Review of Michael

Michael (1996)
3/10
Blowing a premise with promise
18 June 2008
For the most part, "Michael" is a disaster – ten minutes of charm and ninety's worth of missteps.

Travolta and MacDowell do their best, frequently rising above Nora Ephron's numbingly banal script. But the film moves like a snail. And even within its fantasy context, the characters behave implausibly on a regular basis. (Reporters who routinely let the story of a lifetime – an apparent angel living on Earth – out of their sight?)

Someone forgot to tell romantic comedy maestro Ephron that William Hurt, brilliant in so many other films, is no Tom Hanks. The movie's "climax" redefines the word contrived. Ephron may be shooting for Heaven here, but unfortunately "Michael" is a long, long ride through cinema heck.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed