User reviews

The premise was there to make a really good romantic comedy, but somewhere it all went totally wrong. First, there were no sparks between the two leads. There they were near the end pretending to be in love at first sight, and it was just not believable at all. McDermott's character was really annoying, obnoxious, unsympathetic etc... until about 3/4 the way through the film, then he started to be sweet - but he was nowhere near convincing enough. Aniston had VERY little to do, and her character was really only half developed, while Parker's character was a complete joke - how self obsessed can a person be? The pointers on relationships in general fell short, and really the only people to liven up the film were the bit part actors, who outshone the central actors in every scene. Quite frankly this film was a total waste of energy and time. It had the foundation to be O.K but could not properly utilize the resources to pull it off.

You know what is going to happen 15 minutes into the movie, unless you have had a lobotomy. The characters are kind of likeable. Still, it's just a happy ending, format driven, feel-good movie. I guess you can watch it with a date or something, otherwise skip it.

I thought this was a tightly-written, well-directed, superbly-acted film. It moved me to tears. Rang true & clear. Happy ending & all, it depicted the angst & turmoil of the shallow relationships this culture encourages.... the characters did the work & found their true mates as a result. Too slow for American hyper/commercial attention spans, for sure. More like a European film in that regard. Brave & moving. Glad I saw it.

The film has weird annoying characters, strange unexplainable slapstick, and an insurmountable amount of dialogue about smoking. The movie has a contrived plot of a bitchy, empty-headed woman's (Jeanne Tripplehorn) search for love. Although who would ever like Jeanne's character, personality, or reading of the dialogue, I really cannot say. Except that she likes to smoke.

Sarah Jessica Parker gives an interesting character performance (who likes to smoke). Dylan McDermott does his best to look pretty and soulful (as he smokes). And, hey, what is Jennifer Aniston doing there? Oh, she's not really in it enough for anyone to care about her. (But she likes to smoke).

This is a waste of anyone's time. I don't even know how I was able to sit through as much of the movie as I did. I can't even believe I spent the time to write this, except to warn others of its banality. Anyone need a cigarette?

A ridiculous "date movie" from director Scott Winant and screenwriter Winnie Holzman contains not a grain of truth in all its 'smart' talk and crisscrossing plot threads. Story concerns the love lives of several Los Angeles characters but (unfortunately) centers mainly on accident-prone ghost-writer Jeanne Tripplehorn, who doesn't know she's crossed paths with soulmate Dermot Mulroney many times since they were both children. Haphazard narrative causes unfunny film to skitter and slide into oblivion, and these leads have absolutely no chemistry. Tripplehorn put off some scary heat in "Basic Instinct", but was never able to find another role that played off that mystery. * from ****

From the beginning, 'Til There Was You was on the right track, setting up for the big finish where it would all come together. But the thing is, it didn 't. I found the ending extremely disappointing, but maybe in someway it was the right ending; a little more realistic you could say. Judge for yourself.

'Til There was You is one of the worst films we've ever seen. It fails in every respect. Jeanne Tripplehorn was better (as an actress...) in Waterworld. In comparison, this film is Dungworld. When a character stumbles once, or even twice, in the course of a film, one can understand it. But Jeanne's character falls, trips, stumbles so often that she might have a bit of Jerry Lewis in her. In her defence, each (prat?) fall was probably blocked, choreographed, and rehearsed. And rehearsed. Although this is bad enough for a film, the actors (Dylan McDermott and Jeanne Tripplehorn) seem to spend most of the plot going "out for a smoke" or trying to find a place to smoke. If the film was a diatribe on having no place to smoke- Ok - BUT, it isn't.

However long this film runs, it is too long by 10 minutes past the running time.

Oh, Jeanne Tripplehorn, ALMOST acts in a public forum meeting. You ALMOST see her break life into the character. Oh, it's ALMOST as convincing as her scene yelling at Michael Douglas in Basic Instinct--hmm, on second thought, not really.

This is a film to avoid at all costs unless you need a cigarette and are trapped in nicotine addicts anonymous or forced to watch outtakes of HOOPER (Burt Reynolds). And even then, toss a coin or go to sleep.

WOW that was two long hours, if it were not for the awful "The Switch" this would be the worst movie in Jennifer Aniston's post "Friends" filmography. Not that any of the movies problems are her fault. She is actually blameless, as she is very good in her five or six scenes. Along with Sarah Jessica Parker as a former child star, she is the best thing in the movie.

No the blame for this movie lands firmly on the door stop of a bland Jeanne Tripplehorn (who I loved in "Waterworld" and "Basic Instinct") a dull Dylan McDermott, whoever was in charge of casting those two and finally the director Scott Winant.

I normally write a plot in a paragraph for each review, here it does not need a full paragraph.

Two single strangers keep almost meeting over the years, will they ever meet and fall in love?

I've just realised the movie was only on for one hour and forty four minutes. It felt a hell of a lot longer!! In fact my interest only perked up when Jen Aniston and Sarah Jessica Parker were on screen. Whoever though Jeanne Tripplehorn would make an interesting romantic lead were very wrong as I simply didn't care about her character and Dylan McDermott is dull and lifeless I did not care if they got together or not!! I was more interested in the problems in Aniston's characters seemingly perfect marriage.

I caught this on TV last night(sans ad-breaks), and I have to say, I liked it a lot. I had tried to watch it a few times before on TV, but had never really got hooked into the story enough to stick with it until the end.

I'm glad I did now. I hate Sex And The City, especially SJP's character in it, but she was great in this movie. And (gulp!) very sexy in it. Must have been the Bob.

Jean Tripplehorn is very underrated, and has had some casting misfortunes in the past, which have overshadowed her talent and potential. Even though her character here was for the most part a little distant and icy, she still managed to bring a bit of warmth to the part. And she's also extremely attractive, which never hurts.

Jen Aniston "didnt play Rachel", which was a good thing. The supporting cast did their jobs well, and Dylan McDermott? Well, you either like him or you loathe him, I have found. I thought he was quite watchable in this.

I was amused to see reviewers on here, knocking the film because people smoked in it. Honestly, I don't understand what that has to do with a film's artistic merit. On matters like smoking and drug use, some of our

members(non-UK, usually) tend to let their right wing views tarnish their opinions of a film. Which is, as they say on message boards, "Retarded".

Take a chance and see this film. It's not Con Air, but it has a story, characters, and lots of smoking.

(irony) Which is wrong, as Jesus doesn't like smoking. Or homosexuals(/irony).

7.5 out of 10,

Goodnight.

There's a nice build up for the first hour - two kids grow up and bump into each other several times before 'finding' each other - but then there seems to be twenty minutes of the end missing because one minute they don't know each other from Adam and then they're together.

Somebody should explain that the only reason people go to see this type of movie is to WATCH THE CHARACTERS GET TO KNOW EACH OTHER. This movie completely skips this part and ruins all that's gone before it.

I recently saw this movie, starring Jeanne Tripplehorn and Dylan McDermott, for the second time on cable and I think it's a lot more interesting and original than critics gave it credit for. It does have a meandering nonlinear plot, and the lovers destined to be together don't meet until the end; these facts bother some who are used to a formula plot. It has been compared (unfavorably of course) with Sleepless In Seattle, but aside from the couple not meeting until the end, the two films are not at all similar; Sleepless (which I also liked) is much more conventional; every single scene is directly related to the inevitable conclusion.Til There Was You is actually more like You've Got Mail, where the predestined couple are foes before they meet. Til There Was You, however, is much more original and authentic.You do have to have patience with it; while it's part comedy, it's also a bit like real life; much of what happens is peripheral to the central plot. I liked this; you may not.It has several quirky characters, the most entertaining played by Sarah Jessica Parker.I am sorry that more people didn't like this; the harsh criticism will only encourage future screenwriters to go strictly by the book.

This is a fix-yourself-a-cup-of-tea and snuggle up with your kitty and watch this and fall in love with romantic movies all over again type of film.

Beautifully filmed, perfectly cast and the settings are bliss.

It's not great art, but it is like a warm chocolate chip cookie. Sure, you need more than just that for a balanced diet but oh my goodness, every now and then you really crave one.

We watched this wretched movie because Jeanne Triplehorn and Dylan McDermott were in it. When the movie ended, all I could think about was that I would never be able to get back the two hours that I wasted on it. Triplehorn tried her best but her earnestness somehow just made things worse. My trying to like it didn't work. I feel sorry for the actors whose agents talked them into being in it. A boring story, badly written, with no direction, and so memorably bad that we still laugh about it years later. If this clunker didn't kill off the dinosaurs, it definitely killed Triplehorn's career. It made me wish that I were at the dentist having a tooth drilled. A 4.8 rating is being more than generous for this rambling, embarrassing waste of film. Save yourselves!!

the first time i saw Til there was you, i liked it for it's cuteness, but it kinda went by slowly...but then i had an urge to watch it again,and i was able to catch more about the connections between Nicholas and Gwen. i love how EVERY time i watch it, i discover some new path crossing i didn't catch before. i really do like this movie.

Kind of funny for a romance movie. I shockingly actually liked the movie.

Dylan McDermott is a good actor, and a likable one at that, so it was no surprise that at the peak of his fame he popped up in romantic comedies like this one. He also did 'Three To Tango' during this period, which is a far superior film.

This is a typical, run of the mill romantic comedy, and not a particularly good one at that.

The set up is weak, the jokes laboured. Although the two leads do their best there's not much chemistry between them and it shows.

It's a shame, but this film proves why it's so hard to make a successful romantic comedy

I do not know what reviews some critics gave for this film but it was probably horrendous because critics seem to have their own definitions of what a movie should be about from the films they've enjoyed early on in their lives/careers. I also bet that the reviews are horrible because they have seen these actors in other performances and have been somehow annoyed by them therefore becoming slightly biased. I myself am biased towards/against some actors, directors and even certain film critics.

This movie in particular offers many styles and direction that have been used before in other much more acclaimed films (I will not name any because truthfully nothing comes to mind). What I appreciated about this film is it's simplicity in terms of telling it's story. It runs a straight line that doesn't use much dreamlike flashbacks, dream sequences and it doesn't even try to become innovative. A movie that runs like a well told story with no flashy effects that could deter the watcher from what we're supposed to be paying attention to... the story. I could understand why people should not like this as much as I do and I don't blame them. We each have our own vision of what we want and I like this movie.

Focusing on the movie, I think that all the main characters are well developed. Dylan McDermott, Jeanne Tripplehorn, Jennifer Aniston and Sarah Jessica Parker have a strange and yet wonderful chemistry together (Although not all of the characters know each other, their scenes are actually realistically acted). Scenes, from the watching of the fictitious TV show by the two leads to the scene which they finally meet is so unexpected that it is realistic.

In conclusion, I have to say that watching this was a pleasant experience (although many cliched dialogue and situations). People should see it with an open mind and try to enjoy.

Sometimes a movie is too ironic and self-parodying for its own good. This brilliant and cleverly-conceived film, despite having been panned by critics and drubbed by fans, deserves a hard second look by those with sufficient vision to look beyond the apparent formula of the film to see the deft irony that lies (not very far) beneath the surface.

This film comes disguised as a romantic comedy. Indeed, it has all the fantasy elements of the genre: endlessly falling flower petals; attractive men and women initially at odds with one another; the protagonist's self-discovery; and (ultimately) a lush, romantic setting. It doesn't spoil the film one whit to say that it even has the traditional rom-com ending of "girl gets boy" -- in fact, isn't that de rigeur for a romantic comedy?

But beneath the trappings of the eternal quest for love lie uncomfortable truths that this movie keeps sprinkling among the rose petals for the viewer to confront: people betray one another's trust for casual or selfish motives; trusting one's heart to "love" leads as often to heartache as it does to fulfillment; what looks like love from one person's viewpoint is often something very different from the other side; being too needy for love stifles talent and ambition; and happy endings sometimes only appear that way.

Looked at as an ironic commentary on the imperfections and uncertainties of love and of the fantasy of "happily ever after," this film is nearly perfect. Looked at as a straightforward romantic comedy, it's awful. But there are dozens of clues in the skilled writing and direction that point to irony, rather than romance, as the powerful engine that pulls this movie. Indeed, the movie takes vicious swipes at romantic comedy staples throughout: the magical love story of the girl's parents, on which she was bottle-fed, turns out not to be quite what it seems; most other characters repeatedly fail in their love lives, or succeed only to suffer great loss as a result; and great-hearted social gestures are doomed to failure. Sometimes the irony is apparent in other ways, such as in the flower petals that fall too relentlessly and too often either to be ignored or to be accepted at face value.

The message of this film, ultimately, is quietly stark: everything is doomed to fade away, and we shall fade away, too, no matter whom we love or how deeply. Whether we will get scorched by that love before we shuffle off is an open question. This is not your standard romantic comedy message. Nor is this really a feel-good movie. But it is very funny in places, cleverly constructed, well acted, and comes with an important message about love and loss. It deserves a second chance.

Gwen (Jeanne Tripplehorn) is a romantic dreamer, encouraged by her mother, but she is disappointed in love time and again. Nick (Dylan McDermott) grew up in a dysfunctional family and, consequently, wears no rose colored glasses to look upon life and romance. There is one common denominator between the two of them, they both loved a "Brady Bunch" type show called One Big Happy Family when they were young. The child star of the show, Francesca Lanfield (Sarah Jessica Parker), grew up to be a troubled adult, with drug problems, who now lives on investments that were made for her during her young acting days. Thus, she owns a beautiful old apartment building in Los Angeles, which once housed Louise Brooks, and where Gwen now resides, that she is selling for big bucks. The plan is to raze the building and erect something new. As luck would have it, Nick is the architect of the project and Francesca likes what she sees and the two start a sexually-charged thing. The "luck" continues when Gwen, an author, is assigned to ghost write Francesca's autobiography. Thus, the two of them have connections to Francesca, a happening to add to the string of chance meetings and near misses between Nick and Gwen throughout their lives. As Gwen fights for her beloved building, Nick has second thoughts about his role in its destruction and Francesca remains a petulant, mostly unlovable eccentric, how will the film play out? This is a sweet story with attractive, talented performers but its pace is so slow that some viewers may turn it off. Certainly, Tripplehorn, McDermott, and Parker give nice performances, especially Parker, who makes a believable, mixed-up child star all grown up. Then, too, the L.A. scenery, costumes, and amenities are fine indeed. But, the script, which contains many good ideas and themes, moves along very slowly and the direction is far from snappy as well. Therefore, if you love romantic dramas, especially those that sport beautiful actors, do make time for this one. It has a nice tale to tell, even as it takes what seems like a decade to tell it.

I've seen this movie about five times by now and I still find new things to like about it. Tripplehorn is great (especially at pratfalls) and the rest of the large cast is pretty good too. The movies takes swipes at modern architecture, smoking and relationships, and they are very funny for the most part.