Molly (1999) User Reviews

Sweet and Funny, but Derivative

[alabamagetaway · 5/10 · 17 June 2005]

A lightweight film, but engaging. I think that the actors did their jobs well, given the flimsiness of the script. I don't regret the time that I spent watching it.

It is, however, a knockoff - virtually a remake. I see that I'm far from the only one who recognized "Charly" / "Flowers for Algernon" in this. I wonder how they got away with it, presuming that it was presented as original work.

Those who complain about credibility ought to know that the original story by Daniel Keyes was presented and published as science fiction. And of course, in 1959, far less was known about the mentally challenged. The biggest credibility problem I had was the depiction of Venice with clean streets, nobody passed out on the sidewalk, and windows without bars. Then again, it's a MOVIE.

Either an editor or the script girl (excuse me, continuity director) was a little careless here and there, but to be more specific would make this a spoiler.

I found it amusing that the more sophisticated (and sexually aware) that Molly became, the more prominently her breasts were shown.

Watchable, but it can't quite pull it off.

[callanvass · 5/10 · 19 November 2013]

(Credit IMDb) A bachelor becomes the unwilling guardian of his autistic, retarded sister; then an experimental treatment works a dramatic change in her brain and his attitude.

This movie is quite sentimental and sweet, but it's not quite skilled enough to do what it aspires to be. The storyline itself was actually rather endearing. I felt Elisabeth Shue did a decent job playing a mentally challenged autistic girl, and transitioned very effectively to a smarter person. Portraying an autistic person isn't easy. Elisabeth Shue is far from the problem here. She struggles a bit sometimes, but considering it was a huge leap for her dramatically, I feel she deserves props. It gets a bit too ambitious in the second half, not to mention I had a hard time warming up to the main lead (Aaron Eckhart) There was just something about him that felt off to me, despite OK chemistry with Shue. It tries to go for the typical heartbreaking finale which is full of sap and sentiment, but I found it to be way too conventional. I also thought the love story between Elisabeth Shue and Thomas Jane was slightly contrived. It didn't feel real to me, and I thought it was just thrown in there for the sake of it. It tries to be a sad, thought provoking film, but fails. It's certainly keeps your attention, but it's not as powerful as it likes to believe it is.

5.8/10

I liked it the first time as "Charly", the film adaptation of Flowers for Algernon

[chriscsugaree · 5/10 · 9 July 2009]

This movie is more like Flowers for Algernon (by Daniel Keyes) than Rain Man. Heck, anyone who has read Flowers for Algernon can tell that Dick Christie probably read it too before he wrote Molly.

The difference here is that at the end Molly seemed to feel some sense of sadness, like a loss she could not quite put her finger on. While at the end of Flowers for Algernon, Charlie did not know he had lost anything.

Dick Christie did not write this movie as much as he read Flowers for Algernon, made small changes, like changing the lead from male to female, and then claimed it as his own work.

Anyone who has ever read Flowers for Algernon or seen the award winning 1968 movie Charly will understand what I am saying. That was awesome and perfectly done.

A few positive things I can add is that I do think Elizabeth Shue did a fine acting job as Molly and it was on par with the 2000 TV version of Flowers for Algernon with Matthew Modine. Maybe even better.

Very interesting

[hyndmank · 30 March 2003]

I recently rented Molly and i loved it. Mainly because of Jill Hennessy but also because of the character Molly. After about 30min thru the movie you start to think about how it will feel like being autistic then Molly eventually tells how it feels. The movie is funny, dramatic, interesting and a very beautiful movie. The only thing that i did not like about the movie is the ending.

