New Year's Eve (2011) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
139 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
'New Year's Eve' felt mechanical and forced, a project merely designed for profit. This is rather a 118 minute tourist video about how wonderful The Big Apple is
The Upcoming7 December 2011
After his last holiday-themed box-office smash Valentine's Day in 2010, director Garry Marshall has carbon-copied the exact same formula for his latest film New Year's Eve which uses its gigantic ensemble cast to document various different relationships and states of emotions over the course of a single day and night in New York City.

The story lines include: a couple awaiting the birth of their child, two people who become trapped together in an elevator and a gentleman who is trying to enjoy his last New Year's Eve on earth as he sadly lays on his deathbed.

Much like Valentine's Day, Marshall's latest film seems to forget the importance of character development and indeed sure-footed narrative; these films feel like the audience are watching Ashton Kutcher flirt with Lea Michele, or Zac Efron helping Michelle Pfeiffer, which – in all honesty – they are. Never are viewers able to break away from the celebrities portraying these supposed characters, which cause great issues when trying to build and present emotion.

The film also has some bizarre cast members, including the incredibly pointless Jon Bon Jovi who slinks about, and may as well be promoting a new Greatest Hits album when he enters the frame. Stars like Halle Berry and Robert De Niro are incredibly redundant here, even though they do benefit from moderate screen-time. Performers like De Niro are worthy of a solid script and something more important to do rather than just stand around holding a theoretical sign saying 'And Robert De Niro'.

Contrary to the opinion of the majority of critics (or males), 'Valentine's Day' was yes fluffy, gooey and forgettable two hours, but also entertaining. It did try very slightly to be different – with a gay romance amongst other things – and whilst this was all still "Hollywood", there were far worse movies released in 2010.

To be fair to 'New Year's Eve', it is not amongst the worst of the year. This might be due to the fact that most of the audience had or have extremely low expectations upon arrival. Expecting a film to be bad makes it all the less painful if the final product is indeed poor and consequently, makes it seem much better than it truly is if a viewer is not disappointed.

'New Year's Eve' felt mechanical and forced, a project merely designed for profit – there is no love nor compassion, no credibility nor realism. This is rather a 118 minute tourist video about how wonderful The Big Apple is, and how beautiful the people who reside in it are. Throw in disgusting amounts of product placement and an old rock star, and hey, you've got a $100 million motion picture! Spend your £8 at the cinema this Christmas on a film that gives like 'Hugo' rather than this, and save the holiday romances for 'Love Actually' on DVD with the family or partner.

Verdict: •• It is better if Marshall does not attempt to make another movie about a commercial holiday again. If we see a trailer with Kutcher dressed as the Easter Bunny for love next year, run for your life.

For more The Upcoming reviews http://www.theupcoming.co.uk/category/culture/cinema/
107 out of 135 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Really enjoyable
natygance21 December 2011
I don't think I understand people at all. I watched it despite all the bad reviews and I didn't regret it. I'm starting to think people are really bitter, it's a really sweet movie about new years and how people feel around that time of the year, it actually gave me a warm feeling, so yes, it's not a deep smart full of effects movie, but sometimes people need a movie like this, I'm all against unchallenging movies, but I don't think this was the case at all. It's the perfect new year movie, that gives you hope for the year to come and live everyday fully. The variety of characters is okay, as you get to know them enough to see a little bit of yourself in them or not,and it's really interesting to see what different people go through at that time of the year and how they feel and what they hope to change. It really is a warm,hopeful movie, at least that's the way I saw it.Sometimes we need to take a break and take a deep breath, that's the movie.
80 out of 105 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
2/10
New Years Heave
nathan-hooper7 December 2011
The trouble with ensemble comedies - romantic or otherwise - is that the audience is given little time to develop a relationship with any of their characters. This is certainly the case with Garry Marshall's seasonal effort New Years Eve, but the problems with the film are far from done there.

