Gerry 2002

Critics score:
61 / 100

Reviews provided by RottenTomatoes

Ty Burr, Boston Globe: The best way to approach Gerry -- perhaps the only way -- is to treat it as a sanctuary, a film to be visited the way you would a Buddhist temple or a piece of ambient music. Read more

Rene Rodriguez, Miami Herald: There's a purity of purpose in Gerry -- a clean, unwavering focus -- that makes the movie feel strangely exhilarating, even when nothing is happening on the screen. Read more

Richard Roeper, Ebert & Roeper: I could say for the first forty-five minutes or so it was funny and interesting and I got what he was doing, but it just becomes tedious ... Read more

Michael Wilmington, Chicago Tribune: It's definitely one of the strangest films ever made by a major U.S. director -- yet I liked it. Read more

Stephen Holden, New York Times: With all its quirks, Gerry seeps into your pores like the wind-whipped sand that stings the faces of these disoriented hikers. Read more

Jonathan Rosenbaum, Chicago Reader: The two stars...[Casey Affleck and Matt Damon]...both playing characters named Gerry, wander across the desert for some reason, and if you enjoy watching them on any pretext, you'll probably enjoy this; if you don't, you won't. Read more

Eleanor Ringel Gillespie, Atlanta Journal-Constitution: If nothing else, Gerry is restful, though I'm not sure that counts as a recommendation. Read more

Manohla Dargis, Los Angeles Times: A tough, vigorous exercise in cinematic form and pure aesthetics. Read more

Houston Chronicle: Read more

Steven Rosen, Denver Post: An innovative and unusually artistic experiment. Read more

Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly: Gerry meanders, all right, but by the end of the movie, you know that you've been somewhere. Read more

Liam Lacey, Globe and Mail: Fascinating, even if perversely so, and quite beautiful. Read more

Gary Dowell, Dallas Morning News: On the surface it may seem as barren as its desert, but underneath is a beautiful and surreal meditation. Read more

John Powers, L.A. Weekly: Van Sant ultimately reveals so little about this odd couple that we frankly don't give a damn what happens to them. Read more

John Anderson, Newsday: The results are part biblical allegory, part existential crucible, and remind one that anytime the meaning of life is questioned, it's positive -- because it presumes the possibility of meaning. Read more

Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times: The movie is so gloriously bloody-minded, so perverse in its obstinacy, that it rises to a kind of mad purity. Read more

Stephanie Zacharek, Salon.com: Read more

Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle: Ragingly bad art that contributes to a definition of independent film as something no one would want to sit through. Read more

David Edelstein, Slate: I'd be lying if I said it didn't annoy the hell out of me for most of its 103-minute running time. But I might watch it again sometime and try a little harder to get on its wavelength. Read more

St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Read more

Geoff Pevere, Toronto Star: If you can get lost along with it, Van Sant's Gerry is actually anything but empty: At times it's tonically liberating. Read more

Time Out: Read more

Todd McCarthy, Variety: Read more

J. Hoberman, Village Voice: An anxious movie-object that might well wonder whether its minimalist aspiration is a matter of ambitious purity or empty pretense. Read more

Stephen Hunter, Washington Post: Zzzzzzzz. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Ulph. Umph. Ach. ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz. Read more