Pointless re-make of an Originally great classic
M. Burress | Cincinnati, OH United States | 12/04/2008
(2 out of 5 stars)
"I'm a fan of the original Harvey with Jimmy Stewart, so I was interested to see the newer version would. I like Leslie Nielson, so I thought that was promising.
Ultimately, however, this was a huge cinematic waste. It isn't an awful movie, but the original is SOooo much better, and they didn't really try to change much about the movie. It's even set in the same time period, and they "dumbed-down" the cinematography and sound to make it seem like a movie filmed in the same time period as the original.
I had a bad feeling when I watched the Illustrated intro, and after watching the whole thing, I came away wondering what was the point of doing a remake of a movie that was already good? It wasn't to modernize it. It wasn't to improve the storyline, and it certainly wasn't to indroduce more talented acting. The acting was mediocre and lackluster.
Basically, they just tried to re-create the original version with new (not better) actors. If you're going to watch a version of Harvey, stick with the original."
Big mistake
Jacob A. Abel | Ohio | 07/27/2008
(2 out of 5 stars)
"I bought this version by mistake. This version has it's moments, but is no comparison to the James Stewart version. Harry Anderson as Dowd had potential at first, but the movie is ruined for the most part by certain actors trying too hard to act, and some too little."