Stuck somewhere between a 'Visit New York' advert and meandering rom-com, few of the movies plots are linked and many are only hastily so at the end of the movie, almost as an afterthought. The film is incredibly low on laughs of any variety and despite - or perhaps because of - its huge star cast it never feels like its going anywhere, much like the Times Square ball which gets as much screen time as anybody.

The characterisation is incredibly lazy; Ashton Kutcher plays a pyjama-wearing stoner cartoonist, Zac Efron is the plucky young go-getter, De Niro (who will sign up for anything these days) is the grumpy old coot. These typecasts are bad enough before Lea Michele appears essentially playing Rachel Berry from Glee, replete with the screeching vocal performances. The cherry on top of the cake, however, is Michelle Pfeiffer who re-enacts her performance in Batman Returns as kooky wallflower Selina Kyle; to my immense disappointment she never became Catwoman and proceeded to whip up any sense of excitement.

The one positive thing I could say about this film is that it isn't offensively bad, except I cant because three of the precious few non-white, non-American characters are horrendously bad racial stereotypes. I'll leave you to spot them should you have the misfortune of having to endure this vapid exercise in futility.
89 out of 123 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
3/10
A Sequel to Valentine's Day!
eldestjay10 December 2011
What? It's not a sequel to Valentine's Day? 

Let's be honest here. There was absolutely NO reason to make this movie. Well, maybe one: money. During a viewing of this excruciatingly painful melo-dramedy, one will find absolutely no artistic value, underlying message, or actual creative backbone. This film is just an excuse to slap a couple of famous face in front of the same camera, within the same period of time. You know what that's called on the set of a good movie? Bad casting. 

I can't believe someone made the same mistakes that were made just a year or two ago! When I first saw the poster, I thought "Is this a  parody?". But then I saw who was directing this prick of a film. 

Garry Marshall: Probably the single most desperate man in America. I am convinced that his last and final wish (let's be honest, he's not exactly in his twenties) is to meet as many famous people as he can; and what does that leave the helpless moviegoers with? The atrocities that were (and still are) Valentine's Day and New Years Eve. 

Looking for a fun holiday film to put a spring in your step, and a sparkle in your smile? Then spend your ten bucks elsewhere, because this movie is not worth the dough. 

The whole thing is a jumbled mess of popular actresses of today, and a few familiar faces that we all know. Then of course your Ashton Kutcher and your Jessica Biel who insist upon us that "Yes look, we're still famous! We promise!" 

Well I don't need it. I don't need it, and I encourage everyone to stray far away from this badly written, far-fetched, soap cushion of a love story that sincerely wants to be literally everything that it's not. It's a drama for people who don't like dramas, a comedy for people who don't like comedies, and a romance for people who don't like romance. Not worth a second of your time.
69 out of 95 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
2/10
Vapid, ridiculous and lacking quality.
Troy_Campbell8 December 2011
The latest in a long line of vapid group ensemble romcoms quickly becoming popular in Hollywood – Valentine's Day, He's Just Not That Into You, etc, etc – is devoid of anything even remotely resembling quality movie-making or quality entertainment. It's a hodgepodge of inane mini stories, hammy acting, ridiculous moralising and ludicrous plotting all converging to produce a sickly sweet holiday flick that should be avoided by all. I'm not sure what's more disconcerting, that Valentine's Day was triumphant enough at the box office to warrant this semi-spin off or that some of the usually terrific actors present here – Michelle Pfeiffer, Hilary Swank, Abigail Breslin, Halle Berry, Robert De Niro – decided to sign on the dotted line for this junk. Give this puke-fest a miss or you may actually want to skip the real New Year's Eve this year.
124 out of 180 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
2/10
A Nutshell Review: New Year's Eve
DICK STEEL10 December 2011
I'm speculating that one of the reasons why New Year's Eve got pushed up so early in the month is because come that time of the season everyone will be out there merry making rather than to head to the cinemas and probably revel in whatever festivities the welcoming of the new year will bring, instead of watching something that failed to capture the mood and spirit of leaving behind the old and being hopeful for what the new year would hold. Yes, for all its celebratory mood seen in the trailer, the actual product is nothing more than a really boring affair culminating in the New York Times Square ball drop at the stroke of midnight.

Garry Marshall continues from his festival theme film Valentine's Day with yet another ensemble that rounds up some of the hottest folks in Hollywood, playing caricatures in 8 short stories that you know will link up one way or another, either through characters or through events. There's Ingrid (Michelle Pfeiffer) the mousy secretary of a music executive (John Lithgow) who quit her job to fulfill her New Year's resolution with the help of a courier boy (Zac Efron). Then we have Robert De Niro as a patient on his death bed persuading his doctor (Cary Elwes) and his nurse (Halle Berry) to let him see the countdown from the rooftop of the hospital. Jessica Biel and Seth Meyers play a couple who are expecting their child, and are in competition with another couple played by Sarah Paulson and Til Schweiger to produce the first New Year's baby to walk away with 25 thousand, engaging the help of Carla Gugino's spiritual doctor.

Leaving the hospital and into the hottest party in town, there's food caterer Laura (Katherine Heigl) who has to contend with rock star Jensen (Jon Bon Jovi) who is trying his utmost to win her back after walking out on her a year ago, with tired comedy contributed by her chefs played by Sofia Vergara and Russell Peters. Jensen's backup singer Elise (Lea Michele) finds herself stuck in a lift with the indifferent Randy (Ashton Kutcher) while en route to the performance. Sarah Jessica Parker and Abigail Breslin play a protective mother and daughter pair where the latter is trying to seek permission to spend the night out with her friends. Hillary Swank plays the executive of the ball drop event which has hit a snag, with Ludicrous as her police confidante, and rounding it all up is Josh Duhamel as a music mogul apprehensive whether he'll meet the woman of his dreams once more.

And throw in a couple more big names from Ryan Seacrest to cameos like Matthew Broderick and even Michael Bloomberg himself against the backdrop of Times Square, and the stage's all set for one heck of a party, not. Most of the stories here, written by Katherine Fugate, seemed more like an exercise to pack as many characters as possible without digging deeper in to the emotions on why such a day on the calendar is such a big deal. While Valentine's Day may have it easier since any romantic tale will fit the bill, how do you do one for New Year's, and to do so successfully, and convincingly? If not for the bevy of stars, this film would have fallen flat on its face because there's nothing absolutely compelling in the stories that you'd root for anyone to succeed in fulfilling their objectives before the new year kicks in.

It's dull and uninspiring, with no real emotion on display despite the wealth of talent at its disposal. The one I really wanted to laugh out loud at, is that of the Josh Duhamel arc involving a guy pining for a woman whom he had described a magical meeting that got etched permanently in his mind. This served as the hook to engage until the end, but what an anti-climatic let down when the identity got revealed, because throughout the film every other female character was of a lot more positive in attitude that the final chosen one, and worse, seemed to be forced into it because her character arc was simply the most atrocious of the lot. I never understood her appeal, and when she appeared in the end to close the loop, I'd swear I'd rather shoot myself if that was something that can happen in real life.

New Year's Eve was a tad too long in dragging out its scenes so that each arc has about an equal amount of time without one upstaging another, but all in all this film has one purpose and one purpose only - to serve as product placement, in almost every shot you'd see a brand name sticking out. You'd get a lot more cheer in actually getting outside and making merry with strangers, than to be stuck in a cinema hall watching this depressingly bad film. Pick something else instead if you crave for ensemble films.
48 out of 66 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Just Awful
topbearau28 December 2011
For the first time ever I have been forced to write a review about a movie, because I don't want everyone to spend money of this diabolical piece of work.

What a waste of a superb cast. There is not ONE redeeming feature of this movie. Total waste of my time just to get to the theatre to watch it. I was gone after an excruciating 40 minutes. Don't let the big names fool you. They are ALL way off the mark, but that is to be expected with such a bad script and, oh God, where was the director?.

