When in Rome (2010)

There's a lot of negative reviews on here about this, I'm just really glad I watched the film before reading them!! Sometimes a film asks you to suspend your disbelief. The very premise of this film is so preposterous as to not be out of place in an animated Disney film, so I find it incredible that more people didn't watch the film with that in mind. It has an excellent supporting cast, all of which hit the mark, fans of Napolean Dynamite will be delighted, and the leads are really good, Bell in particular.

Sure it's not ground breaking (rom-coms almost never are, by their nature we usually have an idea of what's coming), but it's full of fun and it's been made well, with enough substance and humour to keep you going til the end - unlike some rom-coms with much higher ratings. I would recommend checking it out if you like to lose yourself in fantasy and you're a fan of the genre

Fmovies: *1/2 out of (****)

"When in Rome" actually looked pretty decent judging by its advertisements and the cast wasn't too shabby either. I thought I'd leave my brain at the door and enjoy the film for its silly, nonsensical ride. It turns out that When in Rome is every bit as typical, dry, and unfunny as every romantic comedy you've seen. Even when the film has its moments, which are very minimal, the energy that was once there, had been drained out. The problem isn't that the film is formulaic and predictable, because that's what we've come to expect. The problem is that this film has no energy and basically no backbone. But the main issue is its script. The jokes couldn't feel more forced, empty, and missing more punch lines. For a comedy, you'll laugh maybe twice, if that. Although, here's the million dollar question: What's redeeming about this movie? It's formulaic, it's tedious, it's predictable, it's nonsensical, it's hollow, and its energy has been drained.

Stop me if you've heard this before: Beth (Bell) is a workaholic, which basically corrupts her chances of finding that perfect man. Beth goes to Italy, Rome to see her sister get married to a man and there she meets the "one", which is Nick (Duhamel). She picks up coins from the fountain and there a group of men fall in love with Beth, but there's a problem. She only loves Nick and the men keep ruining the chance of her being with the one. But another issue arises. Does Nick really love her back, or is it just because she picked up his coin from the fountain, which makes people fall in love?

When in Rome's main issue is the dialogue. Not one piece of dialogue is note-worthy, memorable, or even watchable. The dialogue is completely inane and pretty much below average. The script, is also another issue. The script is dry, as predictable as it can be, and simply just awful. On a 1 to 10 scale, 1 being the lowest, 10 being the highest, the predictability level for this one, is easily a 10. I can see every scene coming from a mile away. Did I mention it's a chore to sit through? Well at least the performances are watchable.

Overall "When in Rome" is nothing special, and in fact feels so much like every other film out there, that's it's pointless to see it. It's by-the-numbers, predictable, and disposable. There are a lot of flaws and very few redeeming qualities. I expected a mediocre film, but I also expected a fun time, which I didn't get here. Wow, what ever happen to the good romantic comedies? "When in Boredom" is a rental at best.

I honestly cannot decide which is worse, this or The Bounty Hunter. They have both been the worst releases this year. If this is what romantic comedies are now, then I'm giving up on the genre entirely. After watching The Bounty Hunter, I thought things could not possibly get worse. But here I am.

Most bad movies have some reasonably highish points. This movie has positively none. There is no character development (and no, the ending with the guys does NOT count). The acting is just sub-par. The writing, I don't even want to talk about. It started this whole chain of disaster. The only reason I'm giving this a five and not a two is because I believe effort alone, no matter how bad the outcome, deserves merit. Kudos to them for that. But really, I'd rather do a 5000 word essay than go through this again. I actually felt dumbed down.

When in Rome fmovies. This movie is painfully bad. What is truly sad about this, besides the fact that I wasted two full-priced movie tickets on it, is that both leads are charming and likable. Unfortunately, the script here is about as terrible as one can be.

Seriously. The FIRST SCENE features dialog that makes you squirm in pain. It is simply awkward, unnatural, and unfunny. It makes you think, "Should I get out and ask for refund?" The answer is yes. There a few decent moments during the 75 minutes that this movie actually runs, but it is difficult to appreciate them because there are so very many BAD moments. (75 minutes? Yes. Imagine what was left on the cutting room floor.) And not just bad moments, moments that fall flat on their face which are made worse because you know that they (the writers, director, producers) thought these were going to be great laughs. Of course, I could be wrong and the professionals mentioned above simply didn't care. They were getting a paycheck whether this movie was awful or not.

I would have given this movie 1 star, but I gave it two because both Kristen Bell and Josh Duhamel impressed me. It makes me sad to think that it is possible these young, promising actors are going to have this terrible movie on their resumes. It would be even worse if some studio doofus who didn't see this movie ends up saying, "That Kristen Bell, she can't carry a movie. 'When In Rome' proved that." Such a shame to waste talent like that.

Wait to see this wreck on cable, and when you see it on cable I bet you don't make it through the whole 1:15.

Honestly this is what Rom Coms are about. Romance comedy and a thread that connects the story. It met all those expectations and more. Good A list actors hitting main and cameo parts. Romance=Rome=NYC. Comedy= the entire cast. Sit back and enjoy. Enjoy the magic and the premise that there is free will when it comes to love. Kristen Bell is as entertaining as ever. Josh Duhamal does a good job as a leading man. Dax Shephard a great character actor as always. Maybe a bit too much spark with Kristen Bell. Anjelica Huston and Danny DeVito round out the cast. Why rate it less than a B+?? Can't see why some people are rating this low on the Rom Com scale.

I don't know what people are looking for. This is a cute, silly RomCom! Geesh! It's not a freaking documentary! If you want a cute, fun escape that's silly and entertaining then watch this movie. There are funny parts. Josh Duhamel's (or however you spell it) sidekicks are funny and there is scenery in Rome. Kristen Bell is likable and cute. The other supporting cast is good (Angelica Houston, Danny DeVito, etc). Not everyone wants to watch depressing movies that are clearly only made to be considered for an Oscar. Sometimes you just want to watch something fun. Oh, and by the way, I'm a girl. So maybe I am more forgiving then some of these guys that would rather watch a Steven Segal movie.