User Reviews (102)

Add a Review

  • Thrashman8816 February 2004
    I don't know why everybody is bashing this little movie. Granted, it's not an "extraordinary film" nor is it Oscar material, but it does get the job done, and that is to entertain for an hour and a half. Matthew Perry's character is not that far removed from what he does in "Friends", so if you like "Friends" style of humor, you'll have no problem enjoying "Serving Sara". The premise of a guy delivering court notices isn't very attractive, but the movie does a fine job in stretching this premise and making it funny. Liz Hurley looks, as always, hot and Bruce Campbell(EVIL DEAD) is funny as the Texas business Honcho trying to divorce his wife.

    I actually had my reservations about watching this one, because neither the title nor the cast was that appealing to me at first, but again, I must confess that I did enjoy this little sucker and I'd be lying if I told you otherwise. 7* out of 10*!
  • In New York, the process server Joe Tyler (Matthew Perry) is assigned to deliver a divorce paper to Sara Moore (Elizabeth Hurley). Her wealthy Texan husband Gordon Moore (Bruce Campbell) is cheating her and also trying to take all their money for him. Sara offers one million dollars to Joe serving Gordon first, and he travels to Texas with Sara trying to accomplish his task. Meanwhile, the serving company sends Tony (Vincent Patore), the colleague and enemy of Joe, to serve Sara. A dispute begins with the oponents trying to serve the divorce papers first, to get financial advantages in the process.

    I liked a lot this chase movie that slightly recalls "Midnight Run". There are many funny moments, Matthew Perry and Elizabeth Hurley show great chemistry and the IMDb User Rating of 4.6 is quite unfair. Every time that I see the beautiful and delicious Elizabeth Hurley, I recall the amazing choice of Hugh Grant for Divine Brown. My vote is seven.

    Title (Brazil): "A Servi├žo de Sara" ("Serving Sara")
  • RoodyMan28 January 2006
    Frankly, the amount of stars this movie received on this site is sickening. I honestly found this movie to be an adequately comical film, and can't see how it only received 4.8 out of 10. Now, obviously it wasn't the best movie I've ever seen, but I did find myself laughing at it quite frequently. I really can't think of anything major that would yield such a low score. The acting was good, the cast had Mathew Perry, Elizabeth Hurley, Jerry Stiller, Cedric the Entertainer, a cameo from Mike Judge, and someone who I believe deserves to be in many more movies, Bruce Campbell. The story was sufficiently original, and the movie had, a brilliant, yet unforeseen twist towards the end. The only thing I could possibly think of for people giving this movie such a low rating, is that people tend to over-analyze comedies way too much. You can't expect a drama movie to be the same as a comedy, it just doesn't work that way. Personally, I would like to see this movie again, and feel that it deserves a better rating on this site than it obtained.
  • I saw this movie, mainly because Matthew Perry was in it, and I love his Chandler Bing character. Now, I first feared "oh no, this is going to be some romantic mumbo jumbo", but NO. Ofcourse this film contains romance, but it's ok, cause it's funny as hell. Perry makes several characters in this movie, which are worth it alone. Hilarious and I can definately recommend it, eventhough the plot line is a little weak, but Perry and his co-stars makes totally up for it..
  • "Serving Sara" is a modern-day comedy movie about a man who gave up a successful career take a job that he enjoys. He becomes frustrated as he struggles to accomplish his daily job duties and he cannot figure out why. He learns (the hard way) that his coworker is not only jealous of him, but also competitive towards him.

    The main male character is Joe who is played by Matthew Perry. Matthew Perry works for a private investigator as a process server and is hired to serve divorce papers to the main female character Sara, played by Elizabeth Hurley. Matthew Perry has goals and struggles to stay on track to accomplish his goals. Once he serves Elizabeth Hurley her divorce papers, she convinces Matthew Perry to work with her to save her share of her fortune.

