Critics’ reviews

Sea of Love (1989)

8 reviews from 8 publications. Critics’ score 72: 5 positive, 3 mixed, 0 negative.

Back to our review of Sea of Love

72
Positive
5
Mixed
3
Negative
0

Most critics find Sea of Love an entertaining, suspenseful thriller, with the strongest agreement centring on Al Pacino’s performance and his chemistry with Ellen Barkin. The praise goes beyond star presence: reviews pick out the vulnerability and weariness Pacino brings to the detective, and the believable sexual tension that gives the romance weight. Richard Price’s screenplay and Harold Becker’s handling of the mystery also receive credit for keeping familiar material involving.

The reservations concern plausibility, depth and how well the film holds together, with responses ranging from enthusiastic to qualified rather than hostile. Empire finds the ending unconvincing and unsatisfying, while Eye for Film welcomes the unpredictability of a late turn. The Los Angeles Times enjoys the performances but finds the entertainment superficial and formulaic. The New Yorker likewise finds plenty to enjoy, yet argues that Becker’s direction flattens material that could have been more daring.

Variety
31 December 1988 · Variety Staff
85*

The review finds the film a suspenseful noir, elevated by Pacino’s performance. It especially praises the depth he brings to the burned-out cop and calls his romance believable.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★★ · Tom Hutchinson
80

Hutchinson praises the film as a tough, suspenseful mystery thriller with strong sexual tension. He singles out the plausible erotic chemistry between Al Pacino and Ellen Barkin, alongside Richard Price’s sharp screenplay and Harold Becker’s realistic direction.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2009 · Ian Nathan
75*

Nathan finds the thriller gripping overall, despite an implausible and unsatisfying ending. He praises Pacino and Barkin’s sizzling chemistry and the intrigue Becker sustains along the way.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· BC
75*

The review finds the thriller efficient but says Pacino’s return makes it essential viewing. It especially praises several scenes as among the best of his work.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
15 September 1989 · KEVIN THOMAS
65*

Thomas calls it a slick, amusing diversion that works as superficial entertainment but offers little depth. He praises the chemistry and performances of Pacino, Barkin and Goodman, while noting implausibilities and a familiar thriller formula.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
15 September 1989 · Janet Maslin
64*

The page content is inaccessible, so the critic’s verdict cannot be established. No specific praise or complaint is available from the provided page text.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
10 September 1989 · Terrence Rafferty
60*

Rafferty finds the film consistently entertaining but ultimately not daring or cohesive enough. He particularly praises Al Pacino’s subtle, vulnerable performance, while faulting the direction for flattening the material’s highs.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
23 March 2009 · James Benefield
75*

The critic finds the film highly watchable and says its genre-mixing mostly succeeds. He singles out its unpredictability, especially a genuinely surprising late twist.

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