A big red light and a solid warning..give this a huge miss.If it was free- to-air I'd still change channel.
24 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
2/10
Drivel
Evansja1112 December 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I wanted to give this film 1 out of 10, but there was a single poignant scene starring Halle Berry that provided the only depth of character in the entire film.

Otherwise, this movie is a disaster. The storyline is obvious and pathetic, the characters are so weak that you don't feel any sympathy for their respective plights, and the film lacks any sense of being genuine.

I just wanted it to end, and spent much of the time rolling my eyes with disbelief that actors as strong as this ensemble cast had been presented with such dreadful dialogue and such weak characters.

This film made Valentine's Day look good (an incredible feat) and both films were clearly an attempt at an American version of Love Actually, which both utterly failed.

Don't waste 2 hours of your life on this drivel.
26 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
4/10
Too many story lines make New Years Eve a bit of a dud.
Jimmy Collins10 December 2011
I rather enjoy the odd ensemble comedy such as this film, I somewhat enjoyed Valentines Day and I really enjoyed He's Just Not That Into You, but what those film had but this doesn't is a fewer amount of plot lines. There's just too much going on in this film, far too many characters, as soon as I found myself interested in one plot its segment would end, you can never get really attached to one set of characters.

For me the best storyline was the Michelle Pfieffer and Zefron plot, it was really the only one with a bit of substance, I actually think a full movie of that story would be great, also the Jessica Biel and Seth Meyers plot was rather funny thanks to the highly underrated Ms Biel. This movie is entertaining enough I suppose but it's also lacking any real great laugh out loud moments, the only time I laughed was when Jessica Biel was in labour, she could do some great comedy if given the chance.

Lea Michele manages to bring her great screen charisma to the big screen, she is very fun to watch and her rendition of Aude Lang Syne was lovely and a nice way to end the movie.

If this movie had about four or five less stories happening this movie would have been much better, it's not horrible by any standards but it's not excellent either, also this may sound mean but Sofia Vergara is possibly the most annoying actress alive, at least they didn't put a decent actress in the most annoying role in the film. I mean it's worth paying to see the excellent dance scene between Zefron and Pfieffer over the end credits.

OK, but basically it's exactly the same as Valentines Day but with more actors and a lot less substance.

Enjoy. Maybe.
28 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Appalling
snookies122417 January 2012
Full of names, names and more names. I expected to be disappointed but it was oh, so much more.

A movie NOT worth watching, not even for free on the TV, unless you think drinking castor oil might be fun. Made me wonder how all those names ever made a name.

Bad writing, casting, acting, directing, editing. APPALLING movie, worse than porn, amusing only in its appalling-ness ... and all those big names being appalling, some by association, some just because they are Sarah Jessica Parker. My god, that woman should move to the south pole and stay there. Can't believe someone thought it would be a good idea to let her breed ...
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Just don't watch it.
Bea Isaacson2 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I'm going to be honest. I liked Valentine's Day. Sure, it was as predictable as the UK Christmas No. 1, but it was cute and cheesy and sweet and your typical fluffy Valentine's Day movie. But first of all. What is a New Year's Eve movie? Seriously, who came up with the idea of a movie about New Year's Eve? New Year's Eve is pretty much a night where teenagers and young adults go to parties and make out, families go to awkward parties at Aunt Pamela's, there's a big countdown, but it's not that big a deal. New Year's Eve is a celebration of the upcoming year, and apart from a speech by Hilary Swank's character, they don't even touch on that. So the story is about ten or fifteen people who are somehow linked together. We don't know how or why, and by half way, I just wanted it to end. They all play the most ridiculous, under-developed, bland characters, who lead into a story but then stop to make room for another half-hearted character. The actors- most of them past their sell-by date, like Kutcher, Biel, Heigl- just prove why they're in this attention-seeking, made purely for money movie instead of something with depth. To be honest, I'm disappointed in Abigail Breslin and Jake T. Austin, who actually show promise. They're also incredibly annoying, especially Sarah Jessica Parker's character. I don't even know her name, do they even mention it? And Heigl's character manages another scene stuffing her face, you just want to punch Bon Jovi for being so annoying, and Sofia Vegara, who is hilarious in Modern Family, seems to be the only hum-our there, and even those jokes are straight out of her Modern Family character, Gloria. It's an hour and a half of awkward kisses, guys getting off with fifty year old women, stories being abandoned half way and celebrities who have, now, hit rock bottom. This probably was the worst movie I have ever watched.
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
2/10
Terrible
mark6353 December 2012
Do NOT bother with this over-budgeted, poorly-written, over-acted, hammy waste of film stock. This movie was so bad it made me long for infinitely better movies like Barney's Great Adventure and Ed (note sarcasm).

