IMDb > Liz & Dick (2012) (TV) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Liz & Dick
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
Liz & Dick (TV) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 7:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [Next]
Index 68 reviews in total 

62 out of 74 people found the following review useful:

It's all in the speech

2/10
Author: lhalan from United States
25 November 2012

This movie dispels all the mystery and magic around this star-spun couple, here portrayed as rich drunks in a whirlwind of self-absorbed emotion. However, the diction of Grant Bowler is remarkably Burtonesque while Lindsay Lohan cannot rise above the California valley. Taylor spoke with distinction--slowly, somewhat deliberately, and with a stylishly youthful twist in her young to middle years. Lohan mumbles and sprints through her lines with her now nasal-bound voice. I mostly blame the director for missing this most important feature of the legendary Taylor. This movie is a hot mess that grows worse with every scene. It is surely destined for Saturday Night Live.

Was the above review useful to you?

70 out of 98 people found the following review useful:

Amateurish with a Capital "A"

1/10
Author: sandy-340 from United States
25 November 2012

Not for one minute was Lohan believable in the role as Taylor. This role should have been given to a seasoned actress at least in her 30s. Lohan mostly looked like a little kid playing dress-up with her mother's makeup. And what was with her puffy-looking lips? And her double chin? And the AWFUL hair/wigs? And the fake eyelashes that always looked like they were about to fall off? Whomever wrote the script obviously has no talent. It was worse than shallow. There were so many mistakes and the characters were never fleshed out; they only scratched the surface of who these two really were. Elizabeth Taylor was a complex woman. Lohan is arguably just a one-hit wonder whose acting ability is extremely limited, if it exists at all. Her raspy deep-throated voice is in stark contrast to Taylor's elegant way of speaking. Not to mention the obvious: Taylor was one of the most beautiful women of all time. Lohan is a 20-something child with mediocre looks. And the freckles made her look even more like a cartoon character. It's a shame she was cast in this role - they used her for publicity knowing the movie would end up being nothing more than a silly parody.

Was the above review useful to you?

45 out of 54 people found the following review useful:

It would be better with her voice filtered out

2/10
Author: Joanie from MiddleMass.
25 November 2012

As has been noted, Bowler evokes Burton with his voice. He has studied him, has it down. Lohan does not sound like Taylor at all, does not bring anything that remotely captures the essence of the woman to this film pairing. She just careens through her lines as if a superficial physical resemblance was all that mattered. And her inability to evoke Elizabeth is a constant irritant. There is nothing in this performance that gives a clue as to why they were attracted to one another...or if they really were. I kept listening for a resemblance in the voice, in the bearing..it just was not there. I found myself thinking at one point that Michael Jackson could have done a better job, as he sure had studied the woman. Painful.

Was the above review useful to you?

44 out of 61 people found the following review useful:

Uncomfortably Awkward Performance

2/10
Author: marcia muldoon from United States
26 November 2012

Lohan was not remotely believable as Liz Taylor. For one, Taylor had a remarkably unique voice with a bit of an English accent since she was born in the UK. Taylor's voice was soft, airy, almost girlish and full of drama. Lohan made no attempt to sound even remotely like Taylor. Lohan's voice is husky like she's smoked too many cigarettes. Lohan sounded like a hardened truck driver without any of the femininity that made Liz Taylor so attractive. In this film, Lohan talked way too fast--she giggled in the wrong places and frowned oddly at the wrong moments. Lohan didn't project any authenticity at all.

Lohan's mannerisms, gestures and facial expressions didn't match the emotional moments she was suppose to be portraying throughout this film. It was like she was rushing through each scene so she could go somewhere more important rather than stick around and try to perform in this dumb movie.

Taylor's body was very curvy--most of her adult life she struggled with overweight, yet, she always projected a raw sexuality that jumped off the screen. Also, Taylor had huge breasts. That's one thing Burton used to say he loved about Taylor. Yet, Lohan appeared scrawny and flat chested in many scenes, as she moved clumsily around trying desperately to be sexy.

