How did they manage to create such a beautiful film, a pretty love story, when the story is about two nutters spying on their former partners. When you think about what the story is about, and how far Sam (Matthew Broderick) and Maggie (Meg Ryan) are willing to go in order to get back to (and at) their former partners you would think that both should be either jailed or institutionalized. However, Addicted to Love, manages to create a fairly romantic love story out of it, without us ever doubting the sanity behind their actions. Both Matthew and Meg are here in roles they have portrait many times before in other films, while the star of the film is Tchéky Karyo. You end up hating him and loving him at the same time, feeling sorry for him one minute, wishing him all the worst the next. This is crucial to the story, bringing me to the conclusion that it is Tchéky that really makes the whole film work. One could criticize that even though the idea is original, the story isn't, with no unexpected turns or twists along the way. Simple, but pleasant film. 6/10

When you hear the words `romantic comedy', the first thing that springs to mind is some sugary, smiley, big-haired, feather-light Julia Roberts escapade. `Addicted to Love' presents us with the polar opposite to this, even if the premise is pretty the same as you'd find in the usual rom-com. The result is a deft, reckless, amusing and entertaining heavy-handed movie. There isn't much to bicker about here.

Meg Ryan and Matthew Broderick show tremendous colour and prove to be likeable characters as the vengeful stalkers. Tcheky Karyo is funny as the clumsy French fool. Kelly Preston is the least convicted of the four main characters, but is still relatively good.

The film has its own generally funny slapstick moments that compensate for the lack of verbal wit. The narrative that follows is good enough to keep you wanting more, and the jokes are all very well timed. The title Robert Palmer song adds to the reckless, but endearing epitome of the film. The directing styles aren't amazing, but they're hip and stylish for the most part.

Overall, it isn't film of the century and is far from outstanding, but `Addicted to Love' is original, entertaining and very funny for the most part. I give it 6.8 out of 10.

I thought this movie was pretty average as romantic comedies go, and frighteningly similar to Meg Ryan's previous vehicle "French Kiss", which saw Kevin Kline playing a Frenchman she falls for, enroute to getting her cheating fiancé back. "Addicted To Love" could have easily been the sequel! That aside, my one objection is not only the lack of chemistry between the two leads, but also the fact that we are launched into the action far too quickly. One imagines the writer/director desperate to start the story and not being bothered to establish the relationship between Sam and Linda, before BOOM! She leaves him and Sam is in New York, all within a few minutes and seconds. The credits had barely finished!!

I found the character of Maggie difficult to get a grip on. Independent and wilful, one finds it hard to imagine what she sees in the dappy, love-sick puppy, Sam. They are in such completely different leagues. Sam quips that they got together via "Common interests", but this is not enough somehow, since the characters really do not have anything in common, despite trying to separate their ex-lovers.

**SPOILER WARNING**: In another scene, Sam and Maggie sleep together whilst fantasising that she is Linda and he is Anton. Yet Maggie's justification for sleeping with Sam is not made clear - she hates Anton and frequently says so. If she slept with Sam because she was falling for him this should have been made clearer, since he sleeps with her whilst pretending she is Linda whom he still loves. Although good, perhaps this scene could have been cut as it is confusing and largely irrelevant.

The rest of the film was OK, the pranks were cruel but effective. More focus should have been made on the relationship between the two leads.

This generally enjoyable comedy should have been much better than it was, considering all the talent that worked on this film. The problem is, it isn't dark enough to be a dark comedy, but it is too dark to be a romantic comedy. Therefore, some of the revenge seemed too mean-spirited, and some of the sweet moments seemed out-of-place. BUT, even with that big of a problem, I still enjoyed the film. It was consistently funny and entertaining, and Broderick and Ryan both gave good performances. The best performance, however, was by Karyo, and he was probably my favorite thing about this movie.

This is my all-time favorite movie. This would be an extremely hard part to play for both Broderick and Ryan. I think that there was great casting, great storyline, and great production staff. It's just too bad that this show didn't get as much recognition as it should have.

Better than average plot but not enough to raise it above B-level.

I think Meg Ryan's star status worked against her because her cute reputation undercut her tough character. However, she proves that she can do something besides "bubbly" and is pretty good in a more edgy role.

