Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

ChicDragon It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

ChampDavSlim The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

Delight Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.

USFbobFL I suppose for some, this movie has some redeeming qualities. For me, however, I found myself hitting the fast-forward button through 75% of the film. First of all, the attempt at having all of the characters dialog rhyme was extremely distracting and so removed from real life that it made the already uninteresting plot even more unbearable.Since I spent most of the time fast-forwarding through what seemed to me as the ridiculous and mundane, you should really watch the movie for yourself and make your own judgements. Maybe you'll get lucky and actually be able to get into it.One word of advice, rent this movie first prior to purchasing. You'll be glad you did. I'll be putting my copy up for sale on eBay.

david-greene5 This comment comes from someone who used to make films and who positively devours them, sometimes seeing ten or more in a given week. I often deliberately seek out movies that I know little or nothing about. I wanted to see the movie, "Yes" because Joan Allen at her worst, in a terrible film is likely to be worth watching, so great is her artistry. In the Brechtian sense, the composing of all the dialect in this film in strictly rhyming verse is alienating. You do not become readily hypnotized into that suspended disbelief that makes many movie stories seem so real. Some very committed, powerful performances in this film frequently make the sense of real, vibrant characters come across very strongly; however, the verse often jars you into standing back, as it were, and more objectively examining what the filmmaker is saying thematically. In my opinion, Sally Potter is dealing here, in a fascinating manner, with some major philosophical issues. It is heady, literary territory and I quickly knew that vast numbers of moviegoers in this day and age would be very resistant to a film that is so far removed from the flashy action fare that is so pervasive these days. I don't know if there was ever a time when one might have expected much box-office success for such a strange film. Perhaps Ms. Potter was blissfully oblivious to this fact in an impassioned quest to bring her project to the screen; however, given the high level of intelligence that is so powerfully in evidence here, I rather suspect that what we are seeing is the product of a great deal of courage. I believe that this artist had a powerful vision of a "dangerously" unique sort of picture and, with that rare sort of integrity that will not permit degrading compromise, she brought forth a film which is dazzlingly rich and thought provoking.......and will surely never work for those who crave that adrenaline rush that seems to be the primary aim of today's blockbuster hits. Such integrity garners all possible respect and approval from me. I was engrossed and intrigued throughout the whole piece.

Roland E. Zwick Writer/director Sally Potter's movie "Yes" gives us an inkling - at least in terms of style -of what it might be like if Shakespeare were alive today and writing screenplays (though one hopes that they would turn out considerably better than this one happens to be). The "unique" characteristic of the film is that the characters discuss the meaning of life and the complexities of relationships entirely in poetic verse. Pure rhymes, slant rhymes, internal rhymes - virtually every type of rhyme can be found in this film. The problem is that the novelty of the conceit wears off mighty quickly, so that all we are ultimately left with are a bunch of pretentious, whiney characters driving us crazy with their high-toned blathering. Allow me to propose a simple rule of thumb: you know you'll be needing a sturdy pair of hip boots to wade through any movie, play or novel in which two of the main characters are referred to simply as He and She.I hope I won't be dismissed as a Philistine for objecting to this film. As a matter of fact, I am always open for anything even remotely novel and different in film-making, and I actually quite like the idea of a movie that plays like an extended poem. The problem is that I just couldn't stand any of the people we were being asked to care about in this particular work. Joan Allen and Sam Neill play a middle-aged English couple whose marriage has long ago become a hollow shell. They are clearly intended to be models of the enervated upper class - cynical, bored, filled with ennui and unable to communicate their innermost thoughts and feelings to one another - but we've seen these types of characters and marriages so many times before that Anthony and She feel more like caricatures than actual people (I'm not quite sure why he gets a real name and she - I mean She - doesn't, but no matter). And their speaking in verse only makes them all that more insufferable in their pseudo-profundity and monumental self-absorption.Allen, due to her extraordinary gifts as an actress, is at least able to cut through the pretentiousness and create some feeling for her character, but Neill and Simon Abkarian (who looks distressingly like Borat), as a chef from Beirut who becomes her lover (he's the He to Allen's She), are not quite so fortunate. Moreover, to make matters worse, in a movie in which language plays such a crucial part, some of the accents are so thick that much of the dialogue is simply incomprehensible. That only compounds the frustration of watching the movie.There are some genuinely lyrical moments when the movie seems to be working and we can see what the filmmakers were trying to get at. But, unfortunately, those wind up being too few and far between to keep us from voting a resounding "Nay" to "Yes."

Ghost-Cat If I can not find the rhyme - fine, if I can not find the rhythm - hit me!It's been a while since I have cried watching movie. And by the end I sobbed like a child who has been told that Santa is not real. Of course, I'm lying just a bit, men do not cry in movies. It takes a woman to bring tears to man's eyes. Yet, I admit, the movie touched me deeply. I have been known to write a verse or two. And timing was suspiciously perfect, I just was looking for the answer, hoping 'Yes' could be the word I'll hear from the Goddess. God answered instead. He did not sound 3.14ssed but neither He was pleased with my quest. At least He was amused, you can bet on that. Let us return back to the movie. Some people, I guess, those who did not expect to hear a lengthy poem, might get upset after an overdose of verse. I pity them but only for a moment, it's all I've got for them, the rest is for my Goddess...I meant the time, my darling, not the pity. Yeah, yeah, yeah. All the time. OK, I'm sorry, little domestic troubles. I gotta go now. See it for yourselves. And hear too)))Bye-bye,Ghost Cat