 It probably took some guts to title a film Failure to Launch. Imagine how critics could run with that title! Well, it turns out that critics are indeed using that title to predictable effect. "Failure to Launch? Is that the title or my review? Answer: yes," quipped Joel Siegel on ABC's Good Morning America."Fatally titled," Stephen Hunter comments in the New York Times. Peter Howell in the Toronto Star asks, "How, exactly, did an idea with this much star power and comic potential manage to misfire?" Bob Strauss in the Los Angeles Daily News concludes: "Failure to Launch does not achieve altitude. In fact, it never gets off the ground." In fact the movie is receiving wildly mixed reviews. On the one hand, Stephen Holden in the Washington Post calls it, "one of the best American films in months and months and the best comedy since I don't know when." Chris Kaltenbach in the Baltimore Sun credits the performances of Matthew McConaughey and Sarah Jessica Parker. "There's comfort in seeing actors we know doing what we've come to expect them to do," he writes. "But more important, the film surrounds them with supporting characters who are less familiar to us, who act in ways we don't expect. The result is a satisfying blend that does down nice and easy." On the other hand, Steven Rea in the Philadelphia Inquirer obviously feels that it should have been blown up on the launching pad. He describes it as "apocalyptically awful" and goes on to say, "Failure to Launch rep;resents a failure in every way: of ideas, of inspiration, of casting." Claudia Puig in USA Today is equally caustic. "This would be romantic comedy is neither," she comments. "The premise is misbegotten, the chemistry non-existent and the dialogue leaden. Did we mention how tediously the plot unfolds." |
