IMDb > Jack and Jill (2011/I) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Jack and Jill
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
Jack and Jill More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 25:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 241 reviews in total 

306 out of 372 people found the following review useful:

Deserves to be Erased from Film History

1/10
Author: dekkar5 from United States
12 November 2011

I will start by saying that I have enjoyed many Adam Sandler movies and have found him to be a generally funny guy when I've seen him interviewed and when he was on Saturday Night Live.

I laughed gleefully through Anger Management, Mr. Deeds, Billy Madison, 50 First Dates, and Happy Gilmore. Funny People and Just Go With It were awesome movies! I was brought to tears in Sandler's emotional portrayal in Reign Over Me.

I have great respect for the man as a comedian and actor. But Jack and Jill is abysmal. The "jokes" are not only bizarrely misplaced - THEY ARE NOT FUNNY. I did not hear a single laugh, not even a slight giggle from any audience member in the theater. In fact, almost 1/3 of them walked out before it was over. Those who stayed, openly derided the flick as we all exited the theater in utter disgust and sadness.

I don't know why Al Pacino was in this movie, his acting made it seem like he was forced at gun point to do this movie. Nick Swardson and Tim Meadows are way too funny to be in such a disaster. Especially given Swardson's stellar performance in Just Go With It.

This movie is not a flop, its not an "oops", its not a mistake - it's a career ending pile of trash. A career ender that started with Sandler's god awful "Grown Ups" and climaxes with this revolting hunk of garbage.

Sorry Adam, it's over.

Was the above review useful to you?

216 out of 270 people found the following review useful:

Terrible. The trailer is the highlights.

1/10
Author: MosHr from United States
9 November 2011

The standard that Adam Sandler movies has set is pretty low, but even with such low expectations going to the movie, the movie still felt terrible. The gag is twins and ignoring that healthy identical twins with different genders is impossible, we get to see Adam Sandler dress up as a woman. And, we get to see Adam Sandler dress up as a woman a lot, ridiculously lot and so much so, that Jack Adam Sandler and the rest of the cast are just supporting actors to the almighty squawking of Jill Adam Sandler.

We could say this is just Adam Sandler up to his usual antics but Jill Adam Sandler hogs up the screen time and nothing about her really makes any sort of logical sense. There is Al Pacino as himself who falls for Jill, a possibility that the writers explain away as madness or nervous breakdown of Al Pacino. Then, there is Jill who is loved by the kids and Jack's wife Erin (played by Katie Holmes) for reasons that Jill doesn't portray on screen and we are never shown, all we are shown is the mean and manipulative Jill. The Jill that Adam Sandler portrays is his own immature rendition of a woman, filled with toilet humor and displays of uncharacteristic skills and strength as positive attributes. Jill is portrayed uninteresting and vacuous though written differently, and that being the center of the movie makes the movie uninteresting and tiresome.

The movie would have been an acceptable Sandler movie if Jill had been played by a woman who could actually portray a big heart. The previous Sandler movies were enjoyable movies, but Jack and Jill is a real stinker, barely watchable. The only thing I found interesting was the background opulence of everyone around, thrown around so casually that it really feels like the big guys involved in the movie have severely lost touch with their audience and given way to sloth where they think anything they do is magical. Avoid the movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

196 out of 245 people found the following review useful:

Terrible, terrible, terrible

1/10
Author: ryanwjphelps from Burnaby, BC, Canada
11 November 2011

I saw a pre-screening of this film the night before it opened to wide release. I knew going in that it was not going to be an excellent film. But, I thought, there would be a few laughs and some funny moments in it. I was terribly mistaken.

Adam Sandler was terrible as 'Jill'. We were supposed to believe that the character was actually a woman. All I saw was Adam Sandler in a dress with a stupid voice.

The character of Jack is unlikeable and mean, almost to the point where you wonder how he has any family or friends.

Katie Holmes, which I usually enjoy watching in films, was a non entity in it. Her character was one dimensional and boring. She might as well have not been there at all.

Al Pacino, why did you do this movie? He is an amazing actor with amazing credits to his name. But this? Really?

The jokes were pointless and not funny. I'm really tired of 'fart' jokes. Been there, done that. Not funny.

The only funny part of the film was Jack's son, he had a couple of funny lines. Basically the only time I laughed was when he was on screen doing something.

If I had paid for this movie, I would have walked out to get my money back. As it was, I sat finished my popcorn, pop and thought, "Free tickets were too expensive to be here." Do yourselves a favour, skip this movie and do ANYTHING else.

Was the above review useful to you?

191 out of 238 people found the following review useful:

torture

1/10
Author: jitzcovitz from United States
11 November 2011

The only reason I went to see this atrocity was because my nine year old daughter really wanted to see it and I'm able to get through some of these terrible movies (i.e. Zookeeper) because she's having fun throughout the movie. Even though she enjoyed the movie I was counting the minutes until it ended. Every scene, every line every moment of this 'movie' was unfunny, awkward, unrealistic (even for an unrealistic movie) and seriously unentertaining (not a word I know). Just when I thought the movie was over, it makes you sit through these stupid clips of real life twins saying 'funny' things about being a twin. IT LASTS THROUGH TILL THE END OF THE CREDITS! This movie is meant to hurt you for paying to see it. Even worse than Old Dogs....seriously!

Was the above review useful to you?

152 out of 186 people found the following review useful:

Sandler put the "F U" in 'Failure"

1/10
Author: Vaughn Fry (Legendary_Badass) from United States
10 November 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Jack is a highly successful director of television commercials. For Thanksgiving his outlandish twin sister Jill (Sandler, again) comes to visit. Despite efforts to get her to leave, matters get complicated when Jill catches the eye of famed actor Al Pacino, whom Jack needs to convince to star in a commercial… I guess. What Jack and Jill is really all about is Sandler's effort to exact revenge against moviegoers.

Drag is not a good look for Sandler, and it should be no surprise that he is unfunny as a woman. The jokes featured in Jack and Jill have the range of an infant golfer. Committing to a viewing of Jack and Jill is almost a misogynist effort. All manners of humiliation beset Jill. She takes damage to the head, gets groped, has her skirt looked up, and if the sound is telling she may even have her bowels destroyed. Pure class, that Adam Sandler.

So not only is Jack and Jill an offensive PG comedy, it's structurally broken. Jill appears on the scene way too fast, in under five minutes. No build up to her arrival, no clever use of music from The Cars —from what I can gather Sandler's favorite band—for her reveal. Jill also has a tendency to run off into the woods, which at first is random. Lastly for what is billed as a holiday movie, Chanukah is glossed over through a montage and I'm not even sure how Thanksgiving lasted as long as a dinner scene.

It's obvious that Pacino has no business being in this film, but what's really at stake are the remains of Sandler's reputation. If Sandler ever wonders why he can't get an Oscar nomination, all he has to do is look back at the selfish decisions he has made. Jack and Jill is not a script, or even a concept, that deserves a read. It's like a fake movie found within Funny People that was replaced with the more imaginative "Merman". Yet, Sandler turned it into a movie that will surely pay him upfront over $20 million.

The awesome mess that is Jack and Jill is so wrought with issues that this reviewer can only stand to offer some bullet points for the lesser offenders. Katie Holmes is in this movie. David Spade is a better woman than Sandler. Jack has an adopted son whose entire bit is taping found objects onto his body.

The character of Al Pacino has a line that inadvertently summarizes Jack and Jill. After watching his cheesy song and dance number in a Dunkin' Donuts commercial, Pacino turns to Jack and says, "This needs to be burned."

Was the above review useful to you?

