Critics’ reviews

Jack and Jill (2011)

13 reviews from 13 publications. Critics’ score 26: 0 positive, 2 mixed, 11 negative.

Back to our review of Jack and Jill

26
Positive
0
Mixed
2
Negative
11

The consensus on Jack and Jill is overwhelmingly negative: eleven of the thirteen reviews are negative, with none positive. Most critics find Adam Sandler’s dual-role comedy crude and short of laughs, repeatedly pointing to tired gags, intrusive product placement and careless construction. Praise clusters around Al Pacino’s performance as himself, which several reviews find game, energetic or amusing enough to offer relief from the surrounding material.

The disagreement concerns how much that relief counts, and whether the film’s silliness has any charm. Screen Daily finds an endearingly loopy family comedy likely to satisfy Sandler’s existing fans. Time Out settles for mediocrity but sees an improvement on his recent comedies, with Pacino supplying inspired absurdity. Those qualified responses sit well apart from the harshest notices, which describe contempt for the audience and mean-spirited treatment of Jill. The Guardian also treats Pacino’s involvement as a cause for complaint rather than consolation.

Screen Daily
10 November 2011
60*

The review states it will please Adam Sandler fans with its broad and endearingly loopy family comedy but is unlikely to win new converts. It singles out Al Pacino's wonderfully game performance playing himself for praise.

Read the full review →
Time Out
14 January 2011 · Matt Singer
50*

The critic finds the film merely mediocre overall but a step up from Sandler's more recent unwatchable comedies. They single out Al Pacino's surprisingly energetic performance playing himself as the main source of inspired absurdity.

Read the full review →
Evening Standard
10 April 2012
30*

The critic describes a crude comedy centered on Adam Sandler's dual role as a successful ad executive and his obnoxious sister, filled with slapstick and toilet humor. A few amusing moments arise from celebrity cameos, particularly Al Pacino's scene.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
11 November 2011 · D- · Scott Tobias
30

The critic calls it a deadly comedy that inventories new lows, with Al Pacino’s game but humiliating performance as the sole bright spot amid endless product placement and unfunny gags.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
11 November 2011 · Robert Abele
25*

Robert Abele finds the comedy strained and tired, like an elementary school recess that has gone on too long. He singles out the over-reliance on celebrity cameos and product placement as signs that the film prioritizes commercial filler over genuine laughs.

Read the full review →
IndieWire
10 November 2011 · Gabe Toro
20*

The review portrays the film as an absurd, lowbrow mess akin to a bad Telemundo soap, with Sandler’s dual role and celebrity cameos singled out for ridicule.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
10 November 2011 · A.O. Scott
20*

A.O. Scott views the film as another sign of Sandler's comedy curdling into entitled tantrums and woman-hatred. He singles out the grotesque, loud, and needy portrayal of the Jill character as emblematic of the film's mean-spirited bullying.

Read the full review →
Variety
10 November 2011 · Andrew Barker
15*

Andrew Barker calls the film generally stupid with careless direction and a single-joke premise that was never funny. He singles out the way it completes the souring of Sandler's persona into weary, curdled misanthropy.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
8 February 2012 · Peter Bradshaw
10*

The critic finds the film dire and scary-bad, a profoundly unfunny cross-dressing comedy where Sandler plays both twins. He singles out the leaden script and the absurdity of Al Pacino's involvement for complaint.

Read the full review →
The Hollywood Reporter
10 November 2011 · David Rooney
10*

The critic finds the film witless and sloppily constructed, relying on fart gags, stereotypes and lazy product placement. The only mildly amusing element noted is a YouTube trailer mashup.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
10 November 2011 · /4 · Jaime N. Christley
0

The review argues the film is a contemptuous exercise in which Sandler openly mocks his audience with crude gags and shameless product placement, offering nothing but quick, painful viewing.

Read the full review →
The Wrap
10 November 2011
40*

The critic finds the film a juvenile mess that is slightly better than recent Sandler vehicles like 'Just Go With It' but still a train wreck overall. They single out Al Pacino's over-the-top cameo performance as the main reason to watch and note the seamless twinning effects as a technical highlight.

Read the full review →
The Playlist
10 November 2011 · D · The Playlist Staff
37

The critic calls the film a career low for both Sandler and Pacino, criticizing the drag performance, endless product placement, and mean-spirited execution while noting Sandler treats the Jill character somewhat warmly but fails to make it work.

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