Endless Love (1981) Poster

(1981)

User Reviews

Review this title
86 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
Classic tale of "boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy burns down girl's house..."
allexand14 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
"Endless Love" is one of those films that asks you to accept some rather inappropriate and bizarre behavior as normal, and to sympathize with an obsessed stalker. Throw in gratuitous nudity and it's hard not to see why this ruined Brooke Shields' movie career.

The film basically demonstrates what happens when two teens, David and Jade, start dating and their parents let them do whatever they want. David's parents have the excuse of being oblivious but Jade's parents... oh wow... where to begin?

They do drugs with their kids and throw wild parties. They condone David spending the night in Jade's room. Both parents catch them and while the father does get mad the mother calmly stands there and watches them have sex! Her father even sees David brazenly walking around naked in his daughter's room with the door wide open.

It's only when an exhausted-from-constant-lovemaking Jade tries to swipe some sleeping pills and starts dozing off in class that common sense finally prevails and the father forbids David and Jade from seeing each other albeit temporarily. David protests and pleads his case, which is normal. What he does next, however, is not.

An idiot friend of David's talks him into anonymously setting Jade's porch on fire with the intent that he would come back to rescue them. The big dummy actually does this, the fire gets out of control, and the house burns down. Gee, who could've seen THAT coming? David confesses and gets sent for psychiatric observation. While I applaud that they didn't gloss over the consequences of his actions, this is where the movie takes a really dark turn as David starts to become obsessed, and I mean "Fatal Attraction" obsessed.

He does nothing but pine for Jade and write letters to her every day. He blows off therapy sessions and begs his parents repeatedly to get him out despite the fact that he refuses to get better. In addition, Jade's parents divorce and they move to New York. David's parents do likewise and I can't say I blame them.

Finally, he gets released and what does he do? He goes to New York to track her down. The craziness only escalates as he finds Jade's mother only to have her hit on him but David's too obsessed to care. Jade comes to his hotel room to let him down easy only for him to shamelessly beg her to take him back and pretty much rape her. Since no one behaves like a real person in this movie, this wins her over. Then he has a contrived encounter with her father just so the idiot can be run over as he chases David across the street.

This culminates in a scuffle in a hotel lobby when Jade's brother accuses David of killing their father and ends with David being arrested and likely sent back to the nut house which is where he sadly belongs. Jade, who still can't get the hint, has a heart-to-heart with her mother about taking him back and the movie closes on her coming to visit him while he's locked up. I think my heart skipped a beat.

The film's biggest problem is that is treats David and Jade's relationship as one you're supposed to root for when, in reality, it's puppy love gone horribly wrong. We never see how they got together, they never fight, disagree, or have any kind of meaningful conversation, and they constantly have sex. Everything about the movie wants you believe this is true love: the writing, the acting, even the soundtrack. Sort of makes you wonder if anyone ever told Lionel Richie what the movie was really about before he wrote the classic title track. It doesn't help the film beats you over the head with the song either.

The film also has pacing issues once David gets locked up. It says two years have passed but there's not much to indicate this and there's even less sense of time once David goes to New York. The movie shifts focus solely to David and Jade just drops off the face of the earth for forty-five minutes. What's especially weird is that two years would only make Jade seventeen and probably still in high school so how's she wandering around New York and making trips to David's hospital unsupervised? And you can definitely tell that Brooke Shields can not pass for seventeen or eighteen.

The Razzies would have you believe that the main cast gave bad performances, but I have to disagree on this one. Shirley Knight puts in a believable performance for perhaps one of the worst mothers ever portrayed on film and Martin Hewitt does a respectable job playing essentially a crazy stalker. A young James Spader proves early on that he plays a great smug jerk. Brooke Shields does the best she can pretending to have sex when it's quite obvious she hasn't, although instead of pulling her toe couldn't someone have at least demonstrated the kind of faces a person makes when they're making love? And she's still nowhere near as bad as say, Jaden Smith in "After Earth" or Selena Gomez in "Getaway."