Too many story lines (if you can even call them that)+too many stars=a complete crap fest.

I thought Zac Efron was terrible (not sure it was his acting more than it was the awful lines that were written for him). Michelle Pfeiffer (who is usually smoking hot) looked absolutely awful (I'm thinking this was on purpose since her character was basically worn out with life in general). Completely forgettable performances by all involved (would give Hector Elizondo a pass but his accent was a miss).

I usually like Gary Marshall films, but this one was a "worthless steaming pile of cow dung...figuratively speaking."

To sum up--other than the gratuitous shots of NYC, this movie has no redeeming qualities whatsoever. You'd be better off sticking a hot needle in your eye. At least then you'd be blinded and unable to view this crap fest.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Not Celebrating New Year's Eve
Catt Jones9 December 2011
There were so many stars in this film that it felt like a Hollywood casting office. This film was a jumble of story lines that somehow crashes together in the end. I really like all the actors in the film, but the film itself lacked substance. I think that director Garry Marshall took it a little too far when he got Matthew Broderick to make a cameo appearance as Mr. Buellerton. Really, Garry? This film reminds me of the other slapped together film that Garry directed (Valentine's Day). What happened to the brilliance that Garry displayed in films like Pretty Women and Beaches? There were a lot of Oscar-winning actors in this film such as Hillary Swank (Claire Morgan), Robert De Niro (Stan Harris), Halle Berry (Nurse Aimee) and Michelle Pfeiffer (Ingrid). I know that these people did not need a paycheck, so why would they want to add this film to their resume? Ashton Kutcher (Randy) is a man who hates New Year's Eve (as we can tell from the trailer). I think he hates New Year's Eve because he read the script. And another thing…. Why was Ashton wondering around New York City in his pajamas? I've been to New York City in the winter and this is not even close to being believable. I do have to make a comment about Sarah Jessica Parker's character, Kim. I can understand her having a teenage daughter, but what I cannot understand is the inappropriate love interest she ends up with. He is much too young for her (but who am I to talk – smile). I love SJP from way back from her Sex In The City days, but come on!!! The only character that was slightly believable was Hailey (Abigail Breslin), who acted pretty much like a typical teenager. The rest of the story lines were just pure nonsense. Emma's daughter-in-law brought her baby to the film and he slept through the whole thing. I felt like I could have done the same thing. I hate to say it (not really) but the best parts of this film were the outtakes at the end of the movie. If you feel like you need to see this film, I recommend that you wait until it comes out on DVD and rent it. I am not celebrating and I refuse to do a count-down for this film and am giving it a red light.
34 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Very, very bad movie, even it has great names
Codrin Cod12 December 2011
Incredible bad movie, maybe the worst I have ever seen. Full of stereotypes, without a story. Just a bunch of known actors thrown in the worst script that ever came to screen (this is why I was fooled). If half of those actors would be put in any other script, it certainly would be better than this communist story. There is absolutely nothing to watch. Predictable, lazy, without sense, no surprises, no logic, no idea, no sense again. No atmosphere, stupid subjects, and the worst predictable stereotypes, with every single occasion. Do not waste your time, I just did that and I am so sorry. To the producers: Why is this a comedy? Because you laugh at me for being so fool thinking that a movie with De Niro should be at least good? To the actors: Do not ever agree to work on such a movie again. I believed in your names to offer me a nice evening. Next time, I will think twice before trusting in you as professionals. I will wait for other's reviews, and only if it is satisfactory I will buy a ticket. Sorry for you because you have missed a opportunity to do something Artistic, to be Proffesisionals.
70 out of 119 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
3/10
Marshall's 'Valentine's Day' sequel a mish-mash
gregeichelberger9 December 2011
Warning: Spoilers
It's quite disconcerting when people in the theater laugh at something you're SUPPOSED to laugh at - even if it isn't funny. That's the way I felt during the entire two-hour running time of Garry Marshall's "New Year Eve," his superior sequel to 2010's "Valentine's Day" (though that isn't saying very much).

