Connect with us

Movie Reviews

‘It Ends With Us’: What the Critics Are Saying

Published

on

‘It Ends With Us’: What the Critics Are Saying

Following the New York premiere of It Ends With Us on Tuesday evening, the first reviews of the film from critics have been coming in, and they’ve been decidedly mixed.

The romantic drama, based on Colleen Hoover‘s 2016 best-selling novel of the same name, was directed by Justin Baldoni (who also plays Ryle). The film follows Lily (Blake Lively) as she overcomes a traumatic childhood to embark on a new life. But after getting romantically involved with neurosurgeon Ryle, she sees sides of him that remind her of her parents’ abusive relationship. And when someone from her past, Atlas (Brandon Sklenar), reenters her life, it complicates things even more and Lily must learn to rely on her own strength to move forward.

The film has previously faced criticism for its depiction of domestic violence, with some fans claiming it romanticizes the subject. However, a common theme among the early reviews is that while the movie adaptation manages to treat the topic of domestic violence with care, the narrative appears to suffer.

As of Wednesday evening, It Ends With Us had a score of 60 percent from 44 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, and clocked in at 52 percent on Metacritic from 21 reviews.

The film, from Sony Pictures, hits theaters on Friday. It also stars Jenny Slate, Hasan Minhaj, Isabela Ferrer and Alex Neustaedter.

Advertisement

Read on for key excerpts from some of the most prominent early reviews following the premiere of It Ends With Us.

The Hollywood Reporter‘s arts and culture critic Lovia Gyarkye wrote in her review, “The pat treatment of these characters ultimately does a disservice to the broader themes embedded in It Ends With Us. Without understanding more of Lily’s broader community or getting a stronger sense of how she navigates the relationship with Ryle, the film can feel too light and wispy to support the weight of its themes.”

The Guardian‘s Benjamin Lee wrote, “It’s a plot of hackneyed soap tropes but there’s a real maturity to how it unfolds, a story of abuse that’s far less obvious than we’ve grown accustomed to, the details far knottier than some might be comfortable with. There are expected cliches but there are also many that are mercifully avoided too, the story not always conforming to type.”

“The life lessons being taught here about self-acceptance, self-love and self-worth might be a little pat and some of the darker elements could have afforded a tad more darkness, but It Ends with Us leads with heart first, everything else later,” Lee added in his review. “It’s a film of huge, sometimes hugely unsubtle, emotion but it has an effectively forceful sweep to it.”

It Ends With Us savors the trappings of a glossy love triangle: the banter, the flirting, the turbulence, the extravagant costumes,” Amy Nicholson of The Washington Post wrote. “The movie has to cheat a bit to get at the complexity of Hoover’s book. A child of domestic abuse, Hoover writes with painful intimacy about Lily’s struggle to claw free from her past. Baldoni shifts some of that turmoil to the audience, with editors Oona Flaherty and Robb Sullivan cutting key scenes so that, like Lily, we don’t know what to believe.”

Advertisement

Nicholson added that “even bouncing off male leads who are more pinball bumpers than dimensional characters,” Lively gave a “great performance as a headstrong, sensible woman who struggles to consider herself a victim.”

Critic Mark Kennedy wrote in his review for the Associated Press that “the uneven movie adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s best-selling 2016 novel” tries to “balance the realities of domestic violence inside a rom-com and a female-empowerment movie. All suffer in the process.”

“It veers too close to melodrama, with suicide, homelessness, generational trauma, child murder, unintended pregnancy and never-forgotten love all touched on and only half digested,” Kennedy continued. “Set in Boston, it never even pulls from that city’s flavor.”

Time film critic Stephanie Zacharek wrote, “The movie is accurate and effective in this sense: for so many abused women, you never know how bad it can get, until it gets really bad. Yet none of that is enough to make you fully buy what the movie’s selling.”

“The problem, maybe, is that It Ends With Us is all about what it’s about, and nothing more,” she added. “These characters exist to make points about the insidiousness of domestic violence, the way its effects can creep up invisibly even as those who are suffering cloak themselves in protective denial. Admittedly, that’s a lot for a movie to carry. But movies can’t just be efficient feeling-delivery systems; they have to work on us in subtler ways. It Ends With Us makes all its points, all right, but in a way that’s more edifying than moving.”

Advertisement

Proma Khosla wrote for IndieWire that the film “manages to sensitively handle its delicate subject matter, though largely at the cost of a more intricate narrative.”

It Ends with Us does what it wants to (and what made Hoover’s book such a smash hit), highlighting the patterns of abuse, trauma, and silence at play in this specific story,” Khosla added in her review. “Baldoni and Hall handle Lily and everyone around her with empathy, downplaying unpleasantness or oversimplifying story elements ultimately to mitigate risk and protect viewers — with the opportunity to dig deeper in a potential sequel.”