It's the story that really fails them. It's one of those stories that the more effort the actors put in, the worse it looks. The movie wants you to believe it's true love when what's shown on screen is unhealthy obsession. Instead, it ends up a cautionary tale about mistaking lust for love and what can happen when parents don't set boundaries for their children and I really don't think that's what they were going for here.
19 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
endless bore
Caitlin9 June 1999
It's not a terrible movie, despite the wooden performances of the two lead actors. But this story of obsessive love and tragedy never becomes involving or interesting, and feels like it's much too long despite the relatively short running time.

The film does have two redeeming factors: beautiful cinematography and the legendary title song.
20 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Is it the movie or is it the 80s?
sabrinatheblogster9 August 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is ridiculous. I did not relate to the characters for one minute. I know how strong love can feel when you're young, but when a guy sets your house on fire, you're really still going to love him? And want to be with him? Also, that sentimental nonsense (showing how much they love each other) took way too long. I mean, really? 15 years old and you have sex in your parents' living room? (Maybe it's just that I'm too emancipated, but...) Don't have sex before age 17, kids! And NEVER in your parents' living room! And when you do, do it safe! Don't fall for this romantic crap. Almost half of the movie. At some point I just wanted to fast forward it. I did not "feel the love", which was probably partly to blame on the script and partly on the actors. Terrible movie.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Special memory for me
mylarstar19 October 2006
This movie has special meaning for me. I remember being 16 when I took the "love of my life" (who was 15) to see it. I had not seen it since...until tonight. For some reason, I had been thinking about this movie lately and looked on EBay and got it yesterday. I watched it tonight and cannot believe the memories it brought back. I was surprised to remember a lot of the scenes and lines throughout. It also made me terribly sad to remember that my "love" passed away in a car accident 3 years after we saw it together. The title song gets me every time. I cannot honestly say whether or not this is a "good" movie as far as "good" movies go. But I can say without a doubt that after watching this tonight for the first time in 25 years, this movie takes my heart to a place it hasn't been to since 1984 and made me remember an unforgettable night in 1981.

I guess that's what certain movies do, be it "good" or "bad".
154 out of 177 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
If it weren't for the book....
violetta148515 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This film wouldn't seem so awful if the book hadn't been so moving and extraordinary. Zeffirelli said in an interview that he was changing it so the love of the two teens was mutual, and not one-sided, and that I believe was his mistake. The book is not about love at all, it's about obsession. Readers have complained that we don't meet Jade until halfway through the book and she hardly seems to merit all that fixation, but that's the point. It's all in David's head.

In the book, when they reunite, he's trying to make them have sex exactly the way they did years ago. The opening pages show him looking through their window, feeling banished from this "wonderful perfect family," but he ignores all the clues that they are nothing of the kind: when he sets the fire, they can't cope because they are all on acid, in what the mother later describes as a last-ditch effort to bring the family together. The mother watches her daughter have sex in order to live vicariously, because her own marriage is falling apart. The father sneaks stimulants into his daughter's food because he believes in homeopathy. The brother, we later learn, brought David home as he brought other classmates home, mostly to impress them with how cool and hip the family is and then dump them when he gets bored (we learn later from an old classmate David meets on the plane that the brother did the same thing to him). David is obviously emotionally fragile to begin with, but these horrible poseurs are exactly the people he doesn't need to meet. They exploit him as an audience for their Coolness Quotient and then dump him without regard for what they might be doing to him. He's a psycho alright--but if he weren't, he might see through them, which he obviously hasn't done, even by the end of the book.

Little of this was conveyed in the movie, which also did not keep Spencer's late-'60s setting, which would have made the Butterfields' boho weekend-hippie aspirations more understandable. A lot of suburban people were trying to prove how groovy they were back then: look at mainstream magazines like Ladies' Home Journal or Newsweek and you'll see articles on open marriages, the pill, and symbolic meanings of Beatles Album covers. The respective talents (or lack thereof) of Shields and Hewitt have been the subject of much debate and jeering, but I don't think much could be done with a script that jettisoned the essential unreliable narrator aspect of the book (i.e., what David *thinks* he's telling us about the Butterfields and himself is not necessarily what we decide to believe after we've heard some of the details). All we have left is the star-crossed lover thing, and that has been done by Zeffirelli himself in R&J, and modernized in West Side Story. Without Shakespeare's words or Bernstein's music, or any novel element or perspective, it's hard to justify doing it again.
62 out of 76 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Rotten Romance Warning: Spoilers
I remember reading the book about 4 years ago and really liked it so if I forgot something from it I apologize. I understand that certain things in the movie must change from the book but sadly it you make changes the change has to make sense. This didn't happen.

