Glucedee It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

Connianatu How wonderful it is to see this fine actress carry a film and carry it so beautifully.

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

Walter Sloane Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

johnloggins-1 Ok, this film has a lot of twists and turns and moves fast. and several disconnects. which I am still trying to piece together...but it's not horrible.

bricslove First off, I don't see any problems with the pacing, the visuals, or the music in the movie. All were fine and in fact, although the ending felt a bit rushed, it was not just meaningful but also artistic without being pretentious.I agree, however, with some of the reviewers that it more falls into the drama genre than thriller. I have a brief moment of disappointment with good flicks that are categorized wrong, but that's about it.Now... My character analysis is somewhere between the spectrum of views from the reviewers.The movie does not clearly hint at any possibility that Clarke's character specifically went out to find someone permanently vulnerable to marry, due to a handicap. When you extrapolate the characters into the past, perhaps some of the audience would say that is very likely. Understandably so, as there are many people who actually feel so insecure as to purposely marry totally dependent partners. The problem in the movie is, though, Lively's character doesn't waste time to confirm her husband's fears, and denies it when confronted.It would be only natural for her to change her looks following the operation- she had to see herself first to know what she wanted to look like.That was not what troubled the husband. It could have been, in other cases, but the movie tells us that it is not.What critically troubled the husband was that scene on the train that he kept replaying, closing up on his wife's face as she thought no one was watching.Also the realizations: 1. she lied about the man in the park 2. she said she was pregnant, without knowing her husband was sterile.Whereas he could confront her and file a divorce or give her a second chance, the husband hatched a wicked plan to have her blind self back, failing to accept the fact that newly gained eyesight would make one discover more about oneself and have preferences with things one had no way of deciding before. As Gina said: "we don't know who me is." This was the problem. The husband could only get to know this new wife as fast as she could get to know more of herself. This problem was not mutually shared, as the wife had understandably welcomed the changes with delight.Said another way, changes happen faster than the husband is able to let sink in and upon realizing that he is losing his wife, he tries to reverse the process back to when he knows she would need him, therefore would keep him, as if he can make her unsee things, rewind time. So he tries to actually blind her. That is how mentally sick he has become. As the wife is singing this song on stage from a time when she was blind and all she saw was him, and staring straight in his eyes all the time... there's this silent conversation via exchanges of gazes of how she used to love him, how she could still see and knew what he had been up to, and how he ruined it all. He gets the messages, walks out on her and jumps in his car, and, absorbed in a very emotionally intense session of self-introspection and judgment while driving, ends up in a fatal accident.A life ends as a new one begins. Things move on, one way or another. If he had thought about it before the operation he could prepare and therefore grant himself "the serenity to accept the things he cannot change".I loved almost everything about the movie without the need to root for either of these two characters who had become very realistically unlikable as the movie proceeded. I respect this in a movie. A cold but sincere little flick.

evalaw This is a really good film. I really really loved it and I don't get all the negative reviews. I didn't get bored at all and it totally made sense from the beginning till the end. That being said, it's not for everyone. You have to be a little bit more mature and have had serious relationships in the past to understand it. It evolves more around Gina and James' marriage and its evolution after she restores her sight and tries to find her true self, now that she has the power to choose her clothes, make up, hobbies etc. You can see the characters evolve in front of your eyes in an absolutely realistic way, you can even relate to them, feel their agony, theis fears and understand their actions. Blake Lively shines in this film. She's more charming han ever. Jason's lark performance is very nice too. After all, I think James' (Jason Clarks') evolution and reactions in the film are the most interesting part of all.

savdi-71742 Literally that's it. All I See is You is, in my opinion, the film epitome of the phrase "look at the pretty colours". There is nothing here. This "movie" consists of a collection of flowery, overblown images laced with bright lights. It's shiny, it's even pretty at times, but that's because the sparkly prettiness is the entire focus of this "film".I feel that All I See is You was created to show off some stylish imagery, rather than to tell a story of any kind. This is no movie. There were actors half-heartedly trying (and failing) to breathe life into paper characters, but honestly... it's all about the pretty colours.