Part of me won't agree

[raulfaust · 6/10 · 19 September 2014]

Well, it's been some years since I found out about this movie and wanted to see it, but I wasn't able to find it until last week, when someone gave me its DVD. "Molly"'s main story is about a man whose sister is autistic and their relationship. Throughout the picture, Molly seems to get better after being exposed to a surgery-- even thought I'm sure that medicine students and physicians will not believe in such "healing". This story's climax is reached when Molly, after getting better, discovers that her problem is coming back, and that in a few days she'll be autistic again. Her brother suffers along with her, delivering some tense-- yet quickly-- moments. At one hand, I enjoyed this film because it has a GREAT photography directing; it doesn't feel like seeing a nineties movie. Also, Elisabeth Shue's acting is professional, both sane or autistic. On the other hand, I feel that the story didn't defer much from other movies of the genre, delivering a let's-respect-people lesson that we've all seen A LOT. Moreover, it feels odd to see Aaron Eckhart playing anything other than a shooter in an action film; in my opinion, he doesn't fit in the role of Buck McKay. So, that's it: "Molly" isn't anything remarkable or original, but it entertains for some while.

Heartwarming and Fun

[AngelHonesty · 7/10 · 28 May 2023]

The main theme and message of the film, is that Autistic people are still people too. They have thoughts and feelings and shouldn't be regarded as a vegetable. I'm normally not a fan of movies with such strongly pushed messages, but I enjoyed this one. It was heart touching and well put together with a strong dash of comedy. Elizabeth Sue did an amazing job acting as Molly who was an Autistic person who got experimental treatment to have her mind restored. Elizabeth brought warmth to the role really reached the heart strings. What I really liked about the movie is that it wasn't all serious there was a light comedy way to the film. It made you want to get up and dance in public too. Aaron Eckhart who plays the roil of Mollys self absorbed brother does a great job delivering that fun, charming, handsome vibes. I really liked the cast of the movie and the lightheartedness of such a serious subject.

Tough to watch!

[jwoof-780-670588 · 3/10 · 26 January 2021]

I couldn't make it through 20 minutes! I put it on because I love Elisabeth Shue but this was just bad! I felt like it was a awful remake of Rain Man and I just wasn't feeling the acting of someone with disability's.

Flowers For Elisabeth Shue

[lenny-24 · 7/10 · 1 November 1999]

A Flowers for Algernon/Charly type of story. The whole time I knew where it was going. That being said it still hit me emotionally and the trip there was enjoyable. I saw it on a plane and had never heard of it. I was pleasantly suprised at how enjoyable the movie was.

A movie which is sure to offend the whole family....

[sland-1 · 1/10 · 24 November 2005]

This movie is about a woman with autism who leaves her group home to live with her brother (sort of like Rainman) and then has surgery which takes her from having the mindset of a 3 year old to that of a genius.

For as much as this movie was a remake of flowers for Algernon... it was an awful disappointment. If they wished to make a movie parallel to that, they could have just had someone with mental retardation or borderline MR. Instead, they chose a woman with autism and, in the process, stereotyped everything about autism and degraded those who have autism and those who love them. ALl in all, the movie was crappy and a total waste of time.

Molly, Molly, Molly...

[Moynahan_M · 7/10 · 12 July 2003]

Huuu... I saw this movie like 10 times in a row and still not bored or nothing... There is no doubt, this is a LIGHT movie...

Molly is a copy paste of the book or movie Flowers for Algernon or something like that and not to be mean, Molly stays the worst of the two.

Great story and everything but too sensational... You cannot go for there to there just like that and then return to there but remember that just because it's a movie...

Still I give it a 7 on 10 because the actors are somewhat playing their roles greatfully but really... This is NOT a must see at all... Elisabeth Shue will impress you more in Leaving Las Vegas for sure!

A Train Wreck

[tjones-4 · 1/10 · 11 August 2001]

This film encapsulates everything that Hollywood is good at doing wrong. This film is an abortion. E. Shue is uninspired as the totally unbelievable autistic "Molly." Her brother, with whom she has been forced to live with, seems to be building a ship inside his apartment. This is not only a clumsy metaphor, yet a physical concept difficult to grasp. I couldn't watch this "straight to landfill" embarrassment in its entirety. Life is too short. And sleep is so good.

Heartwarming story beautifully acted

[FlickJunkie-2 · 8/10 · 7 May 2000]

This is a touching, bittersweet and wonderful film about an autistic woman who gains full use of her cognitive reasoning through an experimental procedure. Molly (Elizabeth Shue) is a 28 year old autistic who has been institutionalized much of her life. When the institution closes, she is left in the care of her self absorbed brother Buck (Aaron Eckhart). She is recommended for a new experimental procedure which transforms her into a normal young woman. As the story unfolds we see her grow from a child into a woman with many sweet and funny moments resulting from Molly's view of the world through childlike eyes. As her relationship with her brother grows, his transformation is as dramatic as hers.

The film was charmingly done with a coming of age quality about it. There were numerous comical and heart warming moments resulting from Molly's misperception of a world she is trying to make sense of.

The only thing working against this film is the fact that this ground has been retraced in so many ways that it suffers from the tendency to compare it to other films. It has elements of ‘Flowers for Algernon', ‘Rainman', ‘At First Sight' and ‘Awakenings'. It is difficult for a film to be fully appreciated when the viewer is mentally comparing it to all these other stories. That is a pity in this case because this really is a lovable story in its own right.

Elizabeth Shue gives us marvelous performance as Molly. Her portrayal of autism is realistic and endearing. She is so childlike that you really sense that she has the mind of a 3 year old. Later, as she transitions to the mind of an adult, she retains that childlike naiveté that gives the character a purity and wisdom that is fresh and free from cynicism. It was a wonderful performance that regrettably will not be seen by many since this film lives in obscurity as a single facing on the rental shelves.

I rated Molly an 8/10. On an emotional level, I really enjoyed it more than that, but I felt compelled to subtract a couple of points for lack of originality. However, if you enjoy human interest stories this one will certainly touch your heart.

Molly--A Remake of "Charly" and "Flowers for Algernon"?

[jflynn-24 · 6/10 · 15 September 2020]

First, let me say that I loved Elizabeth Shue's portrayal of the character Molly, and found myself caught up in the beautiful love story which developed with Thomas Jane's character. The movie is sweet and old-fashioned, sentimental and heartbreaking...and familiar. Yes, familiar! I've seen this story before with Cliff Robertson in a teleplay in 1961, then his Academy-Award-winning portrayal of Charly Gordon in 1968, and finally Mathew Modine in 2000's tv movie "Flowers for Algernon." In fact, Daniel Keyes won the Hugo award for Best Short Story in 1960 for his short story, "Flowers for Algernon," which was subsequently made into a novel, a motion picture, tv movie, radio show, several stage adaptations, etc. Dick Christie is given credit for writing "Molly," but there is no such credit for Daniel Keyes or his short story. "Molly" is about a mentally-challenged woman with autism who undergoes experimental brain surgery and becomes a genius capable of understanding the most complex of brain theories. She reaches a point where she begins to relapse, and returns to her former self. Okay, so there's no rat named Algernon that she races with during tests, but it is clearly Daniel Keyes' story. IMDB needs to acknowledge this fact and credit Keyes with the story idea.

hahaha

[stephenf-3 · 1/10 · 31 May 2001]

Very bad movie.. i really cant think of much else to say. Elizabeth Shue is shocking! she should have watched DiCaprio in Gilbert Grape before making this film, still the best Autistic character performance ever.

Dont hire this movie. Look at your TV-guide, chances are its being shown in the not too distant future.

Even then, try and go out that night.

Write minded

[MuteMae · 15 April 2000]

Loosely cribbed from Daniel Keyes' novel "Flowers for Algernon" this moist tale follows experimental surgery subject, Molly who overcomes autism only to regress as the procedure's effects fade. We're supposed to realize that, the mentally disabled are people to - and have something to teach us. But this ham fisted tale ends up communicating a less profound message more along the lines of - some of them like to obsessively line up shoes.

Molly, NO!

[Razorbak-3 · 2/10 · 29 September 1999]

Rainman, At First Sight, Forest Gump, The Other Sister, Phenomenon - this movie just throws elements of all these movies together in a mish-mash - with the end result being a very lame, over acted movie.

Poor Elisabeth Shue seems to be suffering from some rare form of autism that only exists in sappy movies. Did the writers do any real research on autism at all. According the the IMDB plot summary this movie is "loosely based on a true story". I'd love to know how loose.

I too was subjected to this movie on an airplane. I thought I was watching a direct-to-video dog. Imagine my surprise when I saw it was actually going to hit theaters in October.

Molly could not compare with 1968's Charly with Cliff Robertson.

[Jim-Sanfilippo · 4/10 · 13 July 2009]

Molly seemed to be a story copied from 1968's Charly with Cliff Robertson. Molly would have been best not to have been made because the acting and the script were below average, while with Charly the acting and the script were above average. Molly's premise, a female version of Charly Gordon, was a good idea, but the idea must be supported by good acting and a good script. The script was not terrible. The movie would have been more entertaining with a better cast of actors and actresses. The movie could also have been better with the current cast of actors if the script was much better. Molly, the movie, was not terrible, and was somewhat entertaining. There are movies that are worse, but also there are movies that are much better.

Miserable attempt at a "Rain Woman"

[TheThill · 2/10 · 22 September 1999]

In a poor answer to the acclaimed film about autism, this film did very little other than annoy from beginning to end. With an idea similar to the Cruise-Hoffman movie but this time with an autistic sister and a "miracle cure" involved, it could have been an interesting, if somewhat unoriginal story. But a saccharine script and often embarrassing overacting made this a rather grating airplane time-waster. Don't even think about paying (non-airline) money to see it.

Molly is a heartwarming film that tackles the difficult subject of adult autism

[inkblot11 · 8/10 · 2 July 2008]

Molly McKay (Elizabeth Shue, very wonderful) has been living in a nursing home for years, after her parents' deaths. She has severe autism and generally answers every question with the word "no". One senses, however, that locked inside her being is a woman as bright as she is beautiful. Her older brother, Buck (Aaron Eckhart) has only visited her on rare occasions, as he was going through college and starting his career in advertising. Word comes, however, that the nursing home is closing and that Buck will have to make new arrangements for Molly. Very apprehensive, Buck brings Molly back to his Venice, California apartment, where the chaos soon begins. When a daycare situation goes sour, Buck has to bring Molly to work, where her erratic behavior soon causes the firm to lose a major account. Buck is promptly fired, causing resentment between the siblings. However, a clinic worker, Sam (Thomas Jane) has been a friend to Molly for years and he encourages Buck to be patient and caring. Also, a doctor at the clinic (Jill Hennessey) convinces Buck to let them try a new surgical technique on Molly, one that will allow her to lead a more normal life. Amazingly, after the procedure, Molly does become more verbal and starts to catch up on some of life's moments that have eluded her. But, can it last? This is a very nice film about an important topic, autism. However, instead of focusing on children, this one shines a light on the experiences of an adult with the condition. As such, Shue is wonderful as the brave and bright Molly while Eckhart is equally fine as her confused but goodhearted brother. One must also congratulate Hennessey and especially Jane for giving great turns as well. The setting in Venice is beautiful and the other cinema niceties, such as costumes and photography, are more than adequate. The script is both lightly humorous and tear generating, at the same time, and gives the audience a good look at the autistic individual, trapped inside his or her own body. Even so, one suspects that the film, made in 1999, might be a bit dated as to current discoveries and treatments. But, that matters little, indeed, to the overall enjoyment of the flick. If you are a fan of sweet, thought-provoking stories, told with care and humor, you should make time for Molly. Good golly, you will be entertained and enlightened at the same wonderful time.

An Offensive Flowers For Algernon Rip-Off!!!

[berolvenus · 1/10 · 9 July 2006]

I have just had the unfortunate experience of having to suffer through this film on DVD, and felt compelled to warn anyone contemplating watching it! This film is constantly offensive, painfully dreadfully bad and only funny unintentionally. Everyone involved in it should be ashamed. I can only imagine that the usually excellent Elisabeth Shue was drinking heavily throughout the production! It is credited as being 'written' by Dick Christie, but is clearly a direct Rip-Off of the excellent Sci-Fi Story 'Flowers For Algernon' and the film of the similar starring Mathew Modine, neither of which it even remotely does justice. BAD BAD BAD!!!!!! Or As Molly would say in her (for some strange reason) oddly deep voice NO NO NO!

Much better than expected!