1. These two leads are terrible! I can honestly say that Edward and Bella had more things to say than this. They at least had a conversation about science together. David and Jade just like saying how much they love each other and how they couldn't be apart from one another. That's it. There is no character development from them and no reason for them to stay together. Plus no offense to the actors but there not good at playing these roles. Maybe it's the directors fault but it still is terrible. David is unpleasant to watch which was part of the book but they should have at least made him understanding enough for the audience which sadly he isn't and makes his role as leading male disturbing. Jade is just a whiny teenage girl that I've seen before.

2. The side characters are obnoxious and eerie to watch. The dad is totally crazy, the mother is honestly one of the more frightening mother roles I've ever seen, the other characters are dull and the only one who deserves the one star I'm giving this movie is James Spader. He did a pretty good performance for what he was given.

3. The story is just a mess of problems. Why didn't the dad throw David off his property since technically he was trespassing and refusing to leave? Why did the judge say he couldn't contact Jade yet David is seen sending her letters? Why didn't the dad do anything when he saw naked David in his daughters room and then she went in with only a towel on? Yeah, motivations in this movie are apparently just silly myths.

This could've been a good movie. I could see potential behind it but sadly this movie fell flat on its face. The romance doesn't work, the characters don't work and sadly the story doesn't work. When those three things don't work in a romance movie you sadly have a bad movie.
18 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Is this movie for real?
altec1815 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I can't believe this movie got made. It's so awful, and it's not awful in the typical way. It's just messed up. It's not messed up because the family is hippie-ish and whatnot, it's messed up because the characters in it do not act in any rational way whatsoever. The mother watches her fifteen year old daughter have sex and she enjoys it, the boyfriend lights the family house on fire after seeing the girl hold hands with another person, the mother comes onto the daughter's boyfriend, the father has this bizarre over-attachment to his daughter (he seems jealous about the daughter having a boyfriend). It's sick, twisted, and wrong.

It may have been based on a good book, but you can't tell from watching it.
16 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
loved it
goldenholden3729 September 2014
I don't know what everyone was talking about. This movie is great. I'm shocked at the low review and glad it didn't keep me from watching this movie, even though it almost did. I do agree that the performance left much to be desired, but they did have passion for each other. It was just the acting... Anyway, I didn't read the book and I think that was where the problem laid with a lot of people. It's rare that you will read the book and then watch the movie and be satisfied. Especially if it's a book you love. I'm glad I went into it not knowing much about it.

I do have to say how teed off I am about the huge spoiler in the description which tells what David did to the house, like WTHeck?! That doesn't even happen until halfway into the movie,Jesus!

Anyway, good watch. I will definitely watch it again and read the book. It was a beautiful tragedy.
21 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Sooooooooo Bad
magoomj8 May 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Boy meets girl, boy fornicates with girl, girl's father gets mad that boy fornicates with girl, forbids boy to see girl, boy burns down girl's house, boy goes to the loony bin. And it all gets worse from there. Brooke Shields is the worst actress ever and the writing is laughable. Not even James Spader can save this turd.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
This movie isn't as bad as people say...
tinkerbell114 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I borrowed this movie at my local video store because I am a fan of Brooke Shields. I honestly don't see why people bag this film as much as they do these days. It is a sweet, even if a little cheesy film with great performances by all the cast (some better than others). One of it's bad points is that it's a little too 80's - which may explain why it hasn't aged that well. But I think this movie should not be put down as much as it has, and is worth viewing, especially if your a lover of romance. Another great point in this movie is it's title song and theme "Endless Love" by Lionel Richie and Diana Ross. This song is beautiful and the movie would not be the same without it.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
The boy is selfish & childish
kindredparadox9 May 2021
David (Martin Hewitt) and Jade (Brooke Shields) fall in love with each other. When Jade's father feels their relationship affecting Jade's school grade, he made rule to separate them for a month

