Contact - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Contact Reviews

Page 1 of 4
Nell Minow
Movie Mom at Yahoo! Movies
January 1, 2000
If [Sagan] does a better job of asking them than answering them, that is at least consistent with the scientists creed that the only sin is to be afraid to ask the right questions -- and to be open-minded about the answers.
Read More | Original Score: C
Top Critic
Jonathan Rosenbaum
Chicago Reader
January 1, 2000
The movie's CNN strategy, whereby credibility is measured in TV exposure, proves fatal, often throwing the proceedings into a laughable tailspin.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/4
Dennis Schwartz
Ozus' World Movie Reviews
January 1, 2000
Carl Sagan would have been proud of the film's scientific accuracy if he had lived to see the film through to its conclusion...
Full Review | Original Score: C+
Jeanne Aufmuth
Palo Alto Weekly
May 14, 2003
Even the computer generated graphics are a bad fit.
| Original Score: 2/4
Sean Axmaker
Turner Classic Movies Online
January 17, 2008
With all the science and technology, Zemeckis and the writers made room for spiritual debates (some of them painfully slight), political commentary, and a strangely tepid and inert romance...
Top Critic
Desson Thomson
Washington Post
January 1, 2000
While the movie doesn't qualify as an awful waste of space by any means, it has so many creative black holes, you'll have to weigh the entertainment odds before making this journey.
Top Critic
Mike Clark
USA Today
January 1, 2000
For an aspiring ultimate trip, Contact has a flimsy dramatic grip.
Read More | Original Score: 2.5/4
Top Critic
Mick LaSalle
San Francisco Chronicle
June 18, 2002
When it tries to personify the struggle between skepticism and faith in the relationship between Ellie and her theologian boyfriend, it becomes flat and obvious.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/4
Top Critic
Richard Schickel
TIME Magazine
February 16, 2011
Something like one of those mysterious asteroids that get the astronomers all worked up: a large body of gaseous matter surrounding a relatively small core of solid substance.
Judith Egerton
Courier-Journal (Louisville, KY)
June 28, 2004
The story doesn't always do justice to the mind-bending visual opening of Robert Zemeckis' movie, which features Jodie Foster as an annoyingly intense scientist.
Full Review | Original Score: 2.5/4
November 29, 2015
Whatever rapport this film builds between religion and science is hampered by the religious stereotypes sprinkled throughout Michael Goldenberg's script.
Thomas Delapa
Boulder Weekly
November 4, 2005
Foster's voyage is an astronomical letdown, largely because Zemeckis' ideas of heaven and earth don't extend beyond what can be envisioned as a celluloid event.
Kevin N. Laforest
Montreal Film Journal
September 10, 2002
You've got some great moments and an intriguing, haunting last act, but most of the movie isn't very exceptional.
Full Review | Original Score: 2.5/4
Top Critic
Robin Dougherty
January 1, 2000
Faithful to Sagan's brand of popularized science, the film never reaches beyond Hollywood spectacle and sentimentality.
Peter Keough
Boston Phoenix
January 1, 2000
Although one could do worse than have Jodie Foster's face reflect the secret of the universe, when she tries to relate it to others in plain English, the staggering banality of this film shows through.
Cynthia Fuchs
Philadelphia City Paper
January 1, 2000
Far more mundane than its aspirations to cosmic insights might have produced.
Barbara Shulgasser
San Francisco Examiner
January 1, 2000
If there were truly anything serious, important or intellectual about this movie, this planet would be in big trouble.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/4
Top Critic
Liam Lacey
Globe and Mail
April 12, 2002
Contact, which aims for awe, ends up with piffle.
Read More | Original Score: 2/4
June 8, 2007
The result is a film far too cold-blooded for summer audiences.
Full Review | Original Score: 2.5/4
Top Critic
Sarah Kerr
June 8, 2007
When Contact finally comes alive, it leaves you frightened and thrilled and emotionally overwrought, as only a child can be. The rest is pandering.
Page 1 of 4