When in Rome 2010

Roger Moore, Orlando Sentinel: Bell, a petite, pretty blonde, may or may not have the Meg Ryan-Julia Roberts-Sandra Bullock goods. When in Rome, a leaden variation on that rom-com recipe, fails utterly to make her case. Read more

Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune: The movie lacks invention and true magic in the worst way. Read more

Mary F. Pols, MSN Movies: On this simple, sheeplike level, the thoroughly average When in Rome qualifies as almost a complete success, except in its requirement that we go along with some business involving hocus pocus. Read more

A.O. Scott, New York Times: It lurches along, making Ms. Bell and Mr. Duhamel look duller than they need to. Read more

Moira MacDonald, Seattle Times: Kristen Bell, in the silly romantic comedy When in Rome, has the wry perkiness of a 20-something Sarah Jessica Parker, and you sit through the movie wondering what she might do with better material than this. Read more

Janice Page, Boston Globe: Do as the Romans do. Drive around it. Read more

Andrea Gronvall, Chicago Reader: Josh Duhamel plays the smitten sports reporter who helps Kristen Bell mount her big art show, "Pain"-a fitting title, given the agony induced by this godawful comedy. Read more

Amy Biancolli, Houston Chronicle: Comedies require precision, and there's none here; instead, characters and scenes bash into each other with no evident purpose or logic. Read more

Tom Long, Detroit News: A brainless, fizzy, romantic-comedy fairy tale with a roster of acting talent far beyond expectations. Read more

Adam Markovitz, Entertainment Weekly: We get three acts of labored slapstick wrung from an eye-roller of a premise. Read more

Laremy Legel, Film.com: Read more

Jake Coyle, Associated Press: It's all exceptionally predictable and disappointingly laugh-free, especially since anything with Arnett -- one of the funniest around -- is typically worth the price of admission. Read more

Connie Ogle, Miami Herald: Please, Gods of Love, make this movie disappear. Read more

Stephen Whitty, Newark Star-Ledger: The screechy Bell has the delicate charm of a scraped blackboard; the dully handsome Duhamel looks like a Land's End catalog come to fitful life. Read more

Joe Neumaier, New York Daily News: Duhamel throws around his raffish, real-guy charm, and Bell works a springy cynicism that When in Rome eagerly tries to strip away. But regardless of where its stars want to take it, all roads here lead to blandness and inanity. Read more

Lou Lumenick, New York Post: When in Rome plumbs new depths for ineptitude in acting, directing, writing and every other department. Read more

Carrie Rickey, Philadelphia Inquirer: When in Rome is a rom-bomb. Read more

James Berardinelli, ReelViews: The saving grace of the otherwise generic product is that Bell's vivacity and Duhamel's rakish charm allow the viewer to root for them, even if sometimes that rooting goes so far as to wish the script would serve the couple better than it does. Read more

Richard Roeper, Richard Roeper.com: How do I loathe thee? Let me count the ways. Read more

Stephanie Zacharek, Salon.com: When in Rome may fall flat in places, but at least it hasn't had all the personality manicured out of it. Read more

Kara Nesvig, Minneapolis Star Tribune: All in all, Bell and Duhamel (gee, that rhymes!) are not tearing down any barriers, but it's clear that they're having fun and their chemistry is palpable. I wouldn't be opposed to seeing them team up again. Read more

Rick Groen, Globe and Mail: In the case of When in Rome, oh to do what the Romans used to do: Toss the bloody thing to the lions. Read more

Linda Barnard, Toronto Star: Bell and Duhamel may have something as a romantic onscreen pair but there's no telling. What's going on around them is both distracting and annoying, thanks to the hyperactivity of the oddball suitors who tend to suck all of the chemistry out of the room. Read more

Joshua Rothkopf, Time Out: Read more

Claudia Puig, USA Today: Though not as ultra-cliched as its title, When in Rome follows the predictable conventions of the genre. Read more

Michael O'Sullivan, Washington Post: The problem is not the credulity-stretching script. Or even that much of the movie just isn't all that funny. The problem is that it thinks it's freakin' hilarious. Read more