When David feels want it, David sleep over at Jade's room and made sex until morning, so Jade is sleepy inside school class? David play with fire and burned down Jade's house, when her father stop them to see each other just until school exam? It almost feels like the director really hate the boy character in the book, but then the actors are beautiful, nevertheless is the point. I am only partly remember, but probably the newer version of Endless Love is better and more believable. Plus, you wouldn't believe when you see Tom Cruise, he could make it beyond this film.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Endlessly Intriquing
jrbrowzer9 July 2019
Saw this movie when it came out and have watched it a few times since then. Really interesting to apply the mentality of today to a film which was made in an entirely different era. The late 70s was an era of experimentation which is reflected in the film. It would not make sense in today's context. Kudos to the young actors who showed how a first love can become an obsession. I think given her age, Brooke Shields did a great job with showing how out of control an immature relationship can get. The movie makes me remember a time when you could explore without being branded, grow without being labeled.
37 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A sappy yet interesting look at love and true romance
Captain_Couth15 July 2015
Endless Love (1981) is a romantic drama directed by Franco "Romeo and Juliet" Zeffirelli, starring Brooke Shields and Martin Hewitt as the two young lovers Jade & David who go through thick and thin just to be with each other. The problem is that Jade's free love parents Ann and Hugh allow the young lovers to spend too much time together initially and when they try to act like disciplinarian parents, the cow has left the barn and there's no way it's going back in. Now forbidden to see each other, their love now knows no bounds as it reaches to a point where only something drastic and dramatic lies awaiting.

Based upon the novel "Endless Love" which was written by Scott Spencer and it's a much darker tale loosely based upon the writer's life. I found the movie to be a sweet and over-the-top melodramatic flick that's highly entertaining for all the wrong reasons. Brooke Shields demonstrates her acting abilities that were never quite truly harnessed to their fullest potential whilst director Franco Zeffirelli tries to recreate "Romeo and Juliet" all over again. Martin Hewitt is basically a cipher who goes through the motions, not horrible just there.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
DANGEROUS, IRRESPONSIBLE piece of dreck!
TokyoGyaru5 February 2021
The way they try to romanticize such a toxic, creepy relationship between a naive, impressionable young woman and a obsessive psychopath makes my stomach turn. And her mom is a sick, selfish enabler, the perfect match to the unstable, grasping creep obsessed with her daughter. This movie, especially a character like the mom, doesn't titillate or amuse or interest me--it brings to mind true crime cases. I don't care if it's based off of a book, its title is ironic at best. They also do that classic film thing of framing sexual assault as a passionate, as though "no" means "force me." Disgraceful.

The only plus to the entire film is James Spader. Because of course he is.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The darker version of the teen love story.
TxMike13 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
In 2014 the newest version of this story came out in movie form. Both are based on the same book, and the core story is the same, but overall the two are developed quite differently and end quite differently. I just watched the 2014 version, so I re-watched this one so that I could have a same-time comparison of the two.

This one has a lower IMDb rating but in many respects it is a better movie. It was quite daring for the time, with a fairly graphic love affair between a high school senior boy and a 15-yr-old girl in Chicago. In fairness, the young actress used a body double for the most revealing scenes, but it was till pretty daring. As was the scene where the girl's mother discovers the two of them naked, making love in her home, and only watching. And even more daring, a few years later tries to seduce the young man, now in his early 20s, character-wise.

Not at all new to controversial roles, playing a 12-yr-old prostitute in "Pretty Baby" and playing a stranded girl getting pregnant in "Blue Lagoon", Brooke Shields is the 15-yr-old love interest Jade Butterfield. Her family seems pretty normal, until she and the boy, Martin Hewitt as David Axelrod, begin getting very close. So close in fact that he begins to sleep in Jade's bedroom. Mom doesn't seem to mind, she is happy that Jade is finding love, but dad gets to the point where he will do almost anything to break them apart for good.

This version, probably closer to the source book, is quite dark and the ending is more ambiguous. It also has a very young Tom Cruise in a very small, but very important role.