Tchéky Karyo was excellent as a semi-likable French guy. One common weakness in romantic comedies is that the viewer can't understand why the "nice girl" would fall in love with the "bad guy." In this movie, we can she why she loves him and, by the end, we even like him a little too. Good writing and acting.

Not Matthew Broaderick's best performance... fairly uneven. He doesn't do "hopelessly in love" very well. Broaderick looked great, even when disheveled. For that matter, all the characters look great.

Kelly Preston is pure cardboard but it sort of works because three developed characters are probably enough in a Romantic Comedy.

The set (the hideout, especially) stole the show. The sound was unusually good for a fluff movie.

This is a wretched, wrong-headed little waste of celluloid. Do not be deceived by the film's strange sleight of hand, mis-focusing the audience on Broderick and Ryan. This is actually a story about a young woman (Kelly Preston) from America and an immigrant from France (Tcheky Karyo) who meet in New York and fall in love. Preston, raised in a small town, finally spreads her wings and flies away to the big city in pursuit of her dreams. There she meets Karyo, the man of her dreams, who loves America where he has come to achieve his dreams. Sadly the two of them are dogged by their sicko, stalking ex-lovers who conspire to wreak mayhem upon them and turn their dreams into a nightmare.

Broderick and Ryan commit heinous crimes, including invasion of privacy (on multiple levels), stalking, and breaking and entering. They are seriously disturbed voyeurs who generate no chemistry and no sympathy. I was touched only by the steady, true love of Preston and Karyo which even overcomes the sinister machinations of Broderick and Ryan. The film attempts to get the audience to identify with the sickos, instead of the true protagonists of this film. Unfortunately, their characters provide no chemistry and nothing with which I could identify. I just felt compassion for the two objects of their demented malevolence.

In a comment thread on this film, someone suggested the film's ending was too pat - that there was too much neat "resolution." To the contrary, this film provides too LITTLE resolution. After the twin menaces of Broderick and Ryan finally depart, were Preston and Karyo able to reconstruct their lives of love and security and promise? Or were they forever reduced to penury as a result of Broderick's and Ryan's conspiracy?

The acting in this film is pedestrian except for Karyo, who is quite good. Meg Ryan and Matthew Broderick never come close to portraying 3-dimensional characters - much less, likable ones - or achieving any on-screen chemistry. This is a pitiful excuse for a romance or a comedy or a romantic comedy.

Tragically, this film is about two people from disparate backgrounds who, against all odds meet, fall in love and build a dream life only to have it devastated by two contemptuous criminals from their past. There was nothing funny about two deranged, deluded people utterly destroying the lives of two other people who have found love, happiness and success together in the big city. For me, causing misery in the lives of others is a poor basis for comedy.

This is a great romantic comedy. Meg Ryan is on of the sweetest women in the world and you can't not love her. The story is very clever and funny. Meg Ryan and Matthew Broderick are great and delivers one of the best romantic comedies ever. This movie is really funny at times,but has that serious underline which builds up until the end of the movie. Maybe Meg Ryans best movie yet,beside "When Harry met Sally".

This is a romantic comedy with a rather hard edge, or, to put it differently, a European-style farce with a too cushy ending.

Apparently, this film was conceived as a Meg Ryan vehicle, i.e. as a product suitable for her established screen persona. This was a mistake. The cast choice (and the marketing) make the outcome of the film blatantly obvious and that takes away too much suspense from the viewing experience. Also, the film makers did not have the courage to bring the misfortunes heaped upon Anton Depeaux (played very well by Tcheky Karyo) to their logical conclusion. It's designed as a chick-flick and thus everyone's gotta be happy at the end. A more emotionally ambiguous ending could have turned this into something special.

I like the way Matthew Broderick character showed Kelly Preston how much he loved her and won't let he go just like that to another guy. Instead he didn't sit around feeling depressed, he flew to New York to win her heart again. It was pretty funny when they did the tricks on the French guy, I have to admitt that they were clever ideas. I should have done that to my cheating boyfriend!

What is the problem with the voters on this movie?

Does Meg Ryan ALWAYS have to be a sap? I mean, always the goodie two shoes?

I love her romantic comedies, but this one had BITE. And it was funny as hell... how did it manage to score LOWER than her other movies?

