Meaning it in a good way: Take a shot every time foreshadowing is used in any way, from the dialogue to the angle of a shot. You'll be dead halfway through the film.

The essence of my high school experience captured on celluloid. Sometimes absurdly funny, sometimes a little far-fetched, when you had the chance to act like an adult (and failed),when you felt like everyone was out to get you (sometimes they really were), and when you hoped that, if you wanted to, you could do anything you wanted (even when you couldn't). Everyone has a movie that "just gets it"; this is mine.

If it's wrong to get choked up during the Once Upon a Dream sequence simply because the animation is so symmetrical, then I don't want to be right.

Help me. Slowly but surely becoming a guilty/not guilty pleasure. Do I love the novel that much? Mm, yeah, probably.

Proves that Gene Wilder doesn't even have to speak coherent words to be a comedic genius.

I just re-watched it at 18, and still found it as beautiful and terrifying as I did when I was 10. A wonderful example of how a story can perhaps borrow from/be compared to other classic tales, and still be entirely original.

Crosses the line of guilty pleasure; I unashamedly love pretty much everything about this movie without questioning my judgement. Let this be the only film where this is allowed to happen. Better as a standalone than a first part of a trilogy.

Ugh, it's finally on here. Favorite of the whole series.

Took enough creative licensing without straying from the true message of the book, which is more than you can say for a lot of adaptations lately. I enjoyed it, but I'm probably biased.

Yeah, yeah, we get it, Audrey's accent is a bit over-exaggerated. Get past it, and you have the perfect musical.

Absolutely wonderful. That's all I'm going to say.

Out of the several questions this film could be asking, one is the difficult matter of Reality and Imagination (which deserve to be capitalized when referring to this film). Which of the two is the more horrific? It's open to your interpretation, but I'd be interested to know who actually got a definitive answer. Beautiful, beautiful, beautiful film.

Positively surreal and gripping; unlike anything I have seen before.

The best of the series. And that's coming from both a lover of the books and a lover of movies.

I liked it the first time, and then I saw it again. And I liked it even more. For a Guy-Ritchie-Almost-National-Treasure-Type film, it is worth seeing again. And for the performances, no less. Robert Downey Jr. is very deserving of the Golden Globe nomination, and Jude Law fits his role perfectly. I don't care for the sequel set-up type ending (Dead Man's Chest turned me off from those), but it can sure be forgiven.

It's brilliant and sad how the film comes to an end--Vito's story ends with him killing the man who destroyed his family all those years ago; Michael's ends with him destroying part of his own family in Fredo. The boy who was a hero becomes a more fully realized evil than his father ever was...and with the look he has on his face by the end of the film, we know we aren't the only ones who know it.

After Entertainment Weekly gave this a D, I never read their reviews again. Nor any other for that matter, save for Roger Ebert. I loved this film, and why should I have questioned it based on the "popular opinion" or "what makes a great film"? If you are capable of loving a movie, then it has a greatness. This film, among many other achievements, taught me never to question that. If that seems naive, then I'm naive.

I was blinded by my love for both the remaining bits of the original stories and the epic bromance that is Holmes/Watson. RDJ and Law were great, as were pretty much every other supporting character. And here's the thing about Rachel McAdams: If you liked her before, then you probably won't mind her. But if you didn't like her before, then her performance in this movie probably won't change that opinion

The conclusion that Mickey comes to at the end of the film completley changed how I live my life. The only difficulty now is trying to explain it to other people...I suppose I could just get them to watch the movie. So yeah, I think it's fantastic.

I get very confused when I encounter someone who doesn't like this film. It's one of the few times where I will just go, "What? I...I can't even...what?" Not that these people are strange deviants and golems of the underworld. I just literally cannot understand it. It's like trying to explain the Hardest Geometry Problem in the world from the beginning of Rushmore to a five year old. I think it's hysterical and wonderful and utterly charming. When I was a kid, this was my idea of a perfect movie. And it remains one of my favorites to this day.

Um, what can I say? It's utterly fantastic, isn't it? ...Yep, that's pretty much it. Just, you know. See it.

I'm still a little stung/confused that my favorite, Empire Strikes Back, isn't on here yet. But the first one has a certain magical quality to it that the other films don't have, especially when you're seeing it for the first time. Like Luke, it starts out as an almost innocent fairy-tale-in-space...only to progress to some of the most fun you will ever have watching a movie. Also, Han Solo.

So: Sondheim + Tim Burton. I'll have to admit I'm a little biased from the start. Anyway, I was hugely impressed by the performances, including/especially Johnny Depp. A really fun film, plus the music is fantastic. See sentence 1.

My favorite film. The end.

Ignore Andie McDowell. Everyone else (everyone British) is fantastic.

Gives me goosebumps sometimes. Is that shameful?

Yeah, I understand the hate towards it. But I don't feel it. Not one iota.

There can only be one.

I love you, Tommy Lee Jones--but Ralph Fiennes was robbed of that Oscar.

I think I am not alone when I say that I cried upon my first viewing. Twice. And that shot of the house floating in the sky, suspended by rich, multicolored balloons--the sheer visual beauty alone should inspire animators for years to come.