Notting Hill : This movie was LAME–bunch of Boring Brits

couldn't believe how bad this movie wasI'm a Hugh Grant fan, he was great in About A Boy(2003), Four Weddings And A Funeral(1994), Bridget Jones Diary especiallybut the supporting cast is awful and dull, Julia Roberts is just so-so, the whole movie crawlsso how did this tripe make so much money?

I don't know where you live but if you have been around Brits for any substantial time you'd know that most of them are in fact boring. That was part of the point of the story, boring Brits encounter an American movie star and see how the situations develop.

..*.. TxMike ..*..
Sometimes I think we're alone in the universe, and sometimes not.

Yes and Director likewise shows how Americans are LOUD but still boring with "my American boyfriend" who Julia eventually leaves because he is just soooo "American".

Likewise the pretentious young child star ["Decraprio"]

http://www.kindleflippages.com/ablog/

Given the opportunity to be with the 'bunch of boring Brits' in this movie or, for example, the cast of "Friends" (or any programme of a similar ilk), I know which I'd choose and it wouldn't be the Americans . I loved the cast of Notting Hill and it always makes me smile

i think the supporting cast is very good, especially Hugh grant's welsh lodger. i think the characters are more interesting than the ones in Four weddings and a funeral. and certainly more interesting than the tedious people in Bridget Jones's Diary.

Better than a bunch of loud, ignorant, racist Americans wouldn't you say..

lame, dull and cheesy

deadly combinations for any movie






so many movies, so little time

The movie runs (or limps) a full 123 minutes, which is too long for this kind of fluff. There is a lot of padding, and it shows. Also, the quirks of the band of friends and roommate are too obvious. FWaaF had more nuance.