    This movie is very similar to another movie starring Matthew Perry titled "Fools Rush In", 1996, also starring Selma Hayek. The movie is about a man whose struggles to be successful at any cost and slowly learns what is important to him. He struggles to reach his true goals, as Matthew does in "Serving Sara". Like "Fools Rush In", "Serving Sara" is light humor with little or no real point to the movie. In both movies Matthew Perry plays a funny guy who works along side of beautiful women, and in the end is able to accomplish his goals.
  • I watched `Serving Sara' on Saturday. I wish I could say it was a very funny film. I wish I could say that Matthew Perry doesn't look unhealthy for most of the movie. I wish I could say that Elizabeth Hurley was a good comedic actress. I can say that it's clear even when she's acting that Ms. Hurley is a very classy lady. She's also obviously comfortable in front of the camera. However, her use of exaggerated hip swaying and mouth expressions isn't effective in carrying the jokes. When I think of popular actresses who are naturally funny, I think of Julia Roberts and Meg Ryan. Both these ladies utilize their eyes and whole faces in delivering their comedic lines. As for the very likeable Matthew, the circles under his eyes and his drawn face made it hard for me to focus on his performance. His delivery was similar to his acting in `Friends', but in `Serving Sara' his appearance throughout the whole movie seemed subdued. Perhaps he lacked gusto due to the health crisis he was battling at the time of filming or maybe he was directed to be less `Chandler', and more streetwise and scrappy. As for the other two main co-stars, Vincent Pastore basically plays his character in `The Sopranos'; I couldn't detect any difference between his movie performance and television persona. Cedric `The Entertainer' caught my attention with his on-the-verge-of-a-heart-attack performance as the boss with a short temper and high blood pressure. However, his schtick ran out of steam rather quickly. I became unimpressed after his second remark about `that bitch' revealed a lack of original dialogue. Still, if you're a Matthew Perry fan, as I am, the movie isn't an entire waste. The actor's good nature shines through, even when his role calls for him to be something of a jaded character. I had a few chuckles at some of Matthew's more physical scenes and got to watch him for an hour and a half, so I left the theatre with a smile on my face.
  • GOWBTW20 November 2007
    Matthew Perry and Elizabeth Hurley serve up a very funny, and fine comedy romp in "Serving Sara". Perry plays Joe Tyler, a processing server who boss(Cedric The Entertainer) is more conniving than himself. He and his lackey Tony (Vincent Pastore) makes lots of money serving people. Upon making a serve, he meets Sara(Hurley) and gives him a offer he couldn't refuse. After getting his nose busted, the new partnership has begun. I like the part at the airport where Sara's jeans get mangled up at the conveyor belt. Then when they get to a cheap motel, she flashes the night auditor. The recipe of this team-up is revenge on her ex-husband(Bruce Campbell). Tony, Ray Harris' co-worker is more inept than helpful. He gets the paperwork done, but the time zone gives his the disadvantage. Revenge does have its price, but if it's right, it's a payoff. The result, living large and in charge! Great movie, great cast, so-so response from the critics. But I don't care! You got served! 3 out of 5 stars!
  • After seeing all the promotion Mr Perry has been doing over the last week or so for Serving Sara I started looking forward to this movie more and more. I went in today after reading what some of the reviewers had been saying about the movie and I have to admit I was a little worried I would be disappointed but the reviewers couldn't have been more wrong about this one. Matthew Perry is a fantastic actor and I have to agree with everything Larry King said to Matthew on Thursday 22nd August on his show

    KING: My late friend Jackie Gleason made a movie once with a fellow named Tom Hanks, and he told me, this kid, big. You going to be the next Tom Hanks.

    PERRY: Thank you very much.

    KING: I'm predicting it, Perry. You're a lot like him, you have that air about you, you look the type, and I think you're going to get major roles and this one, "Serving Sara," is just another springboard on a great career.

    After watching this movie I can defiantly say Matthew is going to be the next Tom Hanks. His comedic timing in this film was superb and the accents... hilarious!!!! the whole film had me in hysterics.

