Scent of a Woman (1992)

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

It's really an awesome film and for me is the best

Al Pacino is one of the best (I would name him the best) actors that Hollywood was ever lucky enough to have! This movie (which in my opinion displays one of Pacino's finest acting work) is a realistic ride of a depressing man "I'm in the dark here!" that finds himself at one of the most difficult crossroads in his life.Desperation; rudeness; honesty; anger and love are so intense and passionately displayed by Pacino that everyone can sense them, and as viewers we have no option but to sympathise with his Frank Slade and immerse ourselves in the story of this blind man that apparently everyone hates, but in reality everyone wants to love and understand.The side story of the Baird student is well put together by Chris O'Donnell but Al Pacino steals the show, as he portrays a blind man so perfectly that we easily forget that he is Al Pacino and we start to think of him as a harsh Lieutenant Colonel.Truth and honesty are not usual synonyms that one can say about a Hollywood movie but Al Pacino turns himself into his characters, and this movie should be presented in every acting school as the finest example of truth in acting.I don't know how many times I've seen this movie but every time I do I enjoy it, and appreciate the hard work that was done throughout it. Thank You Al Pacino!

I always heard that Pacino's Oscar win for this role was mostly a lifetime achievement award, but I actually think he's pretty incredible here, as are all of the performances (LITTLE BABY SEYMOUR Hoffman!). Otherwise, the movie is clichéd and corny. Other than a couple of effective moments (Thanksgiving dinner), this is mostly an abundantly false (gun-hotel scene) 90's drama that was just begging for (and getting) awards with every hoo-wah.

This movie came out when I was 12 I fell in love with it from the moment my mom and dad took me to see in on the big screen. That's right parents, look back to how the kids in the '80s were raised...if you expose children to films like this, they WILL understand and come to enjoy them. Everything doesn't have to be childish and stupid and ADHD, children will understand things with a bit of a head on it.Rant aside, what the heck happened here? Chris O'Donnell can act. He can hold his ground against old Al in one of his most celebrated roles. Why isn't he getting better roles? He deserves them, he's got talent.And he's kind of a local boy so...I have to support him. Winnetka is close enough and it's nice to see people from the neighborhood and around the neighborhood make it big.Moving on....Folks argue about Al's role, but he was brilliant. You even got to hear him scream and yell in an angry diatribe at the end of the flick and, regardless of his talent...that IS what you want to see when you shell out for one of his movies.He can do the old bard...but you want to see him do the angry man.And then, moving beyond this....it is beautiful. That is the only word to describe it. It is beautiful and fulfilling and you walk away totally satisfied.You are satisfied with this movie. Satiated. Full. Honestly, if you are looking for more than that in a movie you don't understand what movies are all about.