Reseñas de usuarios

I can imagine liking this film a lot more than I did if the screenplay was given another pass. Sure the overall film is a melodrama built on cliches but Costner, Penn work well together. The overall vibe of the film is pretty much what you would expect. Newman is especially endearing as the crusty father figure. The ocean side scenery is quite nice for escapist fluff. Unfortunately, the final plotting is *terrible.*

The climax as not real connection-in terms of characters or ideas present in the story-to anything that occurs prior to it. It is likea duex ex machina only that it randomly complicates the plot instead of resolves it. It feels so very forced; a mere mechanical device to stick the story with a downer of an ending. This could have been something more.

If you're a big Kevin Costner fan, then you will probably like this film. But, if watching Costner mope around on screen for nearly two hours is not your cup of tea, this film will probably be a very tedious experience for you.

Paul Newman is great. The film flies by while he's on screen. When he's not, the film drags. He deserves an academy award nomination for best supporting actor next year. But seeing as how this film is such a trifle, I doubt it will be remembered next week, let alone next February.

I would normally avoid a film like this . I don't do romantic movies , especially overlong , Kevin Costner ones but I watched this because I'm going through the entire catalogue of Paul Newman films and unsurprisingly he is the best thing in this mushy , over sentimental chic flick .

A woman finds a romantic letter in a bottle washed ashore and tracks down the author, a widowed shipbuilder whose wife died tragically early. As a deep and mutual attraction blossoms, the man struggles to make peace with his past so that he can move on and find happiness.

In a way , this is the best character Kevin Costner could play . I moody , withdraw , sullen man which basically sums up his acting style. Robin Wright does a decent job but you have to wonder what her character sees in a miserable man , fifteen years older than her who wears beige slacks and a cardigan!

It's worth watching this film along just for Paul Newman. In one of his last performances he steals the show as the dad . He still has that twinkle in his eyes that we are so used to seeing .

The plot is ridiculous as they do often are in these kind of films.

One scene where Therese knows that Garrett is going to stay over night , she just happens to leave the bottle and letters in the bedside drawer right next to him . That's just dumb script writing.

As with nearly all Kevin Costner movies it's at least 45 minutes too long and the merciful ending is just typical of a Mills & Boon type novel .

Thank god for Paul Newman.

MESSAGE IN A BOTTLE (1999) ***

Starring: Kevin Costner, Robin Wright Penn, Paul Newman, Ileana Douglas, Jesse James Director: Luis Mandoki 126 minutes Rated PG-13 (for sexuality)

By Blake French:

What do you do when somebody asks you a question? Well, if you're like any normal person, you'd answer it. How do you form romantic chemistry between two characters in a movie? If there isn't already dramatic fire when you look at two characters, then you have to form it will dialogue.

In the new romantic drama "Message in a Bottle," all that the two main love birds do is ask each other and respond to questions. They meet when a Chicago newspaper worker named Theresa finds a bottled up note on the shore while jogging. She becomes curious as her friends find more evidence leading to this man that she deeply wants to meet. When she does meet him, a boat worker named Garret Blake, (hey, Blake is my first name, isn't that neat) romantic music instantly surrounds them. And the questioning begins.

Theresa asks Garret many questions, but all Mr. Blake does is answer. Is that a bad thing? Not really, but when a movie is trying to form romance chemistry, well, this is not the way to do it. The only character who seems to be at all alive here is Paul Newman, as Blake's father, who masters every scene he is in.

The scenery in "Message in a Bottle" is absolutely stunning. From the busy landscape of Chicago to the blue sea waters and crystal clear waves. This kind of material sweeps me away every time I see it in the movies. I would compare this film to the beautiful Montana countryside's in "The Horse Whisperer," one of the best movies of 1998.

The performances in this film are mostly quite good, but none are Academy Award material. Robin Wright Penn is realistic and well-casted. She uses confusion and sorrow to build up momentum for the Costner character. As for Costner himself, however, he is surprisingly bad. I mean, just recovering over last year's "The Postman," this man should be rebuilding his career, not destroying it even more. He gives another "Waterworld" type of performance, acting dumfounded throughout most of the film. It's Paul Newman who is the real surprise. He adds comic relief from all the ineffective melodrama which permits most of the movie.

The characters themselves are indeed likeable. Some are a bit stubborn and bull-headed, others are freewheeling and care-free. This is okay because variety is good, you know. I liked Newman the most, but Robin Wright Penn is right up there with him.

A major flaw in the film, however, is the ending, which is completely out of place and disappointing. I have nothing against this type of closing, but I have already seen this in material in last years "City of Angels," sorry if that gives anything away. It leaves the audience with a feeling of depression and disappointment as they walk out of the theater.

In the end, "Message in a Bottle" is a close call, but I do recommend it. Thanks to some attractive features, original screenplay based on a Nicholas Sparks novel, and some fascinating characters, Luis Mandoki has created a satisfactory movie that I did enjoy for most of the way.

Brought to you by Warner Bros.

While on vacation, a single mother identified as Theresa discovers a 'message in a bottle' on the shore that has moving honest words of love addressed to a woman named Catherine…

The trail leads her to a sailboat builder named Garrett and also to his father, Dodge in a small North Carolina coastal town… It turns out that Catherine is Garret's deceased wife, and the intriguing letters were written, two years earlier, after her decease…

Some people find the one true love of their lives, if they're fortunate enough… Luis Mandoki's film, in part, turns out to be a choice about what occurs when a person finds that right kind of love, then when he is faced with the impossible, and then when he is given the right to continue with his life and is brave enough to love again no matter how unpleasant his grief is…

As a reclusive widower, Garret was still in deep pain, and entirely devoted to Catherine's memory… He had hard time letting go of the past… Catherine was dead but not forgotten and was simply everywhere…

As a sailor Costner didn't inherit the charm of Newman… He was drawn to Penn by her smile, her beauty, even her mistakes…

Robin Wright Penn was beautiful, delicate and sweet as Theresa… She soon insinuates her way into Garret's life… Her expectations were always too high… Since the beginning, she just had to meet the person that wrote those letters… Her life was changed by them… Eventually when she met Garret that morning, she accepted, without hesitation, to step aboard…

Paul Newman as Dodge liked Theresa instantly… He saw in her the key to his son's emotional recovery…

With a very nice music, and a stunning coastal photography—also the ocean scenes are wonderfully taken—"Message in a Bottle" is definitely a weepy melodrama and a must see for those who believe, or don't, in love

"The book was better than the movie." This is a cliché that I hear quite often. Generally, I don't pay much attention to criticisms such as these. For me, it's akin to saying that DaVinci's painting of Mona Lisa is better than the Nat King Cole song by the same name. It may be true, but what's the point? Novels and films inhabit two different worlds with different methods and different strengths. The novel Message in a Bottle by Nicholas Sparks is an engaging story with interesting characters and a carefully constructed plot.

Theresa Osborne (played by Robin Wright Penn) is a divorcee with a young son. While vacationing in New England, she comes across a bottle on the shore, and finds a message inside. The author of the message is addressing a lost love, and describes the ache he feels so poetically that Theresa is moved to share the letter with her friends. They are unanimous in their declaration that anyone would want to be loved like that. Theresa is a researcher for a Chicago newspaper (in the film version), and applies her skills to finding the author of the message. Eventually, she meets the mystery man (played by Kevin Costner) and each tries to help the other overcome their scars from the past.

In Luis Mandoki's film Message in a Bottle, some of the richness and texture of the novel is lost. Plot points are deleted, and an entire subplot added. Locations are changed, and some of the story devices are altered. Many of these changes are necessary and inevitable given the time limits imposed on a standard theatrical film. For character development that lets us inhabit the lives of the central characters, the novel is clearly better than the movie.

Gerald DiPego's screenplay does make some positive changes however. Some of the humorous dialogue is created especially for the film, and works well here, especially when entrusted to Paul Newman. The biggest gain, however, is in the visual elements of the film. The cinematography by Caleb Deschanel (Hope Floats, Fly Away Home, The Natural, The Right Stuff) is nothing short of gorgeous. The film is worth seeing if seen only as a series of beautiful photographs.

Alas, the same can not be said of the performances. Robin Wright Penn does a good job with her character, and Paul Newman is in top form here as the father of the mystery man played by Kevin Costner. Unfortunately, Kevin Costner is out of his depths here. This character is deeply conflicted, hoping for a brighter future, haunted by a painful past. Costner comes across as more dazed than conflicted, and it is beginning to appear that he will not survive the transition to middle-aged actor very well.

In the final analysis, there are delightful moments in the film and the film is worth a look. It could have been an excellent film. But in the end, much as it pains me to say it, the book was better than the movie.

I was glad to read that someone, somewhere actually enjoyed this movie.

I watched it with my ladyfriend, and at the end, both of us just stared at each other in disbelief. The acting, camera work, etc was all great. The ending just plain sucks.

If you're the type of person who can sit for two hours, enjoying a movie, then have the rug pulled out from under you at the end, have at it.

But if you're the type who wants to leave the movie feeling that the time, effort, and involvement in the story and characters was worth while, then my advise is to find something - ANYTHING - else to do.

It's too bad, too. Because it would have been very easy to make the ending worth while.

I can't help but love this movie. When watching this movie, I felt as if I was right inside with the people and it was real life. All the emotions that Kevin's character goes through shows this sensitive side of him that is not always shown in his movies. I cried for his loss and cheered him on in finding another person to understand and love him for who he is. The depth of this film made me want to be in love and to share that experience with someone.

The obvious attraction for a casual viewer would be the poignant love story. The writer cleverly mixes the rare attachment of two individuals, a sailor's son turned boat-maker and a beautiful, sensitive artist: an attachment of the boat-maker that that does not diminish after the death of the artist. Such strong feelings have been the core of great cinema in the past (Truffaut's "Story of Adele H", Polanski's adaptation of Hardy's "Tess," etc.). The film may pale in comparison to Truffaut and Polanski, yet the subject matter, the performances (Newman, Penn, Kostner, and Coltraine), and photography make it noteworthy.

Mexico-born director Luis Mandoki loves to film stories with strong attractions and unusual bonding ("Angel Eyes" is an example) and attract the viewer to the cinematic work by providing all-round positive connotations to the material. If you examine the film closely all characters are positive and uplifting--the varied personalities in the newspaper office, a supportive father (a well-defined father-son relationship), a strong bonding among the family of the dead artist that gradually transforms from the negative to the positive, a male child who accepts a strange new father figure without a whimper...The only negative characters shown almost as a cameo is the journalist's ex-husband who cheated on her. Mandoki seems to make a habit of picking up uplifting, candy-floss subjects. Is he playing safe or is it a Catholic upbringing (reference to "Angel Eyes") at work? As a director's decision, the storm sequence filmed entirely with music and no words raised the film above the usual films.

Mandoki as a director has potential to make great works but is evidently not a director who works to get his details right. He has filmed at locations that do not resemble the Carolinas. Yet Mandoki has a rare ability: he always picks top-notch cinematographers (Oscar nominated Caleb Deschanel here and late Piotr Sobocinsky in "Angel Eyes"). Most viewers would love the picture-postcard locations captured in the film. But I was captivated by the indoor camera-work playing intelligently with light and shadows reminding one of works like "Godfather II." For some quaint reason Mandoki's films seem to attract Razzie awards for bad acting (Jennifer Lopez in "Angel Eyes" and Kevin Kostner in this one). In both cases, I feel Mandoki did extract fabulous performances from other actors (Jim Caviezel in "Angel Eyes" and Paul Newman in this one). Perhaps the bad performances have something to do with whether an actor controls the production rather than Mandoki abilities as the director.

On the whole, the film will be remembered not merely as a great love story well told but for Paul Newman's fine performance and the intelligent indoor photography.

