More in-depth film festival coverage than any other website!
Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 

Overall Rating

Awesome: 8.93%
Worth A Look: 8.93%
Average: 5.36%
Pretty Bad: 21.43%
Total Crap55.36%

4 reviews, 32 user ratings

Latest Reviews

Dressed to Kill by Jack Sommersby

Abracadabra (2019) by Jay Seaver

Sword and the Sorcerer, The by Jack Sommersby

Siege of Firebase Gloria, The by Jack Sommersby

Wild Geese II by Jack Sommersby

Trial of the Chicago 7, The by Peter Sobczynski

Way I See It, The by Jack Sommersby

Kajillionaire by Peter Sobczynski

Allan Quartermain and the Lost City of Gold by Jack Sommersby

12 Hour Shift by Jay Seaver

subscribe to this feed

[] Buy posters from this movie
by EricDSnider

"Goodbye again, Jane. See you in 2020."
2 stars

The first "laugh" in "Monster-in-Law" is when we see two dogs humping. That is how the movie chooses to begin its 105-minute reign of generic, unimaginative comedy: canine coitus.

I am dismayed to report that it gets no better from there. This smelly dog of a film stars Jennifer Lopez, who has not played a character other than herself since 2000's "The Cell." This time J-Lo is named Charley and she is a carefree L.A. woman with a temp job and a multitude of side projects, her apartment cluttered with boxes and paraphernalia to indicate that she is free-spirited and unpretentious.

She chances to meet a renowned surgeon named Kevin Fields (Michael Vartan), and they fall in love. There is only one problem: Kevin's mother, famous Oprah-like TV personality Viola Fields (Jane Fonda), who smothers and clings to her son as the last vestige of sanity in her increasingly manic life. She has just been fired from her talk show and replaced with a younger, hipper woman, which leads to Viola attacking a Britney Spears-ish guest on the air. (The show goes out live, of course, like 2 percent of TV shows in the real world and 100 percent of TV shows in movies.) Then she spends time in a treatment facility, dealing with her anger and depression. And now she learns that her son -- her only son, her pride and joy -- is going to marry some free-spirited, middle-class jenny-from-the-block?!

What is not clear is why, exactly, Viola opposes the marriage. The psychological reason, of course, is that she wants her son only for herself. But the movie never hints at this being even the underlying cause. If Viola has a psychological attachment to her son, no one in the film ever makes the diagnosis, not even her sassy, astute assistant Ruby (Wanda Sykes, whose acerbic commentary provides the film's only few laughs). Instead, the film (with screenplay by first-timer Anya Kochoff) is content to tell us that Viola opposes it, and that's all we need to know. So there.

To prevent Kevin from marrying Charly, Viola goes to extreme, ostensibly funny lengths. She feigns a nervous breakdown on the eve of Kevin's departure for a medical convention, forcing Charly to take care of her in his absence. Viola's stated goal is to drive Charly so crazy that she'll call off the wedding and never look back, but it's an awfully elaborate plan -- complete with falsified prescriptions and actors posing as doctors -- for a woman with such vague motivations. She's not crazy; in fact, her scheming is quite lucid. It just doesn't have any basis in reality.

The real problem here is that the movie never accepts that it is, at heart, a farce. Viola consciously trying to drive Charly insane, Charly discovering the plan and retaliating in kind -- people, when two women use devious powers to destroy each other, it is dark comedy, not a light, frothy, soft-lensed J-Lo throwaway. But Robert Luketic, the usually competent director of such fare as "Legally Blonde" and the under-appreciated "Win a Date with Tad Hamilton!," seems oblivious to his material's true nature.

Unable to commit to its farcical plot, the movie thus flounders in mediocrity, with supposedly three-dimensional characters behaving one-dimensionally, and unrealistic situations being treated as though they were, in fact, possible. None of it connects because none of it makes sense -- not to mention the fact that the things that are supposed to be funny simply aren't. The gags are stale, and the performances are bland.