She's extremely likable as an actress, she is a very good actress, and in this movie she got to play someone with a little bit more range than she usually gets and she did it so well.. what is the problem here? Does everything have to be dumbed down in order for people to like it :(

Addicted to Love is HYSTERICALLY FUNNY. Watch it again and appreciate it. Not everything has to be either sappy or have explosions to be good. Sheesh.

This is by far one of my favorite flicks. Broderick is very funny but i really enjoyed his look. Meg is great, and i don't generally enjoy her stuff. but the real scene stealer is Tchéky Karyo as anton. his rape your skull line is priceless! this is a rare kind of romantic comedy and kudos to director griffin dunne for a quirky and offbeat love story. 10 out of 10

Sam (Matthew Broderick) is a placid astronomer who travels to NYC to win back the affections of his girlfriend, Linda. She has just left him for another man, throwing him into a chaotic state of mind. Finding her apartment house, Sam camps out at the vacant, tumbledown building across the street. He finds he has an excellent inside view of her apartment, due to a large picture window. Soon after, Maggie (Meg Ryan) joins him in his abode. It seems her ex-fiance Anton is the man living with Linda and Maggie is determined to wreak havoc in his life. After setting up a sound system, the peeping duo can even hear the apartment's conversations! Will Sam succeed in getting his girlfriend back while Maggie is messing up the life of her former love?

This funny premise translates into a humorous, enjoyable film. Anton and Linda are sitting ducks as the jilted pair formulate ways to undermine their happiness as a couple. Broderick and Ryan give lively performances that are amusing and, at times, touching. The ending may be predictable but is nonetheless satfisfying. Fans of romantic comedies will consider this one a fine addition to their list while non fans may relish the dastardly deeds ot Maggie and Sam.

This is not a chick film. Actually it's more of a guy film, and probably why it got so many bad reviews and rating, and why a movie so great could be so under-appreciated. Some women who will see this film will see a guy being dumped trying to win the girl back and obsessing about her will immediately feel disgusted and say "Ewwww! What a creep!" They just don't understand what real love is in real life and how complicated it is for guys, especially nice guys. Let me explain - This movie is a Romantic movie with comedy in it, people in love, however ITs a Dark romantic film, it's realistic kind of love, not the one that we are usually are being fed with by most romantic chick films. This movie is about betrayal, obsession and what love is really all about. If you are a guy who ever experienced being dumped or rejected by women after trying so hard to be a nice guy and win a girl heart with love, kindness and basically being a doormat and have your heart broken - This is the movie you must see. Because We all have a little Sam in us who wants to believe in true love, sometimes we are a bit hung up on past lovers and we all stalked our ex's, if it's on Facebook or through friends, and sometimes we still want to love that special someone that dumped us and we are positive that person will realize the mistake he has done and come running back... This is why this movie is so unique, a movie that will leave a mark on you after you watch it.

I've first watched it when I was just a kid, and 12 years later I still remember it and have to watch it again and again… I hope you enjoy this movie as much as I did.

Sam is an astronomer who has been together with his school teacher girlfriend Linda about forever.Then she takes a job in New York and finds a new man in her life, a suave French restaurateur Anton.He settles to an abandoned building across the street from Anton's apartment.He starts spying on Anton and his ex, he even borrows a camera obscura from his observatory which projects a life-size image from the apartment.Later he is joined by Maggie, Anton's bitter ex with vengeance on her mind.Now those two try to break up their old sweethearts, in a way or another.Addicted to Love (1997) is actor/director Griffin Dunne's directorial debut.And it's a very nice debut.Matthew Broderick does top-notch work as Sam.His character is a nice guy who ends up making the wrong decisions.Meg Ryan does a very nice job as Maggie.Her character may be a little annoying from time to time, but I guess she grows on you.Kelly Preston is terrific as Linda.Tchéky Karyo is brilliant as Anton.Maureen Stapleton makes a marvelous Nana.Nesbitt Blaisdell is very good as Ed Green.And so is Larry Pine as Street comic.Director's late great father Dominick Dunne portrays Matheson.The movie has pretty many funny and tragicomic scenes.One of them is when Linda's father reads the note to Sam his daughter has left.It is quite intriguing to watch all those ways they use to break up the couple and to make Anton's life miserable.The vendor's monkey wearing lipstick kisses Anton.They plant roaches in Anton's restaurant when a famous critic is dining there.You start feeling some sort of pity for the man when Maggie has caused him an allergic reaction from strawberries and Sam accidentally hurts the guy in a physical way.In a series of romantic comedies this is pretty original.

thank god i didn't pay to see this movie. alas, a late-night free showing at the theatre down the street was simply not enough to add any semblance of reality to this clunker.

as if the plot isn't bad enough, meg ryan and matthew broderick are so awkward as would-be lovers, i'm surprised there's not more footage of them tripping over each other.

and that inevitable kiss? smarm central. i haven't seen a kiss that awkward since i was in the sixth grade and my boy friend barney (yeah, who am i to talk?) leered "do you wanna french?" at me across the playground.

do yourself a favor and stay at home to wash your hair instead of seeing this movie.

I apologize if this is more about Meg Ryan than the movie but I just saw this flick for the first time tonight despite meaning to check it out for years frankly. I just expected more from Meg Ryan -- more from her career to be honest.

She plays her standard semi-bimbo, semi-slick and yet semi-alluring chick with little substance and not much thought it seems for how her dialogue progresses -- DOA and the Presidio some to mind. Her career is chock full of meaningful characters that defined themselves with any number of strong emotional traits. Even her small supporting role in Top Gun was incredibly well done, despite the arguably contrived and cheesy nature of the film (you have to admit -- cheese doesn't get better). She was electric in that movie -- Harry Met Sally of course is another. You felt her true emotion. I'm a hetero male so it takes a lot of soul-searching to write something bad about Meg. LOL. I just think she's a little one dimensional in a lot of her films and Addicted to Love is one of them. I have no idea what her character is truly thinking in most scenes and what her motivation is. I think that a lot of her troubles are poor script choices. But no one is forcing her.

I would skip it or wait for cable.

Astromer Matthew Broderick sets out to spy on his ex-girlfriend and her new lover; when the man's jilted fiancée comes into the picture, the two conspire to bust up the budding romance. Amiable, rascally, but ultimately predictable comedy is more about transitory love than love addictions. Sunny Meg Ryan gets to work with a little more shading and edge than usual, and she works well with Broderick; but the second-half of the movie scatters around trying to come up with an ending. The finale is cute, like the rest, but some of the wind has already gone out of the picture's sails. Director Griffin Dunne stages a few beautiful comedic scenes (as with the restaurant critic), but Broderick's 'friendship' with the new man in his girl's life is just silly, and the whole conceit of Broderick and Ryan setting up shop in an abandoned building right across the street from the loving couple is amusingly ridiculous. Still, there are finely wrought, surprisingly telling moments in the movie, such as the two leads sneaking over and going through the things in the love-nest, or Kelly Preston telling her Frenchman that she would sell pencils on the street with him if she had to. It's better than it had to be. *** from ****

There is a big difference between a 7 and a 6 to me. I tape and keep any movie that is a 7 or better. I don't tape or keep any movie that is a 6 or less. So, when I have to make a decision on a movie that could go either way, it is a tough call. I figure this movie is about a 6.5. Rounded up, what do you have?

Even then, I could only give it a 6.5 because 1) I love Meg Ryan. 2) Romantic comedies are my favorite genres. 3) The ending was fairly nice. It took all that just to get a 6.5. That tells you a lot.

This movie was slow and sometimes boring and almost always not engaging. I was extremely disappointed in the chemistry (or lack thereof) between Ryan and Broderick (whom I also like). The writing failed to grip the audience. The plot idea is preposterous. And, the comedy part of "romantic comedy" was largely absent. Too bad. It could have been a good movie ... if it was just a different movie.

If only she could get her hands on some good material. But in her eagerness to break out of a stereotype she's picked some real losers.

Today it's a long list.

Here we have someone who's done an excellent job of acting appearing in a movie almost totally without charm. No, take that back: this is totally without charm.

I can't describe what it feels like to suffer through this turkey. It's very painful as work Ryan has previously done has been so unbelievably good.

Forget the supporting cast: without the diamond up to par and with a totally lacklustre idea for a movie, nothing else matters and nothing's going to help.

Go rent When A Man, Harry/Sally, or Seattle instead.

The story seems plausible, but the dialogue is below average. In

all, I found this 'romance' unappealing...something better

should have been done with the idea. What a waste. The

characters are not well developed and very little romance

actually makes it to the stars.

The funniest part (and this is not saying much) is that Linda

requires her father to deliver all her "Dear John" letters like

singing telegrams. Add one more of those and there may have been

something to look forward to every thirty minutes.

When I saw Addicted To Love in the theater, I didn't think I would have remembered it too long. After having seen it at home I have to say it is a nice comedy, recommendable to all fans of the genre.

The movie is very comparable with French Kiss, and the character performed by Meg Ryan is even more interesting than the one in French Kiss. Anyway French Kiss, with Kevin Kline giving one of his best perfomances, is more appreciable and full of jokes.

A beautiful song by Les Negrettes Vertes (who were present in French Kiss, too, can you remember?) matches well a funny and interesting scene.

Addicted to love is a very good movie that speaks about the fact that not all lovers are very sure that they really want each other (You might be thinking of someone else !!!).

Starring the very very lovely and beautiful actresses : Meg Ryan & Kelly Preston, The are really good in this movie and I actually loved them a lot. (I think everybody does). Also starring the cutest guy in town : Matthew Broderick.

This is an adorable movie that will be remembered.

I've watched this film twice over the past few years. The first time I walked away from it wondering what was bothering me about the film. So this time I watched it from that perspective...and the reason became immediately clear. There's no character to "like" in this film. Well, there was one -- Maureen Stapleton -- always a joy to watch, though here her role took up far too few minutes. But as for the lead characters: Matthew Broderick's character is madly in love with a woman (Kelly Preston's character) whom he totally takes for granted and could care less about her desires for her life. Preston's character moves to NYC and falls in love with a low-life a------ who is using her (and any other woman he can) to get a green card. Broderick's pathetic character follows her to NYC to spy on her and deceitfully win her back. Meanwhile, Preston's character has fallen in love with the ex of Ryan's character, and Ryan's character is going to get her revenge against him for using her to get a green card...and then dumping her. So the question is: who do you root for in this film? No one! And that's the problem! So to me, the basic story line is quite flawed, not that the film doesn't have its funny (and occasionally touching) moments. Cockroaches set free in the green card hungry Frenchman's restaurant. Now that's funny! Broderick's character in a physical fight with the Frenchman who has 2 broken arms and a strawberry rash. That's funny! But an old Lassie television show being show in flight? No, I don't think so, and I failed to see the relevance to the story...although they portray that as a relevant moment is Broderick realizing he is in love with Ryan.

Don't mistake my criticisms of the characters for criticism of the actors. Matthew Broderick is fine here. But when you consider his career, you wonder why he didn't become the "every man" type of actor like Jimmy Stewart. He had it in him, but I can't say the right roles came his way...or he didn't accept the right roles. He has had an "okay" career, but it would be difficult to define him as a film star (though he has done well on Broadway).

Meg Ryan was the preeminent love-comedy actress for quite a few years, and in this film you can see why. She's not exactly my style, yet I've enjoyed pretty much every film I've seen her in. Though her popularity has faded, I still enjoy seeing her.

As to the secondary love interests: Tchéky Karyo as the Frenchman; no thank you. I'm glad this is the only film I've seen him in. Kelly Preston...well, okay.

If you don't expect a lot from this film, then you may very well enjoy it...sort of. But it's not Broderick or Ryan at their best, and the plot seems to plod, despite lively situations. It's just sorta broken slightly.

This is a romantic comedy with a rather hard edge, or, to put it differently, a European-style farce with a too cushy ending.

Apparently, this film was conceived as a Meg Ryan vehicle, i.e. as a product suitable for her established screen persona. This was a mistake. The cast choice (and the marketing) make the outcome of the film blatantly obvious and that takes away too much suspense from the viewing experience. Also, the film makers did not have the courage to bring the misfortunes heaped upon Anton Depeaux (played very well by Tcheky Karyo) to their logical conclusion. It's designed as a chick-flick and thus everyone's gotta be happy at the end. A more emotionally ambiguous ending could have turned this into something special.