I was sort of hoping to enjoy this flick, but boy was I disappointed. First of all, the story is set in The Outer Banks of North Carolina, but clearly this film was shot nowhere The Outer Bank, and I would say nowhere near North Carolina. My best guess would be that they took their cameras up to Maine or something and thought that no one would see the difference. BIG MISTAKE! People who have been there know how beautiful The Outer Banks really are, and will recognize the difference. Secondly, this story is just dumb, drawn out, and overly melodramatic. This story could probably have been told in just over an hour, not just over two. The filmmakers got a little trigger happy when Costner signed on, and went overboard(no pun intended) with everything, the result being a confused, disappointing mess. The one bright light in all this muck of a film is the startling performance given by Paul Newman. Sure, it is basically the same character that he played in Nobody's Fool, but who cares. The man is still one of the finest actors that ever lived, and this performance is among some of his best work. If you decide to watch this film, do it so you can enjoy Newman's wonderful performance. His work is the only reason that this film should be viewed.

Spread the message and let everyone know that "Message In A Bottle" was an incredible sight to behold because it was the type of movie that cleared my mind of everything else and allowed to relax in my chair.

"Message In A Bottle" along with the writers as well as Kevin Costner, Paul Newman, and Robin Wright Penn swept me away to another place that gave me the chance to watch a brilliant film with no worries and enjoy an epic romance.

Costner, Newman and Wright Penn share the screen to tell the incredible, emotional and powerful story of one reporter's mission to locate the writer of three mysterious messages that turned up ashore.

The following events set off a tender and sweet romance between Garret Blake played by Costner and Theresa Osborne played by Penn. Also, mixed into this wonderfully crafted plot is Newman who plays Dodge, Garret's father who acts as a calming effect for his son when trying to deal with his newfound feelings about Theresa and those for Catherine, the object of the mysterious messages.

The performances by Costner, Penn and Newman seemed so natural it was enjoyable to watch actors not try so hard to do their best. I got the feeling that the actors truly cared about making this film the best they could for their fans because of the integrity and sincerity they brought to their characters.

"Message In A Bottle" was a powerful and inspirational movie to watch and will be treasured for years to come. In addition, it had two of my favorite actors and it gave me the opportunity to watch a brilliant actress come in to her own.

14 October 2012. This romance drama has Costner in his typical flawed adult male character who discovers himself with a message in a bottle twist. The movie straight forward with several plot moves that has the females swooning one moment, crying the next. This is definitely a female movie though its serious moments outweigh the anticipated light moments making this movie more of a somber serious movie that can't be considered a feel good movie, more of a tear jerker. Nevertheless, it has heart, meaning that may offer an enduring haunting message. Autumn in New York (2000), Somewhere In Time (1980), and Up Close and Personal (1996) have similar tonality and memorable themes.

Message In A Bottle starts with some promise, but can't hold up under the stress of being a romantic film or a romantic comedy. Kevin Costner is pretty good in this and Robin Wright-Penn is very good. Some of the supporting players just seem to be standing around though and never become much more than background characters that turn into cardboard cut-outs. I didn't like the director's film When A Man Loves A Woman because it was way too long and this film seems to have the same problems. Somebody give the director an editor that knows that you don't need every foot of film to make a good movie. The film's one saving grace is Paul Newman. Newman doesn't do a lot of movies anymore, so every role Newman decides to do from here on out should be paid attention to and cherished. This is one of our great actors and Newman makes the rest of the cast look like they don't know what they're doing. If you must see this film, do yourself a favor and read the book first. Although you might just want to check it out for Newman, other than that be ready for a long and ultimately pointless love story.

A Classic love story in the true sense. At times a little too cloying sweetness.

I knew this film was in trouble early on. Female reporter is intrigued by letters that have been found in bottles and goes to meet the man who wrote them. When she finds him, does she explain why she's there? Of course not. Then you wouldn't have a movie.

It's all too predictable as she pretends to have different intentions and fishes for information on the guy's life. I won't spoil anything but I'll just say nothing came as a surprise and I just kept waiting for some resolve which took forever to come. Good movie to fall asleep to I suppose.

A good cast, forgiving the fact that Robin Wright Penn just seems to be doing her best Julia Roberts impression.

This is the movie that proves that most critics don't know what they're doing. The critics shed their sentimentalism sometime in the mid-1960's, so how could they know or care?

One must have a heart to enjoy "Message in a Bottle". It's a treasure--beautiful, poignant, tragic. The cast is wonderful, and if you don't cry at the ending, you aren't human (which most critics apparently aren't).

Boy, was I disappointed with this one! It was probably the worst film I've seen since "A River Runs Through It" which would be the kindling for my bonfire of terrible films. This is a movie about a man who is obsessed with his deceased wife. That's it. That's the whole 2.5 hours. It is the second most agonizingly long, boring movie that I've wasted my money on (The aforementioned movie is still #1). The plot was awful, the acting was even worse. I think Kevin and Paul should be ashamed they made this horrible picture and the writer should be banned from ever writing another script. The cinematography was about the only redeemable facet of the movie. I actually applauded at the end because I was so happy it was finally over. Save your money on this one and rent any other Costner or Newman film, you'll thank me. Really you will.

I think the ones that gave 1 to this movie are the ones that gave 10 to Doom. Otherwise there is no way that this movie can be rated as low as a terrible production such as Doom..

It is a story of a guy (Kevin Costner) that is stucked between living the past or looking for the future after meeting Theresa. It is a well acted love story the end of which is not signaled as some other argued!It is not a cliché at all.If someone claim otherwise, i would like him/her give me an example similar to this movie in plot.

I would recommend this movie to everyone for a nice evening! Watch it you will not be regretful.

"Message in a Bottle" is one of the most beautiful and intense romantic novels ever written. It is a favorite of mine, not only for a Nicholas Sparks's book, but also for the genre itself. "Message in a Bottle" is a wonderful book, together with "The Notebook" (another brilliant romance).

Of course that, as an assumed fan of the book, I had to write something about this movie and that is precisely what I'm gonna do now.

This is one of those cases which the movie isn't as good as the novel. I used to like this movie better than nowadays, perhaps because I knew it before the novel. However, after reading the novel, my point of view about this movie began to change a bit.

The movie is not bad. Far from that. What happens is that the movie is clearly more incomplete comparing with the book and that's exactly here where the movie fails. I'm not the kind of person to list the differences between a movie and a book one by one, so all I can say is that the movie is romantic, emotional and dramatic, while the book is not only much more complete but also more intense, more beautiful, more enchanting, more romantic, more emotional and more dramatic. Perhaps that's why this movie is so dramatically underrated. I can sort of understand why people in general don't like the movie as much as the book, but many people also talk about this as if it was terrible, which is so not true.

If the movie isn't as excellent as the book, on the other hand the movie has its good side too. For example, it shows us some beautiful landscapes, wonders of nature and details, such as sunrises, sunsets, seas, lakes, wind, beaches, green places, sailing boats, etc...

About the actors, Robin Wright Penn was very good looking in this movie as Theresa Osborne. Kevin Costner has one of his best performances and roles here as Garret Blake. Paul Newman, on the other hand, plays Dodge (the same name of a car's make), Garret's father, a serious but simultaneously funny guy with a very particular sense of humor. This is Paul Newman's best role after the voice of Doc Hudson in Disney/Pixar animated movie "Cars".

What a suckfest.

I was talked into watching this by my wife. She loves a good weepy-drama-rom-com type thing and this seemed to tick all the right boxes (for her). But even my wife couldn't muster up a tear - and believe me she will cry at every episode of Cold Case.

I on the other hand cried all the way through - mainly at the appalling waste of time I was experiencing but also because I stubbed my toe on the door frame as I headed to the kitchen for more beer to dull the pain I was experiencing...

A more obvious film I cannot remember seeing. Each slight bend (I can't even use the word 'twist') was sign-posted about 3-weeks before it happened. Right to the very end.

Even having Kev eaten by a CGI shark couldn't have livened up this still-born sorry excuse for a film.

It immediately goes in to my top 10 worst films of all time - straight in at position 1.

If you are thinking of renting it (or worse still, buying it), take my advice - kill yourself.