Rating: 
Summary: Yawn
Review: It was so bad at one stage I lost it and couldn't stop laughing. Save your money, or even better give it to charity. A huge, although beautifully shot, disapointment
Rating:
Summary: Stunning Visuals, Idiotic Characters
Review: This movie is one that certainly isn't going to please everyone, and I feel my money was wasted on this particular tripe. The premise, itself mindless as stone, revolves around two young men who haven't sufficient brain power to sustain one, set off on a day hike and get lost. Rather than doing anything intelligent, like following their own tracks back to safety, they simply keep moving farther and farther into a wilderness area. Hey, it's a desert! Footprints and signs will linger a long time! Follow them home already! But no... they did not pack a brain! Being the brilliant lads they are, knowing in advance they would be hiking in a desert, they brought cigarettes but no water! Not a single bottle of water between them. In a desert!!! Did they bring a compass? No. A map? No. Can they read the stars? Guess not. Did they leave word with anybody where they would be going? Give anybody an indication when they might be expected back? Evidently not, so when they fail to return, nobody cares. And as a movie affecianado, neither should you. Further evidence of stupidity is seen when one of them climbs a big rock and can't get himself down! Long minutes are then squandered on Damon trying to make a dirt mattress for his pal to jump down onto! He should have simply gone up on that rock and pushed the other bloke off! Problem resolved! Really, please! I was left wondering how they managed to generate sufficient power from such useless brains to keep their legs moving! Neither of them manages anything resembling a flash of intellect or logic in dealing with their problems. They walked right over edible plants, but are too imbecillic to recognize them. They simply plod endlessly on, in scenes mind numbingly long, offering little sympathy for these two guys from the viewer. Hey, I live and recreate in huge wilderness areas, and know how to get along out there. These two should have stayed in their car, or better still, safely at home. No, if this film is any indication, they would likely get lost between kitchen and bathroom! Visually, the film is stunning. Technically, excruciatingly long shots of two heads bobbing as these blokes plod endlessly along simply bored me to death. The screen is filled for minute after glorious minute with two massive heads that are evidently devoid of grey matter whatsoever! Personally, if all this movie offers is nifty visual scenes, one could do far better with a nature video or enviroscape. It will cost you much less as well. While I have seen some very avid reviews of this film, I personally would not recommend it to anybody. Hick Trek
was more entertaining than this turkey, and Ed Wood (the man) more visonary!
Rating:
Summary: how much awful can you get?
Review: Listen up movie goers this movie has to be the absolute worst movie i've ever seen.And i truly mean that.When i say boring i mean it.For the few reviews that say there is some type of creative side to this movie,what are they smokin? This movie is nothin but two guys walkin around some harsh terrain lost,rarely saying anything, thats it!
Theres nothing else.Some people say you need alot of patience to watch this movie I've watched Godsford Park at least 5 times i know patience'this movie had to be made just to see what matt damom and the afflecks can get away with,example is myself i paid full price plus tax on this awful movie to see, well "nothing" i guess is the most appropriate word i can use on this website. Please lay off this one!!!!
Rating: 
Summary: Much better than I'd heard
Review: Honestly, the criticism of this movie has been so exaggerated. Before seeing "Gerry," I'd heard that the movie contained only two or three bits of sparse dialogue, that it was suffocatingly slow, and even that it contained a sunset shot "in real time." All of this is false. Someone else even suggested that the whole film was a practical joke, and that Van Sant, Affleck, and Damon were laughing all the way to the bank. Yes, because this movie is SO commercial. I'm sure it was a HUGE moneymaker for all of them. (That was sarcasm, in case you couldn't tell.) As you've heard, this film is about two young men who get lost in the desert, and the movie does a good job of approximating what that would feel like. There is quite a bit of dialogue, although a lot of it is idle chatter or strategizing about how they're going to find their way back to the highway. Some of it, however, is pretty funny. The acting is great, the scenery is so beautiful and beautifully shot it's like a moving painting, and the end of the movie is haunting. I was still thinking about it the next day. No, this isn't wall-to-wall action or hilarity; don't go into it expecting that. Go into it expecting an interesting experimental film, and you won't be disappointed.
Rating: 
Summary: From the Creative Team That Brought You Good Will Hunting...