I don't know, maybe this long-winded and convoluted tale of the loves and lives of 20-plus individuals on the last day of 2011 was hilarious at its core, but being the Philistine that I am, maybe I just did not get the humor.

As it was, "New Year's Eve," as a "star-packed" film, is nowhere near as funny as say, "Grand Canyon," "Bobby" or "Magnolia," but was certainly a better comedy than "The Hangover 2" (but, then again, most memorial services rate in that department).

Film stars - in no particular order of talent or popularity - Michelle Pfeiffer, Zac Efron, Halle Berry, Alyssa Milano, Cary Elwes, Ashton Kutcher, Seth Meyers, Jessica Beal, Chris "Ludicris" Bridges, Common, Hilary Swank, Jon Bon Jovi, Katherine Heigl, Til Schweiger, James Belushi, Ryan Seacrest, Hector Elizondo, Josh Duhamel, John Lithgow, Abigail Breslin, Yeardly Smith, Larry Miller, Leah Michele, Sarah Paulson, Sofia Vergara, Penny Marshall, Matthew Broderick and, unfortunately, Robert De Niro.

Oh, and before you think that's the end of the pain, the film also features Sarah Jessica Parker, fresh off of three straight failures, "Sex and the City," parts 1 and 2, as well as "How Does She Do It?" The so-called plot is wrapped around the lowering of the ball in New York's Times Square and has Claire (Swank) in charge of the proceedings with NYPD officer Brendon (Bridges) as her personal bodyguard.

Other confusing story lines include super chef Laura (Heigl) hooking up with rock star Jensen (Bon Jovi) - while Vergara does an embarrassing Latina stereotype, record executive Sam (Duhamel) trapped with a backwoods family in an RV, Kim (Parker) fighting with teen daughter Hailey (Breslin), Stan Harris (De Niro) dying in a hospital and being cared for by Aimee (Berry), New Year's Eve-hating Randy (Kutcher) stuck in an elevator with Jensen's backup singer Elise (Michele), while couples Griffin and Tess Byrne (Meyers and Biel) and James and Grace Schwab (Schweiger and Paulson) battle to see who will have the first New Year's baby in New York.

And hovering above all of this is bicycle messenger Paul (Efron) trying to fulfill all the ridiculous wishes of wallflower Ingrid (Pfeiffer, think "The Bucket List" without the laughs), most of which seem impossible to achieve, including a trip to Bali, saving a life and performing at Radio City Music Hall. Not bad for a bicycle messenger (that's Hollywood for you).

Alas, whereas unlike "Bobby," there is no Sirhan Sirhan to show up and herald the end of the misery. Here, we get resolutions made, broken and then realized, loose ends neatly tied and lost love regained.

It's a valiant effort by Marshall (who helmed "Happy Days" and went on to direct such feature films as "Pretty Woman," "Princess Diaries" and "Runaway Bride," among others), but with little or no character development, the confusion is so thick here, and plot lines are crossing back-and-forth so much it seems more like a train wreck.

