54 out of 72 people found the following review useful:

hello?

1/10
Author: CrowServoNelson from Wisconsin, USA
8 April 2004

Can anyone locate a plot for this movie? I won't bother spoiling anything for you because wel...there isn't anything to spoil. Absolutely nothing happens in this movie! Thank god I only watched it with my friends as a joke to add to a school project.

Let's just say there are a lot of lines that bring this movie down a lot. I'm sure all the late night hosts have already summed these up in one way or another. I was lost after the first ten minutes, and it's hard to get through the first five! My advice to you is...if you want to see a movie that is at least remotely watchable...AVOID this one. For the love of God!!

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 41:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history