    Everything about this movie was fantastic... not much else to say except DO NOT listen to the people reviewing this movie who say it's not worth seeing... they couldn't be more wrong !!!

    I give it 10/10
  • SERVING SARA(2002)*** Matthew Perry, Elizabeth Hurley, Cedric the Entertainer, and Bruce Cambell.

    In this screwball comedy, a process server, Joe Tyler,(Perry) tries to serve divorce papers to Sara Moore(Hurley). But when he finally serves her, she makes him an offer. If he tears up the papers and serves Sara's husband(Cambell), she would give him 1 million dollars.

    I have no idea why everyone is hating this movie such. It was good! I think it could have benn funnier, but it was still enjoyable, and sweet. I think Perry and Hurley have a lot of chemistry, and I would like to see them paired up together again. Stop being so cruel! jk

    SERVING SARA-***/****

    PG-13 language, and some crude/sexual humor.This wasn't as innapropriate as it looked in the previews. Like most of the bad stuff is in the preview.
  • I thought the bad Matt Perry movies were over now that he is out of rehab. He constantly tries to play the cool guy, which is uncomfortable for everyone to watch. He should have been the humorous fish out of water that people enjoy. After this film anything with the Matt Perry stamp on it should be direct to video. Anyone associated with this movie is suspect. Elizabeth Hurley should not have agreed to this movie, hopefully she got paid up front. The villain Hurley's husband is the star of a funny comedy-horror movie, but this character was barely two dimensional. I officially blame the director for putting this garbage together. A good movie can effect you. Well I was physically uncomfortable when they tried to develop a love story towards the end. In that respect is the only way this movie could be classified as good.
  • Maybe, the best motif to see this comedy is Cedric the Entertainer. because, except him, all is well known. jokesr, tricks, the levels of story, performances and roles who are just sketches remembering the old classic comedies. but, sure, Matthew Perry and Elizabeth Hurley are a nice couple and the holes of story are in decent way covered. and, maybe, that represents the lead motif for not be real critic about the film.
  • Squrpleboy11 May 2003
    This is one of those comedies your mother brings home thinking it

    might be "cute funny"; you know: no boobies, not much swearing,

    little to no violence, and written in a way that everyone gets the

    jokes.................and she'd be right.

    Matthew Perry does his best NOT to be Chandler Bing in his role

    as cynical process server Joe Tyler, and walks a fine line between

    success and reliance on his old character traits. He swears, lies,

    doesn't shave and wears a leather jacket, but every now and again

    slips back into a motion or facial expression that is the essence of

    Chandler Bing. Oh well, he's still the best performer in the film.

    Liz Hurley, as a supposedly devoted wife, oblivious to her

    husband's extramarital affair and suddenly served with divorce

    papers, shows all of the emotion of canned tuna. Let's face it, she

    is merely 'eye-candy' in the picture. And Cedric The Entertainer is

    appallingly one-dimensional and insipid in his role as Tyler's boss

    (he delivers lines like an urban Henny Youngman, for pete's


    The real problems here are dialogue and comic timing though.

    Every line (especially those given to/ by Perry) come across as so

    completely scripted and placed within the conversations that all

    the comedy of the actual words seem forced, and resultingly not

    humourous at all. The dialogue also suffers from both not wanting

    to step on the other characters lines, and in needing to spoon-feed

    the storyline so completely to the viewer (which makes one feel

    about 3 years old by movie's end). Then there is the 'tear-jerking'

    story behind why Tyler does this for a living, and the horribly forced

    romance between Perry and Hurley's characters to add to the

    growing miasma of distaste in your mouth.

    I never laughed once. My family chuckled here and there. And in

    the end, as the credits rolled, my mother chimed in, "That was

    pretty good." Our home theatre remained silent in response.