A sad, but more than adequate description of this motion picture.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Made me join IMDb
Christopher Brett19 May 2012
This movie was so bad it is the reason I joined IMDb. I thought about joining in the past for good movies, but never have I been so motivated by a movie to do something to help others. Save yourself and DO NOT see this movie. Great actors, but horrible plot and writing. Which any movie buff knows it doesn't matter if the actors/actresses are on the level of Robert De Niro/Hale Berry or Kevin Federline/Jenifer Lopez, if the story is bad, nothing can save the movie. To Hollywood: Stop making stink bombs like this! Stop insulting the intelligence of your audiences. Save yourselves and your loyal followers from future pointless junk like this.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
Do you like chocolate milkshakes?
musica112 December 2011
I'm reading some bad reviews of this movie, and I don't think the criticisms are exactly justified. While many of the complaints are valid, I don't think they apply to a movie like this.

I saw Hugo and loved it. That movie is "art" in it's most beautiful form. I expected it to be. Hugo is caviar from Le Bernardin.

New Year's Eve is a big, sloppy, tasty chocolate fudge milkshake from Baskin Robbins. It isn't classy. It doesn't take a lot of talent to make it. But it is ultimately satisfying and puts a smile on your face. My daughter and I both really enjoyed New Year's Eve. For the first few minutes, we did feel a bit like we had ADD because the scenes changed so quickly from one story line to the next. But we soon got into the pace of it and enjoyed it thoroughly as a happy diversion on a Saturday afternoon. It's much better than last Year's Valentines Day and is definitely a feel-good movie for a Girls' Night Out.
33 out of 58 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Avoid
sbourke8820 December 2013
Words can't describe how terrible this "Film" was.. But I will try. I would give it minus 10 if I could but unfortunately 1 is the lowest score.

I like a light hearted laugh as much as the next person but the only time i even cracked a smile was when i was laughing at myself out of sheer embarrassment for sitting through it.

Its quite hard to believe that something with this many poorly written story lines, lack of decent acting and substance, could be enjoyed by anyone who hasn't had their lower frontal lobes removed.

How any of the staff or cast involved could be proud of creating such a monstrosity, is beyond belief.

Its basically every poorly executed cliché imaginable, rolled up into a hundred and eighteen minute long ball of snot...

Avoid.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
miracles do happen!
sarahutchin12 August 2012
i think i may have read this somewhere before, but the ONLY good thing about this movie is the knowledge that if GARBAGE like this can be made into a movie, then the crap i write can too. this movie is absolutely PUTRID (in caps) whoever wrote this script needs to be congratulated... they are blowing the right person/people... it takes talent to get a great script made into a movie but it takes absolute genius to get a piece of crap script made into a movie! MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! and to echo previous posts, i am amazed that half the cast actually agreed to be a part of this pile of donkey sh*t. astounding! i need to hire this whole crew to do something really meaningful. miracles do occur.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
The worst of all time
This may quite possibly be the worst movie ever made. The only thing that's remarkable about this film is how anyone got so many famous actors that aren't cheap, to make this movie. I'm sure they pitched it as "Love Actually meets New York on New Year's Eve" or something stupid like that. Whomever got this movie made must be a great sales person because this movie is just one big piece of crap! There is nothing redeeming about it at all. The couples aren't believable and more importantly, I didn't care about them at all. There was no build up to believable chemistry. We were just supposed to take it on faith. Don't waste your time on this one!
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
A Two-Part Love Boat Episode Is Pieced Together Better
richard.fuller129 December 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Where to begin? Okay, it was awful.

What I immediately noticed was this thing was pieced together very badly. It wasn't cut away with a 'meanwhile' feel to it, suddenly we would just see someone again (I noticed how badly it was done when it cut from Phieffer and Efron, goes to someone else, then falls back to Phieffer and Efron, then off again).

Catch a two-part Love Boat episode and see how well it goes from story to story.

And are these all the jobs for women? Swank is oveseeing the New Year's celebration (definitely straining to channel Maureen O'Hara from Miracle on 34th St), this woman Hiegl was it, the caterer, and then Sarah JP as some flashlighted dress designer. Looked more like a seamstress to me. They all seemed to be channeling the same 'Im a professional woman' image.

I think the funniest bit was that all of America, no, the WORLD is going to be watching NYC on New Year's Eve.