Overall, Lohan's performance was almost laughable--sort of a cartoon version of the remarkable Liz Taylor.

The guy who played Richard Burton was much better than Lohan. He is gorgeous. But, this actor had a lousy script to deal with and Lohan to interact with, so he struggled to be believable.

The script was superficial and flimsy.

My grade for the film is a C- verging into D.

Was the above review useful to you?

30 out of 40 people found the following review useful:

Lacks the usual cheesiness and charm that can be found in Lifetime movies

3/10
Author: sayaterian from Houston, TX
26 November 2012

We watch a lot of Lifetime movies. My family swears by them. However, even by Lifetime movie standards, this movie is an absolute put-on production. I expected some level of awkwardness and wince inducing dialogue, but usually there was redeem-ability in the storyline or "charm factor". This movie had all the potential to be something great, but in the end it was too unbelievable and scarce in good qualities to be redeemable.

It can't be blamed on just one person's performance, but I would put a vast majority of the blame on Lindsay Lohan, the script and the production.

Grant Bowler showed a lot of potential and often it either seemed like he was either the only one actually acting in a scene (with Lohan) or he was trying to illicit some kind of emotional reaction in her performances that her responses to this was almost always met with a flat note. You could completely feel and see the disconnect between them and their own personal expectations. I felt like he put in his all and that he was trying his best to stay in character, but her personality was far more visible and opague than her acting on any level that the believability was just not there. I found myself feeling pity for him and the rest of the cast, but often the bad dialogue just amplified these problems ten-fold.

The sense of time/space was very vague too. Scenes would change often but you had no idea how time had progressed. There was no real feel of what time period you were in or the energy of the era you were living in. Many of the scenes looked the same or the vibe was always the same. You had to rely on the text that would appear that would tell you the shift in time, but I looked away at one point and found myself totally lost time-wise in the film. This made the film feel like it was crawling to finish and made it feel like they hadn't finished editing. Almost like they didn't get enough good scenes, they just decided to put in what made the most sense time-wise, but it was just snapshot moment after snapshot... it felt more like you were going through a change-of-set at a high school play than a cinematic transition like really any movie.

Looking back, had they cast someone more reliable than Lindsay Lohan in terms of acting and personality, they would've stood a better chance of finding someone whose chemistry would've matched Grant Bowler's acting. This film probably would not have struggled so much to make the dialogue work. However, her acting felt 'rushed' as there was no real energy there and she was sleep walking through the scenes.

On the plus side, my interest in Elizabeth Taylor grew so much after this film because I felt like it did her so little justice... Lindsay especially made Taylor seem more estranged to the viewer after her performances. For anyone who wants to know more about Elizabeth Taylor, they would do better to read a biography and watch a few of her movies than to watch this film... this film does her little justice.

Was the above review useful to you?

29 out of 39 people found the following review useful:

Sorry Liz, you don't deserve this

1/10
Author: Bkw150163 from United States
26 November 2012

I am in shock that this movie ever aired.

How can anyone think Lindsay Lohan could play Liz Taylor. She can't hold a candle to her. I was born in 1963 and something draw me to Liz and Dick. It was one of those love stories you couldn't pass on.

I was so excited when they remarried.

This movie is not even worth me talking about it and I am so glad that neither Liz nor Richard have to see it.

Liz, we will not remember you by this movie, but by the person you were.

Beautiful, an icon, unforgettable movies, and a real bad perfume ;-)

Was the above review useful to you?

22 out of 28 people found the following review useful:

I would like to say something good about this movie

2/10
Author: jsaus63304 from United States
26 November 2012

but I really can't When I saw the trailers, I thought it had promise. I saw scenes where it actually looked like Liz and Dick, but those were about the only resemblances I saw. The script was pretty thin and the acting was pretty pitiful. The script did cover their turbulent lives, but did not provide us with any information that we did not already know. Of course, if you are a bit younger than I am, you may have missed their trials and tribulation. If fact, you may not even know who they were and probably do not care. This movie will in no way inspire you to look further into their lives.