    5/10. Not terrible, but nothing I'd watch again or recommend in

    good conscience.
  • adiwsusanto15 January 2008
    I like Matthew Perry from his role in friends and who doesn't dig Liz Hurley sexy appearance & accent. The plot is simple & straight forward and you can foresee what would happen in the end. It's a classic situation where the victims will work together as a team to get back their common enemy. If you enjoy a simple movie, a good feel movie, Liz Hurley sex appeals & Matthew funny act, hen you would enjoy this. I watch this movie on VCD in 2002 and re-watch it again on DVD recently. The reason why I watched it earlier was because of Matthew Perry and the reason I re-watch it was an urge to remind me of what's this movie is all about. Yet, I think I have the same feeling both times. 5 out of 10.
  • Insufferable mess about process server Matthew Perry trying to rescue a trophy wife from a disadvantageous situation. Actually, I've already made it sound better than it is. The plot specifics make no sense. Joe Viterelli is totally wasted as a moronic mafioso. All the characters are over-the-top caricatures. Everybody is both stupid, narcissistic, and cynically motivated. In short, the writing and direction are impossibly bad, and only Elizbeth Hurley manages to imbue her character with any credibility. Matthew Perry and his cohorts at the process-serving company are particularly incompetent in their roles. Perry is all over the map, and clearly had other things (drugs?) on his mind.

    Avoid this sorry mess.
  • Matthew Perry + Elizabeth Hurley + Cedric The Entertainer + Vincent Pastore + Bruce Campbell = this dreck? This is one of the few times that I agree with the critics in that Mr. Perry (who looks like he was having some personal problems at the time of the filming) and Elizabeth Hurley simply do not show enough chemistry to save this sludge. As usual, the cast is game, but the writing and directing is simply not there. So, what gives the movie the 1 star? Hurley's outfits, for sure and Cedric The Entertainer, and the always sublime Bruce Campbell.

    SAVE YOUR MONEY and wait for tv!

    PS - Want to see Ms. Hurley? Watch ANYTHING else!
  • I have not seen a Matthew Perry movie or show I have liked, mainly because I do not like Matthew Perry's acting. He is annoying and not funny to me.

    Comedies are funny when they are based on some reality or are making fun of reality. This movie, however, was just plain ridiculous and a waste of time.

    Elizabeth Hurley has been in much better and funnier movies, such as "Bedazzled" and "Austin Powers".

    This movie used "service of process" as its plot. Whoever wrote the screenplay has no conception of the legalities involved and therefore the story has really no educational merit whatsoever. Serving Sara just was too stupid to be funny. It is the type of movie that some people will watch and think they may have learned something, like what is means to serve divorce paperwork, but will come away knowing absolute rubbish.

    Lawyers like these kinds of movies because it keeps people stupid about the law.
  • Being that it was a fairly cookie cutter screenplay, and I've seen better acting from both Hurley and Perry, I would have normally given it about a 5. A 5 being as low as I could go and still say that I actually liked the movie. It wasn't bad. It had it's cute moments, and Matt Perry, while not as funny as say his role in The Whole Nine Yards, it was still fun to watch. But I gotta say, what bumped it up to a 6 for me was the story's, or director's ability to get some serious skin time with Liz Hurley, in the most trashiest outfit you could come up with in a Texas setting.

    It wasn't a great movie, but it was at least worth a watch, for more than one reason.
  • This film is bad because the entire plot revolves around service of process, and it makes no sense. Granted, I went to law school and got A's in my civil procedure courses. But even a layperson can see the flaws in this.

    In most jurisdictions, you can complete service of process in a number of ways. You can hand the legal documents to the person. You can send them registered mail. You can post an ad in the paper. You can post notice on the courthouse door. You can leave the documents with any adult who resides at the house of the target. You can leave documents in a conspicuous location on the property of the target. You can serve a registered agent, which in many cases is the Secretary of State or similar office holder of your jurisdiction. You can even walk up to the person, say "I have legal documents for you," and drop them at his feet. Even if you don't hand-deliver them, you have served process.

    There is a reason for this.

    If, as this film portrays, you can't serve anyone unless they take the papers from you, it would be impossible to ever sue anyone because most people would never take anything from a stranger. That would make it to easy for people to avoid ever suffering any consequences for their actions. Husbands could avoid ever getting divorced, and therefore ever paying alimony.

    So remember folks: if, in your real life, you are ever a defendant in a lawsuit, you can lose by default if someone leaves papers at your feet and you never show up in court! Knowing all this, the plot of the film is eviscerated. What is left, that is, bad acting, bad sight gags, bad everything, isn't enough to hold the film together in any meaningful way.

    Avoid this movie.
  • Rented it to see if Mathew Perry could act different from the angry, "the world owes me", brooding, dislikeable person he portrayed on Friends

    Rated it a 1 because I've no other options. Too bad this system doesn't have minus signs.

    Fast forwarded most of the useless gratuitous cursing and raging. Which was most of the film. Reduced the 1+film to around 20'. Even that was too much of a waste of my time for me. Beauty of watching a movie at home. One doesn't have to "sit" through a "B" (This one was a Z) hoping for improvement.

    The story line was asinine.

    All the characters had the same M.O. as Mathew Perry. The whole film was full of Mathew Perry's interacting with Mathew Perry. Everyone was worst than awful.

    Mathew Perry was still doing same sch-tick he did on Friends...angry, bad mouthed, rebel with absolutely no cause but his own self involvement... no changes... obviously can't act. Get over yourself.
  • I was on a plane coming home from Greece, and they were playing this movie. I have to tell you, you cound not even watch this movie on a plane it is so bad. First of all, there is no chemistry between any of the characters whatsoever, secondly, Liz Hurley looks like an old lady compared to Matthew Perry, and last of all, there is no sensible plot in the movie. Definitely the worst movie of 2002--1/10--
  • beades25 August 2002
    "Serving Sara" has potential as a case-study in film schools on how to produce a monumentally rank and incompetent movie. From its lame and derivative plot to its mean-spirited tone, sophomoric humor and abysmal editing, it's a stinker from start to long-overdue finish.

    Actually, it's over-generous to call the humor "sophomoric", because that can at least be funny sometimes. Think "American Pie." In "Serving Sara" the humor is simply absent. The jokes -- what few transpire -- are weak, obvious and mostly unpleasant.

    A turkey in every respect. Avoid.
  • If it was just me I would be suspicious but we all three laughed throughout the entire movie and especially at the bull scene until we were literally sick. The Screen It critic called it disgusting but if anyone has ever been around a veterinarian's or a ranch for long, they would see that it is a natural part of life. Add Matthew Perry to the equation, however, and it becomes hilarious. Matthew fit the part perfectly and his boss and coworker constantly added to the laughs. Elizabeth Hurley was just along for the ride but she didn't really hurt the overall humor.

    Everyone should go to this show and lighten up and enjoy it instead of trying to pick it apart.
  • I remember when "Serving Sara" came out I was in the process of moving to England and there were commercials on TV during my pack-out. Each one showed the scene where Elizabeth Hurley gets her pants torn off by Matthew Perry and says, "I said to help me, not undress me!" Of course it was a clever marketing scheme to get teenaged boys (and indeed any males) into the theaters in the hopes of seeing Liz Hurley in underwear for two hours, but they neglected to let audiences know as soon as she says this, she covers herself up with a suitcase and gets a new pair of pants.

    The whole movie is like this. It's tricky and devious. The ads presented it as something it wasn't. One critic (was it that awful Earl Dittman of the non-existent Wireless Magazine?) said Liz Hurley was like (and I quote) "...Lucille Ball." Oh, right. Maybe if Lucille Ball had undergone hours of plastic surgery, looked anorexic, had a British accent, long flowing hair, had been unfunny, and single-handedly helped bomb every movie she starred in.

    Liz Hurley is an awful actress and (I personally think) just so-so in terms of looks. (Any ugly person can look sexy with millions of dollars. Just look at Paris Hilton.) She's not the only fault of "Serving Sara." The script is like a crappy version of "Midnight Run." It's about bounty hunters and women being tracked down and ruthless guys hiring other hit men to take hit men out and... I honestly stopped caring about ten minutes into the film.

    Matthew Perry (looking bloated, unhealthy and utterly bored) basically just mumbles through the whole film. I like Perry (at least on "Friends") but this is not his Big Breakthrough. (Neither was "The Whole Ten Yards," for that matter.) I don't think this is a totally hideous movie - I mean, it's not unbearable to watch. I managed to sit through it. But I was checking my watch a lot.

    And then I recalled how, in England, once I arrived overseas, it went straight to video, never given a theatrical release: and I could totally understand why.
  • Reginald Hudlin, director of films such as 'House Party' (1990), 'Boomerang' (1992) and 'The Ladie's Man (2000), adds another comedy vehicle to his resume in 'Serving Sara'. However, this is a film that is reliant on the talents of Matthew Perry, and for the most part, it is he who saves this film playing yet another version of Chandler Bing from "Friends". Perry plays Joe Tyler, a process server down on his serving luck thanks to being undermined by his main competition in Tony (Vincent Pastore). Tyler is given one last important job; he must serve divorce papers to Sara Moore (Elizabeth Hurley) from Texas millionaire, Gordon Moore (Bruce Campbell). Serving Sara Moore seems like a harder task than possible, and when Joe does, she offers him a better deal where the stakes are higher and Joe can finally get out of the business once and for all.

    This is a fun movie, especially if your expectations were reasonably low to begin with. If you are a fan of "Friends", then it's hard not to like Matthew Perry in this movie. Joe Tyler just seems to be another rougher variation of Chandler Bing. Elizabeth Hurley doesn't add much, but the chemistry between her and Perry seem to work okay. Vincent Pastore is quite funny as Joe's rival in Tony and he managed to give me a couple of chuckles. Cedric the Entertainer just doesn't entertain in this movie at all, and his scenes are especially annoying, and Bruce Campbell does okay as the Texan millionaire. I thought some of the scenes would really bring this film down a notch, but it was handled okay, and wasn't overly groaning or bad. The scene involving a bull was mildly amusing rather than completely excruciating as the critics would have you believe- particularly because Perry made the scene work! I've seen more cringe-worthy efforts in other comedies, and not once did I feel embarrassed for Perry and co, even when Perry was doing a really bad accent.

    Saying that, the film still isn't that great and is pure fluff and so light that it doesn't really offer that much in the way of laughs or in it's story. Perry is just likable in this movie and handles the material well, but one wonders if he can ever separate himself from the style of Chandler Bing, where sarcastic one-liners and self-depreciating humour seems to be the key. The direction isn't that great, and the main problem with this movie is that in many scenes, you could feel the script's presence rather than have cohesive flowing dialogue. Some scenes felt a little unnatural particularly when the character would say something to himself after the scene is over. It felt a little obviously scripted in that respect! However, I had fun watching this movie although I wouldn't bother with it twice. It's a pure no-brainer, and quite likable. Don't take this movie too seriously, and you might enjoy it for the dumb comedy that it is- a non-memorable time-filler and certainly not Perry's best film, yet somehow, he holds this one together!

    *** out of *****!
  • Have never seen a movie where the main character makes a living serving summons. Perry does an excellent job with his crass character even though it lightened up half way through.

    I didn't plug into the importance of the Grapevines in the bathtub until He's asked what he'd do with his money. Perry's interest in vineyards should have been developed more.

    Stimulating the cow was a bit much - they could have do away with that scene.

    The head of security was excellent role, portraying the humor of his roughness was perfect (especially nailing an employee for a insignificant violation - how funny!)

    Great delivery of humor. I especially liked the scene where Perry's boss is trying to explain that the summons really didn't get delivered. The rain pouring down in the background added to the dramatics.

    I'd definitely see this one again and again.
An error has occured. Please try again.