109 out of 122 people found the following review useful:

Sandler's Career May Never Recover

1/10
Author: Candace
10 December 2011

I sincerely wish I could erase this film from my memory. I love Adam Sandler, and yes, he's had a couple of bad films but this one is so bad I believe his career might actually end because of it.

The constant shrieking of Jill is unbearable, and were we really meant to take Sandler's female character seriously? Or was this film only meant to be "funny" because Sandler's in drag? I've still not figured that out, and I don't think I'll devote much more time to doing so.

This film led me to create my IMDb account because if what I've said here can keep even one person from paying to see it then I feel it will have been worth writing.

Cheers.

Was the above review useful to you?

121 out of 151 people found the following review useful:

Absolutely TERRIBLE!!!

1/10
Author: importuner923 from Ohio
12 November 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I went to see this movie with my girlfriend and to be honest wasn't expecting much. But man is this movie awful. None of the "jokes" if you can call it that were funny at all. Some actually cringe worthy. If you want a quick answer then here it is: don't waste your money don't see this movie! To elaborate The character Jill should have been played by a female actress for one thing. I realized that was part of the gag that Adam Sandler played both parts so they would be identical but really it just makes the movie worse. Sandler's interpretation of a female voice is so bad and annoying it makes you want to punch him in the face to shut him up. This is one of those rare movies where I actually wanted to get up and leave the theater. And I haven't seen a movie like that for a while.

Was the above review useful to you?

103 out of 121 people found the following review useful:

Sandler's House of Stupid

Author: keiichi73 from United States
12 November 2011

Is it me, or are Adam Sandler movies getting stupider with each passing one? Oh sure, Sandler's sense of humor has been pretty dumb from the beginning, sometimes in an enjoyable way. But lately, his movies seem to be reaching for a lower form of humor than I even knew existed. I'm guessing it won't take long until we get a movie comprised of nothing but Sandler sitting on the toilet and belching for 90 minutes straight.

But, I'm here to talk about Jack and Jill, a stupefyingly dumb comedy that places Sandler in a dual role as both an uptight ad executive and family man, as well as his loud, obnoxious sister. The movie was a miscalculation from the start. Seeing Sandler dressed in drag and talking in a whiny voice probably would have been pushing it in a three minute sketch back in his Saturday Night Live days. In a 90 minute movie, the performance is excruciating. Was there no one around to stop him and tell him the performance, and the character in general, was just a bad idea? No one to say that it just wasn't funny? Seeing a movie like this makes you want to sit Sandler down, and make him watch his performances in Punch Drunk Love, Spanglish, Funny People, and Reign Over Me to remind him that he is so much better than this.

The plot (such as it is) concerns Jill (the sister) coming to visit her brother Jack and his family for Thanksgiving. She's only supposed to be there for a few days, but she extends her vacation time, and winds up staying almost to New Years. During that time, we get a lot of toilet humor (much more than a PG-rated comedy aimed at kids needs), a ton of product placements (How much did Dunkin' Donuts pay to get their brand worked into the plot of the movie? And would it have been better for business if they had just stayed out of the movie all together?), and a lot of celebrity cameos that include Sandler's friends, as well as some big names cashing a paycheck. The cameos in this film include David Spade (in drag, no less), Dana Carvey, Johnny Depp, Regis Philbin, John McEnroe, Shaquille O'Neal, Drew Carey, Christie Brinkley, and Bruce Jenner. Oh, and then there's Al Pacino.

Yes, I said Al Pacino. Only he's not making a cameo, he's a main supporting character. He plays a caricature of himself as a raving oddball who speaks gibberish in order to fool people he can speak other languages, and becomes inexplicably attracted to Jill when he happens to meet her at a basketball game. Jill has no interest in Pacino, but Jack's ad agency wants to hire the actor for a Dunkin' Donut campaign, so he tries to bring the two together. When Jill further resists, Jack is forced to dress up as his sister and be seduced by Pacino. But never mind. The important thing is Pacino gets the film's only laughs, because he tackles the material head-on and with full passion. He obviously knows this material is stupid, but he gives such an energetic performance, you sometimes find yourself laughing, even if what he says isn't that funny. Say what you will about his decision to appear in this movie, but he earns every cent of that paycheck when he appears in trash like this.

Outside of Pacino's off the wall performance, I can't say I laughed very much at Jack and Jill. The movie's just not that funny. Don't tell that to the guy who was sitting two rows behind me at my screening, though. Every tired pratfall, every loud fart that blasted on the soundtrack, and every knock to the head caused him to erupt in extremely loud fits of laughter, stomping of feet, and slapping his knees. I wanted to ask him what he found so funny about the movie. Most of all, I wanted to be enjoying myself as much as he was. That's obviously the intention of the movie. It wants to make us laugh and forget our problems for 90 minutes or so. That's admirable. But it fails on both counts. My guess as to the reaction of the man sitting behind me? He's been locked away somewhere for a very long time, and has never seen a movie in his life.

I won't go so far as to say that Jack and Jill is the worst comedy of the year, as there's much worse out there. But, it's certainly one of the most annoying. This is the kind of movie where the filmmakers started with the idea of Sandler playing brother and sister, and then stopped there, not developing the screenplay, characters, or the jokes. Considering that the initial idea wasn't that hot to start with, maybe they shouldn't have even gone as far as they did.

Was the above review useful to you?

117 out of 149 people found the following review useful:

Officially the worst film of the year.

Author: DJRMewzique from Canada
10 November 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

What in god's name has made the great Al Pacino THIS desperate? Now, no one on this planet would ever go into an Adam Sandler film expecting something brilliant, but generally, at worst, his films are stupidly entertaining. However, his latest film, "Jack and Jill" is so astoundingly horrible, I am not even sure how to articulate how truly bad it is in a way I will capture the remorse one will feel for having spent money to see it.

I went to the premiere, so all it cost me was (a thankfully short) ninety-three minutes.

This time around, Adam Sandler plays a commercial producer whose twin sister, also played by Sandler, comes to visit and...and... You know, I am not even going to waste time describing the plot of this film as it's not ever important enough to bother mention, but it involves cameos by all sorts of (evidently desperate) people from Sandler's impressive rolodex...including Al Pacino.

Yep, Sandler's rolodex is the only impressive thing to note about this film.

If you have seen the trailer, you have seen any and all even remotely noteworthy moments from this otherwise act of tedium. It is not funny, it is not clever, it is not even so bad, it's tolerable. Every single thing about this film is beyond grating.

Seriously. Up until now, the year's worst film was "Red Riding Hood." This film makes that one seem like an artistic stroke of genius. I was uncomfortable just watching it as I wondered what every single why every single person on screen did in their lives to agree to be a part of this...train wreck. Hell, even a train wreck deserves curiosity.

AND on top of all this, it stars KATIE HOLMES. That alone bears noting that if you are dumb enough to still see this film, make sure you have nothing lethal within arm's reach.

Was the above review useful to you?

109 out of 142 people found the following review useful:

Jacked to the Hilt! DON"T SEE!

Author: ladymoonpictures
11 November 2011

It literally is AWFUL. I don't know, I seem to always confuse Stiler with Sandler, when I don't see one of Sandler's movies for a long time, then pay dearly! I mean payment in waste of time, unfunny skits, fart jokes and generally Sandler doesn't get it. Yea, I know, he continues to make money, but this movie is the worst of the year. Promise! Now, even though I get in free, we were passing time till we'd see "J. Edgar." While we didn't lose money, I got so frustrated because this pap was wasting my time by being so completely unentertaining, I even had difficulty in saying, "Well, at least we didn't have to pay for it!" No, I STILL felt cheated. What a total waste of theater space, not to mention the out of place, stupid cameos at the twins birthday party that falls flat. Go see ANYTHING else!

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 25:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

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