Uh, hello? Never heard of time zones? It was probably what? Nine or ten in the morning where Halle Berry's man was stationed. Who watches celebrations in NY? NY is probably the fourth-to-the-last time zone to celebrate the new year, towards the end. So why would the WORLD be watching what is going on in NY? And Swank's speech sucked.

Sometimes it felt like I was watching a Happy Days or Laverne & Shirley marathon, with pregnant women and trapped in elevators.

One bit I did notice, Seth Meyers' wife pushed on the belly a bit too much, clearly displaying it wasn't a baby.

And is this New York? A race to see who has the first baby of the year? As I said, check out a couple of eps of Love Boat, or better yet still, look for a TV movie called Last American Traffic Jame (retitled on IMDb as Gridlock) for an idea of how overlapping, inter-twining stories can be sorted out and placed with characters interacting. It can be done.

Unfortunately, New Years Eve wasn't it.
8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Is there anything below 1
kdebnam12 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I hated this. Imagine a romantic comedy

version of the expendables. Yeah it's an idea that sucks.None of these actors need to be there because their characters don't matter. Not one good story with depth, but 200000000000000 different ones that make absolutely no sense and by the end of the movie you would of forgot about them anyway. All this is is an even more bad, even though didn't think possible, sequel to valentines day. Just tried to shove as many well known actors into a film so their fans would watch. Only watch this if you have an hour and a half to kill and there is nothing else left to watch even though that's not possible, That is the only scenario where I would watch this again.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
What a load of old Hootenanny
Jon-drake27 April 2012
If you are the sort of movie lover that refuses to switch a film off once you've started, even when it's physically painful to continue then this is the movie for you. It's absolute tosh, it really is - the fact that it got made is truly incredible ... SJ Parker, JB Jovi, Kutcher yes I get it, but De Nero, Halle Berry, Swank, Ferris Bueller, please take me through the decision making process here! New Years was ruined for me when I discovered (jools Holland spoiler coming) that the Jools Holland Hootenanny show is recorded and played out as if it was live (the countdown isn't real, just like that Friends episode with Joey and Elle Macpherson), I felt cheated (of many years) then and i made a resolution to never see the new year in with Jools again! But what I hear you say has this to do with this shocker of a movie? Well it's simple - A bunch of A-Z list celebrities pretending it's new years eve - stick with Jools, at least you'll get some decent music !
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
big names but nothing else
Special-K8822 March 2012
A series of vignettes, centering around a vast array of N.Y.C. characters and their differing perspectives as they live through New Year's Eve, including a dying man whose final wish is to see the ball drop at Times Square, a Manhattan crew trying to ensure that same ball drops as scheduled, a work-obsessed gourmet chef dealing with her feelings for an old flame who suddenly re-enters her life, a single mother trying to 'protect' her teenage daughter from the dangers of the big city, two pregnant couples competing for a big cash prize, two strangers with nothing in common who get trapped inside an elevator, and a middle-aged secretary who quits her job then makes it her mission to live out her outrageous resolutions. Garry Marshall's 'follow-up' to Valentine's Day is made attractive by its star-studded cast, but—just like its predecessor—gives its actors nothing to do other than just show up and look good. Watchable, thanks to an all-star cast, but insignificant. **
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Way to much going on, its unbelievable!!!!
Christopher O'keeffe8 December 2011
Just read the headline. There is way to much going on in this movie to even understand what is going on! The idea of making a movie like this is good, just like valentines day. The problem with these movies is that yes they sign a lot and i mean A lot of big name actors, even 3 Oscar winners like, swank, De Niro, and Berry. The problem with this is that you don't know who to focus on. The scenarios are thrown in and out and shuffled around like a high stakes poker deck, its just unbearable! About 30 Min's in and I'm totally lost with the plot. It made me want to see breaking dawn, YES i said it, I'm a 21 year old guy who would rather see twilight then this garbage, at least i know what is going on in twilight and I'm not clueless the whole time i was watching it. Trust me people wait for the girl with the dragon tattoo or some other Oscar movie cause trust me this will be 118 Min's of your life that you save by watching something else!
16 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
loading
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews