IMDb > Catwoman (2004) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Catwoman
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
Catwoman More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 64:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 638 reviews in total 

153 out of 241 people found the following review useful:

I will never understand...

2/10
Author: BHorrorWriter from Ohio, USA
30 January 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

...how movies like this get rushed into theaters.

I honestly believe that when the idea of a Catwoman movie came across someone's desk several years back, it was a good idea. Unfortunately what turned up in theaters in 2004 was this mess! Having never picked up a Catwoman comic book, I cannot judge the film on that background. Knowing only of the old Batman TV show from the 60's, the 90's Cartoon and the brilliant portrayal by Michelle Pfeiffer in Tim Burton's exceptional Batman Returns in 1992. That's all I really have to go on.

However, this 2004 update on the character is flawed. Halle Berry is awkwardly cast as the lead. Her screen presence was boring and lacked any real motivation.

With 3 writers, it is no wonder the story goes in all directions, never sticking to one line for too long. It is disjointed and incomplete. It almost seems the script was written just to have CGI fight sequences and Berry in that silly (though hot) costume! Pitof, as director strings together a film that has no real entertainment value. Though many scenes are shot beautifully, I do not see where he treated the character of Catwoman as the focal point. It just seems like he was making a movie - nothing more nothing less.

All in all the film is bland. Trite. Scripted weakly. Sloppily acted. Well, you get the idea.

Long live the days when Michelle Pfeiffer wore the Catwoman costume. She truly demonstrated the characteristics of a true Feline Femme Fatale. She holds ranks with the women that have portrayed Catwoman - Berry, though I love her, does not! 2 out of 10

Was the above review useful to you?

155 out of 247 people found the following review useful:

Instant Cult classic

1/10
Author: timetwister77 from United States
21 February 2005

remember this flick; recall every poorly crafted detail; recite every stale line repeatedly. Why? Because one day, my friend, this train-wreck will be playing at your local buck and a quarter cinema @ midnight 30 with a line of freaks rolling along the walls. Each will be holding a ball of catnip in one hand and a jar of face cream in the other; and you'll be the #1 popularoso if you can recite along with this mutt. All I can say is WOW. That is the worst villain of all time: Marbleface.. my face has become marble from too much toxic face cream? No, this wasn't directed by a Frenchman. I mean it..This movies is A+ cheese. CGI catwoman to real Berry is stunning. Goes from sleek to klutzy instantly. If you like this movie like i do, your rolling on the floor. Every second is purely genius. If you liked it for real, your bus just pulled up, get away from the comp.

Highlights: 1) This is not Catwoman. Catwoman is Selina Kyle; this is patience something or other. This movie was too embarrassing to be connected with such an awesome character 2) My fav part of the lame costume: the shoes with the toes sticking out. 3) Oooooh the most sinister thing we can think of: the fiend knows the face cream is ruining the beautiful girls faces, but wants to profit anyhow. This kind of villainy puts Lex Luthor to shame! 4) Catwoman's freak out with the catnip! This is when the Rocky Horror crowd crowd will toss the catnip balls at the screen 5) You cannot argue with the music too loud scene. period. A keg's nozzle will NOT squirt that far Patience. How did you achieve such a feat. You really are a super hero.

Was the above review useful to you?

177 out of 301 people found the following review useful:

Dear Hollywood, please stop doing this!

1/10
Author: udeaasykle (udeaasykle@hotmail.com) from Sandnes, Norway
11 February 2005

Oh my, where do I begin? Well I could tell you that this is a well made action movie, but obviously I would be lying my head off. So instead, I want to tell you the truth. Are you ready? Here it comes… "DON'T SEE THIS MOVIE" Let me tell you why. If you see this movie and are over the age of 16, you will end up hating yourself for letting yourself rot for 104 minutes without getting anything back, except an increased feeling of wanting to get revenge on Hollywood. They say that it is very hard to get your script into a movie. Well, after seeing this movie, I think a one legged monkey could write a better script, without either pen or paper. The fact that Halle Berry even uses a male stunt double, makes me loose all respect for both her and this movie. Besides the stunt double thing, the movie still sucks. The dialog sucks, the acting is not even present and the action looks sloppy and poorly thought through. This movie actually made me like The Core better, which is pretty much impossible. I rate this movie 1/10

Was the above review useful to you?

157 out of 266 people found the following review useful:

Crap in its purest form.

1/10
Author: taken_335 from Palm Springs, CA
28 July 2004

Directing 0/10, Writing 0/10, Cinematography 0.5/10, Editing 1/10, Acting 0.5/10, Overall Satisfaction 0/10

Final- 0.5/10

One word is brought to mind when thinking back to my viewing of, Catwoman- Crap. It might be inspired by my estimation of the film's display of only 12 minutes of living, breathing actors (which I will get into more below). Or it could possibly be inspired by the many errors that there wasn't even an attempt to cover, i.e.- Patience becomes Catwoman after wandering into a restricted area. How did she get into this restricted area, you ask? By walking through the door marked 'RESTRICTED AREA,' in bold, red text, which was simply unlocked and didn't even have a significant locking device on it. You know, I might've also hated the movie (not worthy of the word 'film') because of the pointless-undeveloped story line. And, really, it's not possible to look beyond the disgustingly audacious 'style' of one-named director, Pitof, which can only be described as the style of a headless chicken running through a maze of landmines. Oh, yes, said headless chicken is also being chased by angry natives wielding machetes.

I mentioned above that I estimated that only 12 minutes of living, breathing actors were shown during the entire 140 minutes of film. Almost every sequence of the movie featuring an actor seemed to be butchered by the insertion of CGI's. I'm dead serious. I'm not just talking high-flying, sucky action sequences- I'm talking scenes of Catwoman walking to a motorcycle and calmly getting on it, and the other one that immediately comes to mind is a sequence where a man (a baddie) is simply walking. Yeah, walking. It seems agents and managers are really watching over their clients these days.

Now, two questions I'm asking-

1) What is the point of Catwoman? What the [expletive] does she do?

It's explained in the film that Midnight, the 'magical' cat, chose Patience to become Catwoman, but something is wrong here- CATWOMAN HAS NO PURPOSE!! Every other superhero out there has a purpose- They save people! It seems Catwoman's only purpose is to kill the people who attempted to kill her and chase a cricket or two. There's nothing else to her!

2) Where is the REAL back story?

It sure as [expletive] wasn't in the film! Why wasn't she shocked and attempting to reason and deal with the emotional ass-kicking that would come with the revelation? She's told she's Catwoman by the cliché cat lady, she buys a mask and nails and the result is the 'superhero.' It's adds up, but not into anything of any value whatsoever. Shame on you terrible writers!

Halle Berry is a good actress. I'm not doubting or denying that. She fully deserved her Academy Award nomination and win for 2001's Monster's Ball, but something bad happened here. Her acting started awful and ended awful. I'm hoping the talents and reputation of Berry won't be harmed by her inadequate performance.

Now, My request to Halle Berry- Ms. Berry, I want my money back. I never thought I could see such a terrible performance from an Oscar winning actress. Maybe you were just doing your best with the material? But, you know, that really is not a valid excuse. After reading the screenplay, you should've thrown it in the face of the agent who dared display it to you. How could you not notice how awful it was? Make some better choices and hopefully your career won't plummet as so many others have.

I recall an interview with Ashley Judd, the original casting choice for Catwoman, who said something along the lines of, 'Turning down the role of Catwoman is one the things I regret the most.' Ashley, never say that again. You have only been saved by not appearing in this hilariously terrible film.

Listen people, don't waste your money on this glorified..er…um..crap. It's not worth the $6-$15 bucks!

So now you ask, why not just give it a zero? Why the zero-point five? Well, The editing was sufficiently bad; the acting of Alex Borstein could've possibly taken some effort, appropriately placed CGI's were okay, and I like cats.

Directing 0/10, Writing 0/10, Cinematography 0.5/10, Editing 1/10, Acting 0.5/10, Overall Satisfaction 0/10

Final- 0.5/10

Was the above review useful to you?

31 out of 36 people found the following review useful:

Pitiful

1/10
Author: Nigel from United Kingdom
17 January 2005

I'm tempted to write a long piece explaining why this film was so bad, but I can all too easily summarise by saying "Everything".

It was poorly acted, predictable, unenthralling, clichéd nonsense. And that was just the first half hour, at which point, for the sake of my brain and stopping it melting with the sheer tedium, I walked out of the cinema.

If you're genuinely sad enough to believe that paying good money to see Halle Berry in a PVC suit is good enough reason to spend time gawking at this trash, then fine. Who am I to try to persuade you to try and do something more valuable with your time, like base-jumping without a parachute?

Utterly abysmal

Was the above review useful to you?

27 out of 35 people found the following review useful:

Crap...caught on film!

1/10
Author: shinlyle from United States
14 February 2005

Wow...I have never seen such horrendous footage in my life! I would normally never knock something without having seen it in its entirety, but this film is utter $hit! Put it back in the litter box and throw it out!

I've seen about 45 minutes of footage and it really looks like something someone did as a flash film and they thought "Hmm...this would look cool on film!!"

I think it's total and utter betrayal of the character's roots is bad enough, but to compound that by ripping off elements from other comic-based action films (The Crow, Spider-Man 1 & 2, etc.) is just adding more nails to this already sealed coffin.

The only positive reviews I have read seem to say that "It wasn't as bad as everyone said it was, but it was bad". That isn't a positive review. The only people who enjoyed this film are pre-pubescent guys who will never know the touch of a woman without shucking out a few hundred bucks for it.

This film is a disgrace to comics, movies, and mankind in general, and any woman who thinks this film is "empowering" is probably some young promiscuous woman will will be called "MAMA" before she hit age 17.

Beware this movie, and avoid it like the freaking' plague.

Was the above review useful to you?

29 out of 39 people found the following review useful:

Try to make a worse movie--I dare you

1/10
Author: jjalan from louisville, USA
6 February 2005

Oh, where to start...imagine all the intellectual depth of Showgirls, plus all the excessive and ridiculous special effects of Charlie's Angels, and then throw in some dialog crafted by whomever wrote for Governor Schwarzenegger's Mr. Freeze in the fourth Batman movie, and only then are you even close to a movie as awful as this.

I suppose one should not expect much from a director who actually refers to himself as Pitof. But let's come back to that. Let's move on to Halle Berry. Note to Halle Berry: Letting Billy Bob Thornton ream you endlessly on camera is certainly degrading, but it was also a good career move--and you won an Oscar; feverishly eating catnip and licking people's faces on camera, however, is not a good career move--and you'll probably win a Razzie this time. They make you return Oscars for movies like this. Oh yeah, as for the supernatural explanation for Patience Phillips/Catwoman's superhero status--she gets CPR from an immortal Egyptian cat--I am not kidding.

And then there is Benjamin Bratt, who happens to be a pretty solid actor, but could have very likely damaged a good career. If his participation in this movie isn't enough to stigmatize him, then I'm sure he had to pass up a lot of good roles because of all the time he spent having his foot surgically removed from his former agent's rectum. There is a scene in this movie--probably the worst, and that's no small achievement--that is reminiscent of that ridiculous scene in Daredevil where Jennifer Garner/Elektra and Ben Affleck/blind superhero have a Kung Fu fight at a playground in broad daylight; in this movie it's Halle Berry and Ben Bratt playing one-on-one hoops and her doing Catwoman flips and yet no one appears to be too amazed by this, much less pants-soiling surprised, and on top of that it has a sort of VH1/Color Me Bad/early New Edition video feel to it. And I'm really not sure what city this is all supposed to take place in--Gotham, Metropolis, the land beneath the whole in the cutting room floor--but apparently this place only has one detective, the unfortunate Bratt. No matter what the crime is--burglary, murder, domestic disturbance, interrupted ballet performance--he's always there.

As for the rest of the cast, that annoying woman from Mad TV--I know that's not specific enough; I mean the most annoying one who plays what I guess is supposed to be some bizarre Asian lady--well, she plays Catwoman's annoying and sort of slutty co-worker comic relief since Rosie O'Donnell was apparently unavailable.

And then we come to Sharon Stone. Now I know her career is going down the crapper with all deliberate speed, but it's still hard to understand this one. The only thing I can guess is that the opportunity to break into silly, pseudo-feminist diatribes made this a role she couldn't turn down. Of course Sharon has often lamented the lack of good roles for older women in Hollywood, and she's absolutely right about that, but this is not the best way to lodge a complaint, and plus that's always been a little peculiar coming from an actress whose greatest cinematic achievement is the conspicuous exposure of her labia.

Briefly back to this Pitof character--I thought that pretentious one-named idiot who did the Charlie's Angels movies--McG, I believe--was bad enough, but this guy is even more shameless and obviously lacking in talent. What's with these guys who've never made a movie and are already going by only one name? Don't you have to work up to that? I mean if is Scorsese wants to go by Marty, fine; if Tarantino wants to be just Quentin, or even just Q, whatever, but where does a hack like this get off using one name? This movie deserves every Razzie it receives, and while some reviewers may say it's not really that bad, remember, it took a lot of money to make this godawful thing, and if people don't speak out about how dreadful it really is, they just might make Catwoman 2. Can you live with that?

Was the above review useful to you?

93 out of 170 people found the following review useful:

Please, please, please, please, PLEASE don't hate me.

7/10
Author: Ruth from United Kingdom
13 February 2007

I liked it. OK, it wasn't the best film ever, and yeah, there have been better Catwomen (namely, Julie Newmar and Michelle Pfeiffer), but when you sit and watch it with no expectations, it's actually kind of cool.

From a superhero point of view it's a little one-sided- there aren't any real villains, at least, none who pose a real threat. Although Sharon Stone's character reminded me a tad of Poison Ivy, you know, super-beauty-products and all that jazz. But I quite liked that it showed how someone really quiet and shy can turn into a catty, sexy weirdo.

No offence meant to catty, sexy weirdos.

Catwoman has no real point to it, other than to explain how Patience gets her powers. It would be good if there was a follow-up where she beat Batman / Superman / Poison Ivy or whoever, but since the film did so badly this seems about as likely to happen as pigs flying, hell freezing over, and Ozzy Osbourne announcing a fondness for Girls Aloud. Which is a shame, because I didn't think the film was that bad.

They'd have been better off doing a spin-off from the Batman flicks with Michelle P (or a lookalike) as Catwoman, so the back story wouldn't be necessary.

Don't hate me for loving Catwoman. Please?

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 25 people found the following review useful:

Berry Sucks; Pitof should go back to VFX supervision in France

1/10
Author: Sam-71 from Sydney, Australia
14 January 2005

Wow - where to begin???? Firstly, this film should prove that the Oscars are rigged - Berry can act about as well as I can fly. She deserved the Oscar about as much as George Bush deserves an award for world peace. And Pitof???? Who are you? Madonna???????? Unless you're a mega-star - USE 2 NAMES! Well, as a visual effects producer myself, I can say with confidence that he shouldn't give up his day job - directing VFX is very different to directing a film. Even having said that, the VFX in "Catwoman" were pathetic at best: half of it looked liked a poorly rendered video game!!! Please go back to France and do something else with your life like making coffee or croissants or pretending to be American.... 2hrs of my life WASTED!

Was the above review useful to you?

52 out of 93 people found the following review useful:

People were just hating on Halle!

10/10
Author: Sherazade from United States
13 March 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The idea of a Black superhero/heroine must have been too much for some because after viewing Catwoman, the only conclusion I came up with was that there was a Vendetta against Halle. Harvard University just awarded her a honorary degree with their tasty hasting puddings annual whatever-s in exchange for her promising never to make a sequel to the film. And the Razzies people (The Oscars for bad acting and bad films) awarded her worst actress of the year for playing in the film. It was V for Vendetta for Heroine Halle. Anyway, back to the film, Halle's character is a scruffy looking secretary type working for a top cosmetic company when she accidental discovers the secret to the company's formulas and is killed for her curiosity. As she slowly slips away, a pack of wild and exotic cats make their way to where she is laying and I guess you can say they each donated a portion of their nine lives to her, and as a result, she comes back to life with a catlike vengeance. Sharon Stone plays the wife of her boss, with a mean streak, and that gorgeous hunk of a man Benjamin Bratt plays a police detective in hot pursuit of Catwoman for more reasons than one.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 64:[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