Review: ...comes the most pretentious film of 2002: a movie about two guys walking. No kidding. I expected a little more from Matt Damon and Gus Van Sant, perhaps I shouldn't have. One guy actually wrote a review here that is probably longer than the script. Oh, I can see the pitch now... Damon (on phone): Hey Gus, it's Matt, I've got another idea for a movie. Van Sant (on phone): Great Matt, let's hear it. Damon: Okay, Casey and I will get lost in the desert. (pause) Van Sant: Then what happens? Damon: What do you mean? That's it. Van Sant: Brilliant. When did you want to do it? Damon: I'm not sure. This will take a lot of planning and a large budget. Well, it didn't have a large budget, but I couldn't help myself. I just don't understand what they were going for here. The shots last an eternity, the dialogue is stiff and pointless, and nothing happens. This would have maybe (I stress maybe) been a good subject for a short film, but this thing is 103 minutes long. In fact the only entertainment I got out of this film was writing this review. Unless you have a fetish for Matt Damon and Casey Affleck or desert vistas...BEWARE!
Rating:
Summary: Scenery; YES---Story; NO!
Review: This is possibly the longest, most boring movie I've ever seen. It does not get any better after the LONG opening shots. The scenery is gorgeous, but I rent movies to be entertained! Neither Matt, nor Ben nor Casey (Ben-Casey, who chose these names? What were they thinking?) can save this one.
Rating:
Summary: Boring
Review: Okay, so there's beautiful landscapes -- if I want to see that I'll just watch the discovery channel or something. You don't have to show 10 minutes of this to get your point across. Luckily I saw it on dvd and just fast forwarded it to the end. I feel sorry for people who saw it at the theatre. Someone said it was a conflict between man and nature, that's ok but it should have been an interesting conflict like a tornado or something not just walking. Or at least cut the movie down to 20 minutes. It seemed more like 103 hours than minutes. I read another interpretation were someone said that there's actually one Gerry with two personalities -- that made it slightly better and that's why I gave it 2 stars instead of 1. It was just too long and boring for my tastes.
Rating:
Summary: A movie for people who love to talk about movies
Review: Love it or hate it, Gerry seems to be a movie that elicits lengthy pseudo-theoretical justification or excoriation. Most of these explanations and deconstructions have more words than the movie itself. (They certainly have more syllables.) If you're looking for a movie you can love or hate very loudly to all your cinema-illiterate friends, this is it. Director Gus Van Sant and Casey Affleck have mentioned video games as one idea/inspiration for Gerry. (90% of the film's dialogue is in one fireside conversation about a SimAthens-style game, Zeus: Master of Olympus.) People spend hours trudging through a CG desert or signing virtual treaties with neighboring tribes or whatever without feeling any need to interpret or rationalize their actions afterward. Why not try this approach with Gerry? Then decide if a game-like film is as engrossing as playing a game yourself or as excruciatingly boring as standing by while _someone else_ plays.
Rating: 
Summary: Something different than your typical multiplex movie
Review: Gus Van Sant is not afraid to follow up a big Hollywood movie with a low budget indie production and "Gerry" is definitely unlike any movie I've ever seen before. Some directors, like Steven Soderbergh, will do something as commercially appealing and popular as "Ocean's Eleven" - then follow it up with something as commercially unappealing as "Solaris". Van Sant has done the same 180 degree turn here as well. Sure to incite anger from casual moviegoers expecting the "new Matt Damon movie", "Gerry" is a 103 minute long movie that has virtually no dialogue. And the only two characters on screen are Matt Damon and Casey Affleck - both named Gerry. The movie opens with a wordless scene featuring the two Gerrys driving in the desert until they stop at a rest area. Finally around ten minutes in we are witness to the first dialogue between the two Gerrys. They embark on foot down a wilderness trail where they anticipate finding "the thing". We never find out what that "thing" is because the pair end up getting lost before finding it. The next 90 or so minutes is a nearly dialogue free collection of scenes showing the two guys trying to find their way back to the car. The beauty of a film like "Gerry" is that its minimalism is the silent third character. Blended in with the environment and weather, the two Gerrys are faced with thirst and starvation. The ending is shocking, especially in context of the location where it occurs. This is not a film for everyone. In fact, over half of the people in the theatre abandoned the screening by the halfway point. Whole groups of people left the theatre at one time, unable to endure this movie. Don't go to "Gerry" expecting "The Bourne Identity" or "Good Will Hunting". This is not that kind of movie. The amazing acting from Damon and Affleck would be difficult for an actor to carry off but these guys did it. Damon really demonstrates his skills near the end in a wordless scene that relies solely on his face and body language. Van Sant deserves credit for even considering a project like this. Will you be able to appreciate it, however? That is the question...
Rating:
Summary: Gerry
Review: Absolutely disgusting! If I could , I would give it "MINUS 5" stars!
Nothing useful is left inside you, once you finish seeing this film.
We see a film, looking for something, pleasure, history, lust, good sex, visual effects, inner beauty of the characters......., something!...... but in this film, only a disgusting feeling is left in the heart. Not only you loose the money, but also the time, and furthermore, a horrible taste and feeling remains in the soul for days, after seeing that film! What a waste of time.
| 