SPOILERS FOLLOW: As David and Jade get too close for comfort, and David is asked to stay away, one night he applied an idea he got from the Cruise character, he lit some newspapers on Jade's family's porch, started a fire that burned down their house. He received a suspended sentence if he would go into a mental hospital for therapy. He got out after two years and Jade's family had moved out east, and her parents had split up. When David went to NYC and the dad saw him, was hit and killed by a car while chasing David. Then he and a brother got into a fight, David ended up back in the prison hospital because he broke parole. The movie ends with him looking out a window with bars, as Jade walks in the direction of his building. As the title says, "endless love."
13 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A Brooke Shields classic! Yes, it's that bad.
preppy-34 March 2002
Dreadful film of an obsessive love between two teenagers--David (Martin Hewitt) and Jade (Brooke Shields).

The book is fantastic--very well written and honest. The movie is just utter crap. I remember very clearly when it came out in 1981--there was a huge controversy (back then) over the fact that it dealt with two teenagers having sex. Supposedly it was slapped with a X rating originally because of the sex scenes (My guess is that the studio made that up--they realized how hopeless the movie was and decided to make up a controversy to "sell" it). Anyways, it was "edited" and released with an R rating. I saw it opening night...the audience HATED the film! They were actually laughing at the sex scenes! The real howler was when the mother saw her daughter and boyfriend having sex...and SMILED and WATCHED!!!!

It's really hard to believe Franco Zefferilli did this. Brooke Shields can't act (but that's a given). Martin Hewitt was drop dead gorgeous and actually gave a good performance as David. Also Shirley Knight was superb as Jade's mother--she ALMOST makes the film watchable. Also it's Tom Cruises film debut--another reason to hate the film. In his (thankfully brief) scene he proves that he's an even worse actor than Shields! James Spader does what he can as Jade's brother. Also the ending makes no sense at all.

Listen--read the book. It's great. Avoid this movie at all costs. Easily one of the worst films of the 1980s. Good for laughs only.
12 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
The WORST movie ever made!
bigdgun22 September 2001
This is the worst movie ever made-bar none!! If I could give it a zero, no negative points, I would. I can't believe Shields and Spader were in it. I bet they never talk about it now. A stupid premise, bad script and terrible acting make this Zeffirelli flick seem like Tarentino meets Craven with no budget. Midway through this crap you just want all of the characters to die. At least you can get drunk and laugh at Plan 9 from Outer Space. After Endless Love you just want to shoot whomever suggested it (yourself included).
8 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Just strange...
MarieGabrielle14 April 2007
I will have to read the novel this is based on because, overall the effect of the story in unrealistic, and frankly, strange.

Yes, Brooke Shields looks lovely. Her sometime boyfriend is apparently obsessive. We see the usual nebulous references to psychiatry, which was a prevalent plot twist during this time period. When a story plot could not gel, the psychiatric angle would be thrown in to the story (Think: "Prom Night", "Halloween" or "Lipstick").

Don Murray as the ever concerned but clueless father, once again. Disjointed families, divorce and early 80's drama. Not the worst, but certainly could have been better. The hospital and diagnosis of the obsessive boyfriend were completely surreal. 4/10
9 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
screen goddess Brooke Shields
RavenGlamDVDCollector23 April 2017
Finally gotten around to this. Had some difficulty buying it, along the way bought the 2014 Gabriella Wild remake. Checking up on it on Wikipedia the past few days, I expected a total shambles, and the haphazard way the movie started, well, I wasn't expecting too much. Wading in, longed for that remake. At first, didn't feel like a Brooke Shields movie at all, but then, with that girl singing that song Endless Love everything began falling into place, and as the story rolls on, I began to like it more and more, and, hey, Brooke Shields is just everything that lives up to her legendary status.

Unfortunately, the movie deteriorates at an alarming rate due to that arson plot development that comes like a bolt from the blue, without any clue in up-to-then normal boy David's behavior, which makes me feel it is just contrived. Before this movie finally irrevocably becomes a shambles to unfortunately remain a shambles and stay an utter shambles, I was gonna award it an 8. It had all the potential for a decent story and then went and threw it all away.

Shirley Knight, powerful performance. All the parents do a fine job, but Shirley's an especially good standout, so is Don Murray, the only guy in the movie who could act. I don't like Martin Hewitt, though. Comes across as a pretentious carnivore, something about him I don't like. Okay, they chose an actor who could play the dark side. Another reviewer, I've since seen, refers to Martin as a cipher. Just there. Exactly. He was capable of doing the nude scenes with Brooke. That's it. That got him the part. But that's all.

Something that few films of that era can say, this movie's first half stood the test of time. Except for that corny heart thing at the beginning, and the planetarium thing, didn't really work. Wonderful use of music, I Was Made For Loving You, Baby and Blondie with Heart of Glass, + as mentioned, that girl singing Endless Love.

Movie has a bad reputation. The author of the book is especially at odds with it. No, I haven't read the book. But the shortcomings have to be blamed on the book, it was the blueprint. The arson story twist is a crock, but surely, that's from the book?

Good start. Then derails. Love the good first half. As for the second half, producers, set fire to the whole lot!

Bottom line for me though: Brooke Shields is worth watching.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Fear with the psycho winning ending
mariellosr1 December 2019
What the he'll was this? It made think about the movie fear, but in this version Mark Wolberg's character kills the father and keeps the girl (Reese). Things have changed a lot since the 80's.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Surprisingly good
awvknj31 July 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I came into this with the expectation it would be like a B-Hallmark movie but it was anything but --interesting psychological drama with beautifully filmed love scenes (the Zeffirelli touch) Not knowing anything about the movie or the book that it was based on I was surprised at the twists and turns. And I really enjoyed all the performances as well. I just have to say that Brooke Did much better in this film than I expected acting wise as well and besides that- she's just gorgeous to look at in her youth! No wonder Zeffirelli wanted to film her.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
One star for the only one who is worthy: Brooke Shields
ursuladuke17 October 2020
To have such a gem in your hands, a natural beauty who can act, and create this? Overly dramatic and bad acting, inconsistent characters who's behavior doesn't make any sense, messed up script, pointless ending. I haven't read the book, but unfortunately, this movie is a waste of time.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Unforgettably endless film, ala Zeffereli
videorama-759-85939123 November 2017
Here's one of the unforgettable 80's films, heralded by it's title song. EL is a beautifully shot and acted film, of a boundless love, between two late teens, (Shields and Hewitt, perfectly paired) which when sabotaged by outside parties, heads on a path of damage and destruction, which weighs heavily on Hewitt's character. He becomes unhinged, by the vetoing of him from Shield's family, after things really start to heat up. Besides an undeniable and explosive passion, there are other contributing factors here, with exams and finals coming up. Don Murray as Shield's father was a standout here, where Shirley Knight as the mother who was really good, but it was Murray, who added spice. Knight's open Mother character, was one I really liked though. As you'll see, they aren't your typical family, but they're one you like to be part off. James Spader as the protective and pushy son, who was the catalyst you'll see, was fun to watch. You really feel for Hewitt's character during his breakdown, with emotionally powered moments, this, the strongest section of story. But it's hard to really feel anything for Shield's character until her return, after a long absence of screen time, as really, you hardly learn much about her character, and not that much more in the after. Nearing it's end, there were some well up tear moments, where soon you have a sudden, yet, unsatisfactory, but thought provoking ending, in this Zeffereli's 80 masterpiece. One movie that will make you ponder, well after the curtains, have come down.
11 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Great Romantic Movie
anthonydapiii5 May 2020
I genuinely don't remember much of this one because I watched it when I was younger.

But I can definitely say it was an excellent movie.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Too creepy to be a love story. (spoilers)
vertigo_1412 March 2005
Warning: Spoilers
'Endless Love' may seem like the usual story of teenage romance, carrying on a little too far and too much in that way that teenagers might when they first fall in love. But, this surpasses a tale of romance and instead is the story of young love and desire turned into a psychotic fixation.

Brooke Sheilds plays Jade, the impressionable fifteen year old who's parents forbid her from seeing her boyfriend, David. Only destined to defy her parents, David accidentally burns down the family's house (oh yeah, that's going to go over smoothly with her folks), and is put in a psychiatric hospital. Years pass, and once he is released, David goes looking for Jade, trying to pick up exactly where they left off years ago. But, he is not merely a character who lost his love, but instead, turns things into an unhealthy fixation that borders on the psychotic, gradually making this a very creepy "love story." For me, this was terrible 80s material, and will most likely pique the interest of those who wish to see it merely because of the cast of young familiar 80s favorites (James Spader, Ian Ziering, Tom Cruise, Jami Gertz, etc.).
7 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed