Critics’ reviews

Always (1989)

7 reviews from 7 publications. Critics’ score 58: 2 positive, 4 mixed, 1 negative.

Back to our review of Always

58
Positive
2
Mixed
4
Negative
1

Most critics land somewhere in the middle on Spielberg’s romantic fantasy, and the warmer notices call it entertaining despite its silliness, singling out the aerial action, which Variety finds thrilling. Empire treats it as a poignant, transitional work about loss, playful in its visuals if not one Spielberg will be remembered for. The performances draw the steadiest praise: Richard Dreyfuss for warmth and a palpable sense of loss, John Goodman for the film’s liveliest turn, with Audrey Hepburn in close competition.

The reservations cluster around sentiment and length. Radio Times thinks the film only just avoids tipping into mush; the Los Angeles Times thinks it tips straight in, dismissing it as overlong, tooth-rotting nonsense built on stale imitation, the lone outright pan. Holly Hunter’s character strikes at least one critic as gawky and ditzy early on. Three of the seven reviews cannot be read in full, so the spread may be wider than the numbers suggest.

Empire
1 January 2000 · Bob McCabe
70*

McCabe considers the film a poignant, transitional work, though not one Spielberg will be remembered for. He praises its visual playfulness and emotional treatment of loss.

Read the full review →
Variety
31 December 1988 · Variety Staff
70*

The review finds the fantasy entertaining despite its silliness and calls Spielberg’s adaptation largely successful. It praises the thrilling aerial action, while noting that Holly Hunter’s character initially comes across as gawky and ditzy.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
22 December 1989 · Janet Maslin
66*

The accessible page does not reveal the critic’s verdict. It also provides no details about what the critic praised or criticized.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
64*

The page could not be read, so the critic’s verdict and specific praise or complaint cannot be established. The URL identifies a review of the 1989 film, but provides no review text.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· CM
64*

The page identifies this as a review, but the critic’s verdict is not readable. No specific praise or complaint can be confirmed from the available text.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★ · Joanna Berry
60

Berry finds the romantic fantasy just manages to avoid becoming overly sentimental. She praises John Goodman’s performance, with Audrey Hepburn also giving him strong competition.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
22 December 1989 · SHEILA BENSON
10*

Benson pans the film as overlong, tooth-rotting nonsense built on stale imitation. She praises Richard Dreyfuss for bringing warmth and a palpable sense of loss to the material.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate