I don't care if this adaptation of the book was faithful! I don't care if it was one of the most acclaimed movies of 1988! It still sucked!!Now that I've got that out of my system, let's explore the movie as a whole:The great William Hurt plays writer Macon Leary. He lives in Baltimore and writes travel guides for uneasy travellers on how to make the best of unpleasant trips. It would be great if we saw him writing and get more of his ideas for his books. His wife is played by Kathleen Turner. Both of them are mourning the loss of their son and she wants a divorce as a means to move past it all. The house gets put up for sale and Macon moves in with his siblings. Needing obedience training for his dog, he falls for Geena Davis who plays the dog teacher. One reason this sucks is how dark and murky this is. It looks like it was laundry day and placed in a load of dark's. After awhile I wanted to see some sunlight and some nice images! I understand Kasdan wanting to make the movie to reflect the state of William Hurt, but he really goes over-the- top with this, leaving it one-dimensional. I'm not saying this needs to have sunshine and castles, but add a variety or elements to the look and make the look pleasurable. Maybe that's the wrong word, but you get where I'm coming from. Next, the movie is ridiculously slow with nothing happening to the characters we just give up on. I can see a gradual flow and making a movie slow for the audience to really get invested in and really develop all areas, but that doesn't happen here. The movie tries so hard to sadden the audience and I got sick of it. Maybe if I actually felt something, I would have been more invested. But that's the writers' and director's fault for poor writing and horrendous directing! Geena Davis won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar with an average lineup. She is the only character that is actually somewhat interesting in an extremely dull picture. I guess Hurt does a good job, but that's where the good parts stops.I can think of no reason to see this (other than if you're a fan of William Hurt and Gene Davis). The one-dimensional trait makes the movie as a whole ugly to look at. It is not pleasurable in the slightest and there is no payoff to all the melancholy forced onto you. Might as well let Lawrence Kasdan come to your hose and physically drain your tears by hand.

so I had seen this on television not too long ago over the Christmas season of 2016. When it had come out, I was only about 11 yrs. old I guess so it wouldn't have piqued my interest...I totally liked it...it was very sad and kind of interesting. One of the first long films I remember watching by myself starred Ralph fiennes or his brother, and it was about a fighter pilot that crashed and slowly died along a cavern in like Afghanistan or something...and I think it starred cate blanchette... so here we see Gina davis be as annoying as ever on screen. And William hurt is a writer who has ed Begley junior as his brother and bill Pullman as his publishor or editor that is kind of flirting with the possibility of getting together with ed Begley juniors wife. ordinary brother interaction involving William hurt and ed Begley Jr. kind of make this film more sad as they endure life in their early fifties I suppose? so Gina davis ends up training a dog almost voluntarily for William hurt where you notice on occasion she asks for only five dollars for services.

The death in a family is viewed as an irreparable loss which affects everybody.In such a case,it is a wrong decision for a couple to fight with each other and separate.It would be better if the couple stays together to support each other in times of crisis.It is on these lines that American director Lawrence Kasdan's film "The Accidental Tourist" informs viewers about how wrong choices are corrected by a solitary man when he meets a talkative woman who would like to move ahead in life with him and her son.Although the film is not based on an original screenplay nevertheless it is able to interest viewers as its tone is light.There are various little episodes in these two people's lives which make for an interesting viewing experience.Apart from the leading man who writes travel guides,there are also other people seeking love.It is this story development which gives "The Accidental Tourist" a different edge as it has been promoted as a sad film.

After the death of his child, travel author William Hurt retreats into an emotional shell and watches his marriage to Kathleen Turner dissolve before finding a second chance at happiness with eccentric dog trainer Geena Davis.Lawrence Kasdan's by-the-numbers adaptation of Anne Tyler's novel is a passable, if overly pedestrian drama that has many fans with a tendency to over-exaggerate its emotional impact. Anyone anticipating sparks to fly with the reunion of Hurt and Turner with their Body Heat director Kasdan will likely be surprised by this tame seriocomic oddity that is light years from film noir. The storyline relies on bizarre character traits to generate interest, but they only do so sporadically and haphazardly. For instance, much time is spent with Hurt's two brothers and sister, all broadly played by Ed Begley, David Ogden Stiers and Amy Wright. The three of them co-habit in one house and spend their days doing such madcap things as ignoring the ringing telephone and alphabetizing their canned goods. Apparently this is supposed to be more amusing then it really is. When Hurt's editor, delightfully played by Bill Pullman, falls in love with Wright, the attraction is puzzling because Pullman comes off as a real person, while Hurt's family seem like sketches for a rejected skit from an episode of The Carol Burnett Show.Turner is utterly wasted in the film. It isn't that she is not good, but she is saddled with a glorified supporting turn that requires her to vanish for extended periods of time. She is not allowed to have any meaningful emotional moments with Hurt, so that his late act decision contains no surprise. Geena Davis bugs her eyes out and purses her lips in an attempt to appear kooky, and actually she is quite good in the film, but she is miscast and there is no getting around it. Davis is one of the most attractive actresses working in Hollywood and her innate charm is on display here, so that when all of these people keep pulling Hurt aside and asking in genuine bewilderment "What do you see in this Muriel woman?" - we have no idea what they are talking about and they all seem like idiots. Is she supposed to be undesirable? If so, then the casting is completely wrong.Ultimately, though, the film rises and falls on Hurt. It is his show and the film focused on his emotional journey breaking out of his indifference and fear. In his best moments, I have always found Hurt to be a very mannered actor. His Method approach often seems self-conscious and he loves to overuse an arsenal of tics and odd vocal inflections in place of genuine range. Sometimes it works - here it fails him. He comes off less as a victim of emotional shellshock than he does a somnambulist. It is impossible to see why Turner would want him back or why Davis would instigate a relationship with him. Even worse, when his character starts taking decisive action and makes some daring choices, he seems just as lifeless as he was at the beginning of the film. He comes off as a guy just going through the motions - which would be a good description of the film itself. It looks great, but ultimately it is just going through the motions.