The Lovely Bones (2010; Rated Rated PG-13)

The Lovely Bones

“ Loved the book, admired but couldn't fully embrace the film. ”

-Richard Roeper


The Lovely Bones

(2010; PG-13)

In theaters:
Friday, 15 January 2010

Summary: Centers on a young girl who has been murdered and watches over her family - and her killer - from heaven. She must weigh her desire for vengeance against her desire for her family to heal.

Crime, Drama, Fantasy, Thriller

Peter Jackson

Mark Wahlberg, Rachel Weisz, Stanley Tucci

Post a Comment

Mikesaid on Monday, December 15, 2014 9:40:41 AM
I did like the movie, but like Richard I did not enjoy it as much as I enjoyed Alice Sebold's novel. The scenes in Susie's version of heaven were well made (The visuals are spectacular.) but I felt them to be a little annoying in the sense that they were all over the place and a bit incoherent at times. Also there were some parts of the novel that were excluded from this movie that I think would have helped. One being the mother's affair with the detective on the case (Scenes were filmed but they were ultimately cut.). On the positive side the performances are all very good (Mark Wahlberg was a last second replacement for Ryan Gosling who quit just days before shooting was scheduled to begin.). I agree with Richard's grade of "B-".

Dave Jamessaid on Saturday, February 06, 2010 9:24:43 AM
The continuity errors in this film were shocking considering Peter Jackson's reputation. In one scene, there's snow on the ground. Then, a few minutes later, there's no snow. Then, a few minutes later, there's snow again. It was so noticeable that audience members were saying, "Where's the snow?" And, if the murder occurred in Norristown, PA, why were the victim's schoolbooks stamped "Fairfax County, VA, Schools"? And, there were more errors. I thought the film was junk except for Tucci's performance.

Stacysaid on Wednesday, February 03, 2010 8:54:00 PM
The naysayers are all drunk. This movie was brilliant. I cried like a baby all through. This crime should never be borne by anyone. Peter Jackson's rendition definitely hit a nerve. It will stay with me for a long time. My heart goes out to families who still today are grappling with unbearable loss like this.

Sarahsaid on Monday, January 25, 2010 3:25:35 AM
I saw this movie and I have to disagree. While I haven't read the book, i'm glad I didn't as it doesn't taint my opinion of it. I thought it was wonderfully done! Great acting, great special effects and great story line. The only negative I have to say about it is that some things felt like they were missing but that's understandable considering the time limit of each film. Definitaly one of my absolute favourites! Well done Mr. Jackson and cast!

scott houpsaid on Friday, January 15, 2010 9:49:38 PM
hmmm i'll still go see it. i love stanley tucci and peter jackson.
i'll go in trying to forgot how amazing the book was(if that can even happen) for the sake of not disliking peter jackson. because i <3 his slightly awesome vision, and eye for detail.
but thanks for this review richard. i liked it :D

suzanne t. stengersaid on Thursday, January 14, 2010 4:05:49 PM
Like your new website.S.

Gabriel Eligh Maximussaid on Sunday, December 13, 2009 1:48:51 PM
I'm surprised at all the negativity, I had high hopes for this film and Peter jackson is a genius so I was expected it be nothing less than a worthy addition to his masterful body of work. Still going to see this as soon as it hits nearby.




 indicates required field
Response URL:
Enter text as shown:  

NOTE: Your comment will be approved before it is posted.
Nuts on Clark
©2021 Richard Roeper. All Right Reserved
Powered by
Web site design and development by