Jane Fonda has not appeared in a film since 1990's "Stanley and Iris," and I can almost see why this one brought her out of semi-retirement. In theory, it affords her the opportunity to let her hair down and be silly, the way Barbra Streisand recently did in "Meet the Fockers." But Fonda is not the loosey-goosey type: Even if "Monster-in-Law" were written so that Viola were a full-fledged farce character, Fonda shows no signs of being up to the task. Just as she recently back-pedaled on her infamous Vietnam photographs, perhaps 35 years from now she'll apologize for this picture, too.

link directly to this review at
originally posted: 05/13/05 16:20:38
[printer] printer-friendly format  

User Comments

1/02/19 Jamie I love this movie-Jane is fantastic.She makes it look so easy-totally underrated performanc 5 stars
5/14/11 art J.LO"S ASS is the only good point! 1 stars
11/21/08 Shaun Wallner This movie was stupid! 1 stars
1/26/07 alice no comment 2 stars
8/05/06 drydock54321 fun movie 4 stars
5/09/06 Carol Baker You got to watch comedies. You don't know what'll you get. 3 stars
3/20/06 Agent Sands Loved it! 1st 15 minutes are shit, but then it's a romantic comedy version of Apt Pupil! 4 stars
1/25/06 LP Quagmire One of the year's ten best! 5 stars
1/04/06 Anthony Feor Jennifer should have realized she's not cut out for acting after Gili 1 stars
12/25/05 Melissa Araya It was good. Timing could have been better and it was like other movies but it was good. 4 stars
12/05/05 cody a romantic comedy ok, but laughs were few to none, what is up jane fonda! 2 stars
10/26/05 malcolm funnier than i expected, but still just standard rom-com fare 3 stars
10/17/05 M JLO should stick to perfume making, Fonda & Sykes excellent! 4 stars
10/17/05 Jesse Taylor Very funny, good comeback for Jane Fonda 4 stars
9/22/05 laura excellnt, funny 5 stars
9/19/05 Jonathon Holmes waste of time 1 stars
9/09/05 Tiffany Faye Hawthorne (Charlie says she has 2 asses, LOL!) INCONVENIENT, should she ever have to shit with both at the same time, LOL! 3 stars
8/24/05 Noah Worst Movie Ever 1 stars
8/11/05 ES 4 movie feature at the drive-in, this was number two, sin city was last, how sad 2 stars
7/27/05 Christian Mediocre at best 2 stars
7/27/05 Ivy Great Movie! 5 stars
7/25/05 Eric Rollins On Golden Girls, makes you miss Gili 1 stars
6/19/05 Nicole What a surprise - another crappy J Lo movie 1 stars
6/13/05 Lowgere Saw it as 2nd feature in drive-in, it drove us out! 1 stars
6/06/05 Helen Bradley Great entertainment thoroughly enjoyable 5 stars
5/29/05 crock poor jane fonda. 1 stars
5/24/05 gray suuuuuuuuuuuuuuucked! 1 stars
5/20/05 Christy Schultz Wanda is the only redeeming quality 2 stars
5/18/05 Todd Dear God: Please kill J-Lo, or at least make her go back to Mexico. 1 stars
5/16/05 Jeff Anderson A real letdown & depressing to watch, visually. Wanda Sykes delivers the only real laughs. 2 stars
5/14/05 Enlarged Left Testicle Jane Fonda is still alive?! 1 stars
5/14/05 Sgt Slaughter J-Lo SUCKS. Fonda is a POS. This movie is a good combo of the 2. 1 stars
Note: Duplicate, 'planted,' or other obviously improper comments
will be deleted at our discretion. So don't bother posting 'em. Thanks!
Your Name:
Your Comments:
Your Location: (state/province/country)
Your Rating:

Discuss this movie in our forum

  13-May-2005 (PG-13)
  DVD: 30-Aug-2005



Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About Australia's Largest Movie Review Database.
Privacy Policy | HBS Inc. | |   

All data and site design copyright 1997-2017, HBS Entertainment, Inc.
Search for
reviews features movie title writer/director/cast