[mikeyd127 · 18 August 2000]

I must admit to being quite apprehensive about seing this movie as i had read quite a few dreadful reviews,some of which singled out Elisabeth Shue's portrayal of the title character as being cringeworthy and even worse,bordering on offensive. Having now seen the movie i can happily say it was much better than i had expected. To start,i found all of the performances to be very good particularly that of Thomas Jane who played Molly's boyfriend and of course Elisabeth Shue.Initially it was quite hard to accept her in this role because (Leaving Las Vegas excepted) other characters she has played were quite bland and uninteresting.As Molly she convinces incredibly well,displaying a wide range of emotions from childlike innocence to extreme anger and frustration, not to mention a handful of well played comic moments. Other plus points include a nice music score by Trevor Jones and a conclusion that doesn't go overly mushy yet still leaves you moved. If i had anything negative to say about Molly it would be that at times it seems quite rushed (apparently quite a few scenes were edited out),and that occasionally it is reminiscent of a T.V. movie. All in all while not an excellent movie, Molly certainly isn't terrible and i would definitley recommend it.

Terrible!

[clashcity19 · 2/10 · 30 November 2006]

While watching this film, I honestly thought it was a joke. When I realized that it wasn't meant to be a joke, I became sort of astounded at, well, everything about it. Elizabeth Shue should have known better. She capitalizes on every stereotype there is about mentally disabled people. I thought it was a very unfair and unrealistic portrayal of a person with autism.

The acting is terrible, the story lacks creativity, the characters are not well-defined. The ONLY reason I gave this movie two stars is because there were a couple of scenes that were amusing. However... they all tend to be ruined somehow by some over-generalization of autism.

Save your money.

A Natural Flop

[akoaytao1234 · 1/10 · 14 March 2022]

Molly is a disgusting film.

Preface, I had watched the film it was based on. And boy, how did they get that when you watch this.

Firstly, the sexualization of Molly in the film is just painful. It has been quite sometime when I watched Charly. So pardon me if I make mistakes along the wat BUT Yes, he went sexual BUT not in this superbly pathetic way. Also, do not make her a weirdly fetishized sex object. WTF Film. It such a disservice because the actress is already struggling in portraying the role.

Which is my next point. The acting. I personally think this is in relation with the first point. The hyper sexualization of the character definitely paired and the decision to go ham with child-like Tarzan-esque portrayal is just big disjunct for a viewer like me. It borderline SNL at times.

Lastly, the story feels like it belittles Molly. Again, I had watched Charly far too long so criticize me all you want BUT he felt like a much built character. He develops much more insight, in how his 'intellect' or how others sees him before and after. On the other hand, Molly is almost as if a feral child. She develops, but she never escapes the film's ultimate failure, her objectification as an sexual object. [0/5]

PS: Does anyone find it creepy that the Thomas Jane character implies she loves her even during her time in the Psych ward. She was never shown to be able to comprehend sexual feeling in the ward SO that very weird.

Completely unconvincing...

[moonspinner55 · 1/10 · 16 November 2015]

An autistic woman in her late-20s is farmed out to her estranged older brother after the institution where she resides is shut down (for reasons which aren't made clear). The brother, a hipster ad-man who builds boats and lives an extravagantly bohemian lifestyle, is anxious to palm the girl off to any hospital who will take her...but, of course, they grow closer with time, particularly after Molly undergoes experimental surgery. Expensive, old-fashioned production which did MGM absolutely no favors. Transparent hybrid of "Rain Man" and "Awakenings"--with Elisabeth Shue attempting to pull off Cliff Robertson's act à la "Charly"--wants desperately to be Oscar material. The intentions are sincere, though the brightly-painted scenario is ridiculous, the writing is consistently irritating and the episodes of 'high drama' ring false. NO STARS from ****

Amazing acting

[Kate-117 · 10/10 · 30 June 2000]

The story may not be original, but it was Elisabeth Shue's performance that captivated me. I am surprised she didn't get more acclaim. Molly is such a difficult character to play and Elisabeth's acting was supurb and incredibly believable. I was just made an even bigger fan of her work.