Esther Zuckerman wrote in her review for Rolling Stone, “The movie is as frothy as it is melodramatic; as much concerned with romance as it is with trauma. Throughout its over-two-hour run time, It Ends With Us stays incredibly loyal to its beach-read, airport-paperback origins. The result is a mix of tones that doesn’t always work, but often feels like a throwback to a different era of movie-making, one where the mid-budget movie willing to delve into issues was a viable business model. (Think: White OleanderWhere the Heart Is.) In that way, it’s a successful endeavor, even if it at times may have some schmaltz-allergic audience members rolling their eyes at the emotional roller coaster of the plot.”

Advertisement

Movie Reviews

Film reviews: ‘Marty Supreme’ and ‘Is This Thing On?’

Published

on

Film reviews: ‘Marty Supreme’ and ‘Is This Thing On?’

‘Marty Supreme’

Directed by Josh Safdie (R)

★★★★

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Not Without Hope movie review (2025) | Roger Ebert

Published

on

Not Without Hope movie review (2025) | Roger Ebert

Joe Carnahan was a sagacious choice to co-write and direct the engrossing and visceral survival thriller “Not Without Hope,” given Carnahan’s track record of delivering gripping and gritty actioners, including early, stylish crime thrillers such as “Narc” (2002) and “Smokin’ Aces” (2006), and the absolutely badass and bonkers Liam Neeson v Giant Wolves epic “The Grey” (2011).

Based on the non-fiction book of the same name, “Not Without Hope” plunges us into the stormy waters of the Gulf of Mexico for the majority of the film, and delivers a breathtaking and harrowing dramatic re-creation of the 2009 accident that left four friends, including two NFL players, clinging to their single-engine boat and fighting for their lives. The survival-at-sea story here is a familiar one, told in films such as “White Squall,” “The Perfect Storm,” and “Adrift,” and the screenplay by Carnahan and E. Nicholas Mariani leans into well-worn tropes and, at times, features cliché-ridden dialogue. Still, this is a well-paced and powerful work, thanks to the strong performances by the ensemble cast, some well-placed moments of character introspection, and the documentary-style, water-level camerawork by Juanmi Azpiroz.

Zachary Levi (the TV series “Chuck,” the “Shazam!” movies) is best known for comedy and light action roles. Still, he delivers solid, straightforward, and effective dramatic work as Nick Schuyler, a personal trainer who helps his friends Marquis Cooper (Quentin Plair) and Corey Smith (Terrence Terrell), two journeyman NFL players, get ready for another season. When their pal Will Bleakley (Marshall Cook) shows up at a barbecue and announces he has just been laid off from his financial firm, he’s invited to join the trio the next morning on a day-trip fishing trip from Clearwater, FL., into the Gulf of Mexico. (The casting is a bit curious, as the four lead actors are 10-20 years older than the ages of the real-life individuals they’re playing — but all four are in great shape, and we believe them as big, strong, physically and emotionally tough guys.)

We can see the longtime bond between these four in the early going, though we don’t learn much about their respective stories before the fishing trip. Kudos Carnahan and the studio for delivering a film that earns its R rating, primarily for language and intense action; the main characters are jocks and former jocks, and they speak with the casual, profanity-laced banter favored by many an athlete. (Will, describing the sandwiches he’s made for the group: “I got 20 f*cking PB&Js, and 20 f*cking turkey and cheese.”) There’s no sugarcoating the way these guys talk—and the horrors they wind up facing on the seas.

The boat is about 70 miles off the coast of Clearwater when the anchor gets stuck, and the plan to thrust the boat forward to dislodge it backfires, resulting in the vessel capsizing and the men being thrown overboard. Making matters worse, their cell phones were all sealed away in a plastic bag in the cabin, and a ferocious storm was approaching. With title cards ticking off the timeline (“13 Hours Lost at Sea,” “20 Hours Lost at Sea,” “42 Hours Lost at Sea”), we toggle back and forth between the men frantically trying to turn over the boat, keep warm, signal faraway ships, battling hunger and thirst, and the dramas unfolding on land. Floriana Lima as Nick’s fiancée, Paula, and Jessica Blackmore as Coop’s wife, Rebekah, do fine work in the obligatory Wait-by-the-Phone roles.

Advertisement

It’s terrific to see JoBeth Williams still lighting up the screen some 40 years after her “Big Chill” and “Poltergeist” days, delivering powerful work as Nick’s mother, Marcia, who refuses to believe her son is gone even as the odds of survival dwindle with each passing hour. Josh Duhamel also excels in the role of the real-life Captain Timothy Close, who oversaw the rescue efforts from U.S. Coast Guard Sector St. Petersburg. At one point, Close delivers a bone-chilling monologue about what happens when hypothermia sets in—“hallucinations, dementia, rage…eventually, it breaks your mind in half”—a point driven home when we see what’s happening to those men at sea. It’s savage and brutal, and heartbreaking.

Given this was such a highly publicized story that took place a decade and a half ago, it’s no spoiler to sadly note there was only one survivor of the accident, with the other three men lost to the sea. Each death is treated with unblinking honesty and with dignity, as when the natural sounds fade at one point, and we hear just the mournful score. With Malta standing in for the Gulf of Mexico and the actors giving everything they have while spending most of the movie in the water and soaked to the bone, “Not Without Hope” is a respectful and impactful dramatic interpretation that feels true to the real-life events.

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

‘Black Rabbit, White Rabbit’ Review: Disqualified for the Oscars, Tajikistan Drama Is an Inviting, Meandering Meta-Narrative

Published

on

‘Black Rabbit, White Rabbit’ Review: Disqualified for the Oscars, Tajikistan Drama Is an Inviting, Meandering Meta-Narrative

Selected by Tajikistan but ultimately not accepted by the Academy to compete in the Oscar international feature category, “Black Rabbit, White Rabbit” begins ambitiously, with a famous quote from playwright Anton Chekhov about setups and payoffs — about how if a gun is established in a story, it must go off. Moments later, an inviting long take involving a young man selling an antique rifle ends in farcical tragedy, signaling an equally farcical series of events that grow stranger and stranger. The film, by Iranian director Shahram Mokri, folds in on itself in intriguing (albeit protracted) ways, warping its meta-fictional boundaries until they supersede its characters, or any underlying meaning.

Still, it’s a not-altogether-uninteresting exercise in exploring the contours of storytelling, told through numerous thematically interconnected vignettes. The opening Chekhov quote, though it might draw one’s attention to minor details that end up insignificant, ensures a heightened awareness of the movie’s artifice, until the film eventually pulls back and becomes a tale of its own making. But en route to this semi-successful postmodern flourish, its character drama is enticing enough on its own, with hints of magical realism. It begins with the tale of a badly injured upper-class woman, Sara (Hasti Mohammai), discovering that her car accident has left her with the ability to communicate with household objects.

Sara’s bandages need changing, and the stench of her ointment becomes a quick window into her relationships. Her distant husband rejects her; her boisterous stepdaughter is more frank, but ultimately accepting; her gardener and handyman stays as diplomatic as he can. However, the film soon turns the gunfire payoff in its prologue into a broader setup of its own, as a delivery man shows up at Sara’s gate, insisting that she accept delivery for an object “the deceased man” has paid for.

Mokri eventually returns to this story (through a slightly tilt-shifted lens), but not before swerving headfirst into a seemingly unrelated saga of extras on a film set and a superstitious prop master, Babak (Babak Karimi), working on a shot-for-shot remake of an Iranian classic. A mix of rapid-fire Tajik, Persian and Russian dialogue creates dilemma upon dilemma when Babak’s ID goes missing, preventing him from being able to thoroughly check the prop ammunition for an assassination scene.

Danger begins to loom — a recent Alec Baldwin case even warrants a mention on-screen — as the notion of faulty firearms yanks Chekhov’s wisdom front and center once more, transforming it from a writing tip into a phantasmagorical inevitability. In keeping with the previous story, the props even communicate with each other (through subtitles) and begin gossiping about what might come to pass.

Advertisement

After establishing these narrative parameters through unbroken, fluid shots filmed at a sardonic distance, Mokri soon begins playing mischievous temporal games. He finds worthwhile excuses to revisit scenes from either different angles or with a slightly altered aesthetic approach — with more proximity and intimacy — in order to highlight new elements of his mise-en-scène. What’s “real” and “fictional,” even within the movie’s visual parlance, begins to blur in surreal ways, largely pivoting around Babak simply trying to do his job. However, the more this tale engorges through melodic, snaking takes, the more it circles around a central point, rather than approaching it.

The film’s own expanse becomes philosophically limiting, even though it remains an object of curiosity. When it’s all said and done, the playfulness on display in “Black Rabbit, White Rabbit” is quite remarkable, even if the story’s contorting framework seldom amounts to much, beyond drawing attention to itself. It’s cinema about cinema in a manner that, on one hand, lives on the surface, but on the other hand, invites you to explore its texture in ways few other movies do.

Continue Reading

Trending