Defending Your Life
Provided by Metacritic.com
The movie is funny in a warm, fuzzy way, and it has a splendidly satisfactory ending, which is unusual for an Albert Brooks film
If you're looking for a pleasing, reassuring film, try this one.
The film is finally too soft, but the performances are uniformly strong, the humour intelligently adult, and Brooks once again proves a pleasing alternative to Woody Allen.
The movie's light, easily forgotten and very good for a few laughs. I sure hope that eating thing comes true.
A lackluster affair — smooth and mildly pleasant, with some honest chuckles but without Brooks’ special, prosaic madness.
The New York Times
Within the larger context of the Brooks oeuvre, this pleasantly mortifying arrangement makes perfect sense. [22 Mar 1991, p.C12]
Los Angeles Times
An intermittently funny if unsteady mixture of first-rate Brooks Angst, and set-ups that never quite pay off. [22 Mar 1991, p.F6]
Brooks as Brooks is the funniest observer of contemporary mores in Hollywood. Brooks behaving himself, as in Defending Your Life, is just another clever fellow. [05 Apr 1991, p.G5]
TV Guide Magazine
Unfortunately, Defending Your Life suffers from a slushy-headed pop fever.
The movie is lavishly designed and assembled. However, the sometimes muddled, sometimes boring, and definitely overlong screenplay, lacking subtlety and definition, disappoints the expectations of enjoyment that are set up in the first 15 minutes.
See all 14 reviews on Metacritic.com
See all external reviews