For me, the high point of the whole thing was when Burton died because I knew that the movie was about to be over. Skip this one.

Was the above review useful to you?

22 out of 28 people found the following review useful:

If EL James Wrote Liz Taylor Fanfic, This Is It

1/10
Author: eightbitgirl from United States
25 November 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Literally one of the worst things I've ever seen, and I've seen Manos: The Hands of Fate without the assistance of MST3K.

Look, I went into it with zero expectations. None whatsoever. It's a Lifetime movie, the kind I invite my girlfriends over to watch with some wine and popcorn and it's usually just a hilariously over the top, fun time. Not so much with this.

To be honest, it felt like this was someone's coke-fueled fan fiction. There was no time to give a crap about anyone, because of the crazy editing and scenes that lasted an average of ~20 seconds. Someone died! Who was it, because nobody made an effort to develop any characters.

Here's what the titular characters do: Drink, smoke, have sex, and fight. Repeat ad nauseam. At some point they're supposed to get divorced a second time but according to this film, he dies first! I don't even know. It was terrible.

Grant Bowler tried, he really did, but man - and I feel AWFUL saying this - Lindsay Lohan is done. She cannot act to save her life, and I was too focused on her atrocious accent and curious cheek fillers to even pay attention to her when she attempted to act.

Was the above review useful to you?

24 out of 33 people found the following review useful:

nothing to summarize

1/10
Author: eaglerock-538-869373 from United States
25 November 2012

Simply put, there have got to be 2 better actors in the world, even unknowns - that could have done better than these 2. Lindsey Lohan was absolutely atrocious. She has no business calling herself an actress.

The Richard Burton wasn't as bad yet his lines were awful. I am sure there are better writers out there somewhere. They just simply did not want to write for this movie.

The movie simply took two iconic movie stars and failed to create a movie around them. Then, placing Lindsey Lohan as Elizabeth Taylor was a total failure. It would have been better to select a totally unknown actress that had some fire and passion as well as acting ability rather than Lohan.

It would have been nice to see this movie with the least bit of talent and presence on the screen. And, with a talented writer as well.

Oh well, I guess that is why it was only shown on Lifetime...no one else wanted it. Now we all know why.

Don't waste your time watching it.

Was the above review useful to you?

22 out of 30 people found the following review useful:

A Tempest in a Teapot

3/10
Author: wes-connors from Earth
26 November 2012

As we begin, the aged Shakespearean actor Grant Bowler (as Richard "Dick" Burton) appears to be near his death bed, writing a letter to Hollywood temptress Lindsay Lohan (as Elizabeth "Liz" Taylor). We flashback to their 1961 meeting, while beginning the epic "Cleopatra" (1963). He is smitten. She plays hard-to-get, but succumbs quickly. Both are married, which causes great scandal. "Liz & Dick" get married and divorced, twice. They drink a considerable amount of liquor and burn countless cigarettes, which are the common denominators as the jaded couple travel around the world...

This was promoted as a blockbuster film event, but turns out to be a substandard TV-movie. The reason for the hype was Ms. Lohan's (then) status as a celebrity. Her public escapades would seem to suggest she might bring some depth to the role, but it does not happen. Her "Elizabeth" is not as entertaining as the original, by a long shot...

The make-up successfully suggests Ms. Taylor, though it also changes Lohan into both Natalie Wood and Suzanne Pleshette, as the years roll along. The script most obviously lacks Ms. Taylor's sense of humor - and her fondness for frequent obscenities. Her co-star is likewise restrained. One of the better sequences, directed by Lloyd Kramer, occurs when the couple play "rock the trailer" while spouses Eddie Fisher and Sybil Burton arrive on the set. Confusingly pieced together, "Liz & Dick" ends quickly and without any sense of the famous couple's friendship. There simply isn't much story here.

*** Liz & Dick (11/25/12) Lloyd Kramer ~ Lindsay Lohan, Grant Bowler, David Hunt, Theresa Russell

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 7:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

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