The Lake House (2006) User Reviews

Good chemistry equals good romantic fantasy

[dan_delago · 8/10 · 16 June 2006]

Suspension of disbelief is a wonderful phenomenon. It's used in many genres effectively and why not in romantic film? Although the Lakehouse mailbox took on some magical qualities, the plot still worked for me on a deeper level. It's about connecting with your true soulmate when you feel isolated. Who hasn't felt alone at a crowded party? Or who hasn't feared if they wait too long that they may never find that special someone? It's a part of the human condition this film examines. I mean, look at the architecture of the Lake House itself. It's isolated yet beautiful in a Frank Lloyd Wright kind of way.

This is a character-driven story. It was fueled by the solid performances of Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock. They are so natural and comfortable together on screen. It's more than just physical attraction between two people and that's why the love story works. It's real chemistry between them. I believed these two could be walking along Lakeshore Drive holding hands together.

I was rooting for these two characters to get together. They are likable. They have angst in their lives. They show vulnerability. Real human feelings. They are successful in their careers but there is still that void. In my opinion, they are the right fit for each other. It's the underlying themes of this movie that give it substance not the fact that some of the plot is a bit far-fetched. Love is illogical in many ways but when you find that certain someone, it's magical.

David Auburn's screenplay is first-rate. It creates the right mood. It has emotion in each scene. He makes the story palpable. This kept me interested. I wanted to know what was going to happen next. What more can you ask for in a touching love story? I enjoyed it.

Not without its shortcomings, but interesting all the same

[TheMovieMark · 7/10 · 16 June 2006]

"I don't get it," said one confused old man as he filed out of the theater.

Listen up, folks; this movie is not that hard to understand. Take the time to wrap your brain around it and you shouldn't have a problem following along. However, after listening to people talk after the movie I realize that some of you may walk away a little confused. So let me hold your hand and reveal a few facts that you should grasp before seeing this: A) Sandra is corresponding from 2006, B) Keanu is corresponding from 2004, and C) These time periods aren't mutually exclusive. Sandra's character still exists in the 2004 time period that Keanu is communicating from and vice versa.

Got that? Good. Sandra can tell Keanu where she was in 2004, and Keanu can cross her path, but the 2004 version of Sandra will have no clue who Keanu is. Makes sense, right? So the trick is that the 2006 version of Sandra has to figure out where the 2006 version of Keanu is so that they can meet in Keanu's future (AKA Sandra's present). Everything unfolds from there. Seriously, it's not that complicated.

I think most of the confusion exists because the script isn't as tight as it needs to be. It's frustrating because the story could have been much better (and a few plot holes could have been easily eliminated) with a couple of more rewrites. The most frustrating thing to me, and I reveal this because it's best you know it upfront, is that we're never told what exactly is causing the time rift between them.

We're expected to just accept it as fantasy and not demand any explanations. You'll enjoy the film much more if you understand that not all loose ends will be tied and you can ignore the plot holes I alluded to. I'd love to discuss them and explain my specific issues with them, but doing so would reveal way too much of the story. Email me after you see it and we'll discuss.

Throwing those quibbles aside, I actually enjoyed this quite a bit. Perhaps I'm a sucker for romance movies that aren't scared to throw a little of Nick Drake's Pink Moon down on us, but I like that this is a romance that plays it a bit unconventionally. Is it for everybody? No. There's a lot of talking (though it never gets as gay and flowery as I feared), and some of you might find the pace slow. Though I felt it more deliberate.

I also applaud the performances of Sandra and Keanu, who is nowhere near as robotic as you may expect. I actually bought into his emoting! Good job, Mr. Cool Breeze, but you really need to work on making your sneezes more believable.

Fans of romance movies will adore the theme of love and how its power can change someone's life, but since I'm into more masculine topics, I preferred watching the pieces of the time puzzle fall into place. It reminded me a little bit of Frequency - Keanu does something in 2004 and then Sandra recognizes its impact in 2006. Then we follow along as they try to figure out how to meet.

I wanted one of them to leave their hand in the mailbox and see if the other could see it when they went to retrieve the next letter. Perhaps a disembodied hand wiggling around in a mailbox wouldn't have fit with the mood that the writers were going for, but I would've laughed.

Speaking of mood, I thought this was another strongpoint of the movie. The cinematography is great, creating a cold, atmospheric setting. Chicago's impressive architecture is used to great effect. If you like stunning visuals to set your romantic mood then you won't be disappointed.

As long as you're willing to give this film your undivided attention for approximately 100 minutes (and you can easily forgive its shortcomings) then The Lake House will prove to be an intriguing piece of film for lovers of the romance genre.

And hey, even if romances aren't your thing, there might just be enough mystery here to keep your interest. After the movie, my friend commented, "As far as romances go, this is probably the best I've seen." And he hated The Notebook, ladies.

THE GIST

The Lake House suffers from lapses in logic, unnecessary plot holes, and predictability, but I appreciated its attempt to add something fresh to the romance genre. The intriguing mystery and the performances of Sandra and Keanu are effective enough for me to grant my approval to those of you who already have an interest in this one.

Beautiful!

[prtfvr · 8/10 · 18 June 2006]

I was excited by the premise but worried about it being a remake. There are some major plot holes but the movie's just so darn good that you don't mind. This was the most romantic movie I've seen in a long time - and that includes the torture of waiting for these two to meet! I wish that I could tell you more but you've got to see it yourself. Keanu Reeves is terrific, no flash back to "Bill" or "Neo" as you might sometimes see from him in other movies. Just a great performance. I really enjoyed Sandra Bullock and they have great chemistry - they'd have to otherwise the premise wouldn't have worked.

So, turn off your brain, take your main squeeze and prepare to loose yourself in the moment. I know you can do it if you try. Besides, we get real life every day. What's two hours of romantic fantasy going to hurt you?

Beautiful and Magical Tale of Love

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 30 January 2007]

In Chicago, the lonely architect Alex Wyler (Keanu Reeves) has a troubled relationship with his father Simon Wyler (Christopher Plummer). In 2004, he buys an old glass house in a lake, designed and built by his father, and he finds a message in his mailbox from the former tenant, the also lonely Dr. Kate Forster (Sandra Bullock), asking to deliver her correspondence in an address downtown. Alex meets his brother Henry (Ebon Moss-Bachrach) in Chicago and when they go to the address with Dr. Forster's correspondence, they find a building of luxury apartments under construction to be delivered eighteen months later. After some messages, Alex and Kate disclose that she is living in 2006 and Alex in 2004, they fall in love for each other and they try to find means to meet each other.

"The Lake House" is a beautiful and magical tale of impossible love, with a wonderful chemistry between the gorgeous Sandra Bullock and Keanu Reeves. The story has many flaws and lack of explanations, and slightly recalls the idea of the excellent "Sliding Doors", but better off forget the inconsistencies and enjoy the nice love story. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "A Casa no Lago" ("The House in the Lake")

A Man and Woman Separated by Time

[Uriah43 · 7/10 · 2 November 2018]

Upon moving out from her beautiful lake house a woman named "Kate Forster" (Sandra Bullock) puts a letter in her mailbox for the person moving in asking that her mail be forwarded to her new address. Much to her surprise she finds that her letter is replied to with a strange response saying that the house she is referring to has been vacant for several years. Needless to say, this perplexes her and so she puts another letter into the mailbox assuring the person that she has lived in that house until recently and that includes the current year of 2006. Not only that but she also repeats the request to forward her mail to an address in nearby Chicago. This now puzzles the new resident, "Alex Wyler" (Keanu Reeves) who is living in the year 2004 and when he checks the address listed by Kate discovers that the apartment building is not due to be completed until 18 months later. So he responds that there must be some mistake only to get a letter back telling him that he should dress warmly because if he is living during the time he claims then there will be a freak snowstorm that night. Sure enough, that night it snows. Not only that, but when he puts a letter in the mailbox for her the next morning he is startled to get a response within minutes. Likewise, she is also shocked when he answers within minutes to her as well. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was an adorable fantasy-romance film which has several interesting twists and turns along the way. Admittedly, there were a couple of subplots which tended to detract from the story a bit but even so I enjoyed this movie for the most part and I have rated it accordingly. Above average.

An Unexpectedly Haunting & Beautiful Film . . .

[sshogben · 10/10 · 21 June 2006]

There IS a quality to "The Lake House" that lingers in the mind days afterward.

For a film in which the element of Time is uniquely important, "The Lake House" manages to convey an odd sense of universal timelessness. It is as though the specific When is less relevant than the universality of human thought, feeling, and decision. An almost mystical quality.

"The Lake House" is that rare film which not only invites but welcomes a repeat viewing. The first time simply follow What happens in the story. See the film again to more fully enjoy How this story elegantly unfolds.

This is NOT a time travel film. Repeat, NOT. Each character in this film experiences only his or her own natural time moving forward in the usual linear chronological way. What changes is each character's perspective on what they are experiencing over time, and how each's perception of their Past informs Present decisions which impact Future events.

If I had to pick one theme to describe this picture: at the time they occur, we may not even recognize the most important encounters or events in our lives.

Alex (Keanu Reeves) and Kate (Sandra Bullock) are two seemingly unconnected persons who have lived in the lake house of the title - exactly two years apart. Through seeming accident they find that they can communicate with each other directly, in immediate personally experienced time, through the mysterious mailbox at the lake house. We then follow the often startling events each experiences - and writes about to the other - over the next two years of their lives, Alex from February of 2004 to 2006, Kate from February 2006 to 2008. The result is . . . an extraordinary film that both satisfies the intellect and engages on a surprisingly emotional level.

Their roles here are a significant departure from usual for both Reeves and Bullock, but not to worry. Individually, this is either's best work anywhere. Collectively, their chemistry is exceptional. Subplots in the story are developed through some superb supporting performances, most notably the two parents. Christopher Plummer is achingly brilliant as Alex' demanding genius architect father, and Dutch actress Willeke van Ammelrooy positively oozes wit and warmth as Kate's mother.

The lake house itself . . . physically brings out so much emotional subtext in this film that it ought to be credited as a separate character. (If no artist/architect has actually built this house, they should!)

Altogether, "The Lake House" is one of most rewarding films of any type I have seen in many years.

HIGHLY recommended.

Entertaining - but not as good as Il Mare

[sandrilene · 7/10 · 12 August 2006]

I made it a point to re-watch the Korean original Il Mare the day before I watched The Lake House so that I would be able to compare the two. I enjoyed Lake House and as far as performances go, I liked Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock as much as I did Lee Jung Jae and Jeon Ji Hyeon. Still, I think it was in the filming, editing and overall scripting that sees Il Mare winning hands down. The Lake House, while entertaining and nice enough, loses the innocent and whimsical quality that made Il Mare magical.

Some thoughts on why this was so: - The house. Il Mare was quaint while the Lake House was impersonal. In fact, this was also a point made by Alex (Keanu Reeves) in the movie. He said that the house was made for ownership but was not a home. Hence, it struck me as funny that Kate (Sandra Bullock) would find the Lake House the place where she felt most like herself. No such problems with Il Mare. The house truly WAS quaint...and magical.

• The letter box. The letter box in Il Mare was made of wood and beautifully carved. The one in Lake House was just...a letter box. In fact, it looked beaten-up and weathered. Of course it looks realistic - but it takes away the magical quality somewhat.

• The physical interaction between the 2 leads. There was none in Il Mare - which added to the desperate and aching loneliness of Sang Hyun and Eun Joo (Jeon Ji Hyeon) - especially for Sang Hyun, when the closest he came to Eun Joo (apart from the ending) was at the train station when he sat next to her on the bench but did not talk to her as she was the girlfriend of another man. In Lake House, Alex not only had a heart-to-heart talk with Kate but even danced with her and kissed her. Somehow, that also lessened the poignancy. I felt very deeply for Sang Hyun but not for Alex. And really, isn't it a rather crummy thing to do to be kissing another guy's girl at the surprise party the said guy threw for that girl? Sang Hyun was even willing to help Eun Joo save the failed relationship with her boyfriend but Alex homed in on the girl when she was still with another guy. Of course one could argue that Eun Joo was in love with her boyfriend while Kate never quite felt the same way about Morgan, which brings me to my next point...

• Kate's character. She seemed to me to have led Morgan on. I mean, if you don't love the guy, then why "settle" for him? Yet Kate, in her loneliness wasn't fair to Morgan, deciding to choose him when her heart was really still with Alex. Eun Joo felt she was still in love with her boyfriend and wrote to tell Sang Hyun so though she knew it would pain him. But at least she was being honest and apologised to Sang Hyun when she found out that she still could not quite forget Ji Hoon. Kate leading on Morgan (annoying though he was) somehow made her less admirable.

• The incessant talk in The Lake House. One of the things I really liked about Il Mare was the stillness of the movie. There were scenes when Sang Hyun and Eun Joo would just be doing things alone, in silence, with no talking. This again magnified their solitary state. The Lake House seemed to be afraid of silence. There was talk and action ALL THE TIME as though Hollywood was afraid that we wouldn't get what was going on.

• Annoying love rivals. Apart from Morgan, there was Mona. Yes, I know we are supposed to root for the leads, but really, would Mona be much of a threat anyway? The girl in Il Mare (whose name I forget but she was very pretty and sweet and acted by Choi Yoon-yeong) was the one who helped Sang Hyun build the house he dedicated to his true love after he died.

And I think that encapsulates the whole problem of why I like Lake House a lot less than Il Mare. The type of love showcased in Lake House seemed to be of a more selfish variety. In Il Mare, it was selfless. The one time Eun Joo was knowingly selfish (in asking Sang Hyun to stop her boyfriend from leaving her when she knew Sang Hyun's feelings for her) it turned out to be a huge and crushing mistake that had tragic consequences. In The Lake House, Kate and Alex were finally together when Kate made the self-serving decision to dump the guy she had promised to marry (albeit saving Alex's life in the process).

Just like the 2 houses. Il Mare, the wooden childhood house come to life by the sea, had a whimsical and magical quality about it that reflects the whole tone of the movie. The Lake House, all glass and metal, rings cold and hollow even as it appears attractive.

loved it

[scully213 · 9/10 · 13 June 2006]

I saw a screening of this last night and maybe I was just in the right mood for it, but I really enjoyed it. I'm not even a chick-flick kind of girl! It's best if you don't over-analyze the time-travel details and just go with it... it's a movie, after all. Seriously, I wasn't expecting that much and I got a better feeling from this movie than I have in a long time - it made me feel warm and happy. Plus, the whole theater laughed at some parts, plus people gasped and cried, and at the end everyone applauded. That's a good sign, if you ask me. I don't watch previews so I don't know what they give away about the plot, so I'm not going to give much of anything away here. I will just say that to me this was a uniquely told romantic story. I happen to like Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock, although they are by no means favorites of mine, nor do I consider them to be consistently amazing actors (more often they're not... at least he's not...). But they made this story work for me and I believe they have good chemistry. The movie is set in Chicago and shows the city off nicely without trying to beat you over the head with it (a la The Break-Up). One thing I think I related to a lot with these characters is that they are both pretty isolated and lonely, although not in a sad-sack way. I felt a longing from them for someone to relate to, and even though they have opportunities for other people to be involved in their lives... well it's not what's best for them and they don't settle. Plus, the actors are both in their 40s and I like seeing love stories that aren't about either two 22-year-olds or a 40-year-old man and a 22-year-old girl.

Forget the house, what about that haunted mailbox?

[moonspinner55 · 7/10 · 21 October 2006]

A glass house built on stilts over a lake near Chicago helps bring together a condo-developer and a kissless female doctor who has just begun practicing at her first big-city hospital. The trouble between them is, he's writing to her from 2004 and she's in present day 2006, and their link is a mailbox with a sense of time all its own. Superfluous-seeming romantic drama with an initially-perplexing story conceit actually works better than you might think (thanks to some sharp writing and handling, and nicely underplayed lead performances by Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock). Some of the plot elements don't bear close scrutiny (it might drive you mad to examine the details), yet fantasy films are governed by their own set of rules, and this one plays fair within its narrative structure, although it does keep the architect waiting an awfully long time just to get the girl. *** from ****

space and time people...

[faith_bgd · 1/10 · 5 September 2006]

Even if you accept certain things like melodramatic directing, non-dynamic (slow, boring)editing, there are still some things that have to bother any viewer who saw more then two films in his life. Dialogs like the one between Sandra Bullock and her mother where Sandra asks her "WHY DID YOU MARRY DAD" and mother replies "SO YOU COULD ASK ME THAT QUESTION"! And that's it, THE END OF SCENE. Why is it there in the first place?

THE BIGGEST FLUKE!!!

After they established their communication via the magic mailbox, one of the first things that Sandra(in 2006) writes to Keanu(in 2004) is that "she had a tough day, a man died on her hands at the Daily Plaza." As the first doctor who tried to help the man she would have surely remember his face, and his name too, because she would write a report, and death certificate containing his personal info.

Now as the film goes on we find out that they(Sandra and Keanu, both in 2004) have met and even kissed at a party. Sandra Bullock's boyfriend interrupts their kiss, now, every person can remember who did he/she kissed (assuming they weren't under influence of alcohol :)), especially if the kiss was seen by your boyfriend, and caused a brake-up.

Next, Sandra?(2006) figures out that IT WAS HIM!!! She immediately sends him a letter saying IT WAS YOU, and a lot of blah blah...

Where is the problem? Now we set the time-line.

1. They meet and kiss at the party

2. He gets killed in the accident

3. She figures it was him at the party, but not in the accident too.

She knows his name, She knows how he looks like and she remembers him from the party that occurred before the accident but she does't find out that it was him who died until the very end. HOW???

And at the end, He just shows up in front of the house, but what happens with his brother,and the rest of people in the world who think he is DEAD. What happens? Does he come to his brother and says Hi I'm alive now... An attempt to explain that, with CHANGE OF COUNCSNECES, does't do the trick, cause if that was the case Sandra Bullock is not immune to it, she would have to suffer the same consistencies. If he was alive she wouldn't be at the lake house at all, because there would be no need...

A cut-back to the restaurant with him showing up would be a better solution...

Even though this is clearly impossible, it's amazing.

[Texas96 · 9/10 · 13 June 2006]

I saw this film on June 12th, 2006 at a preview showing in my home town of Austin, Texas. Admittedly, when I first viewed the trailer it appeared to be nothing more than a cheap romantic flick with a hunk (Keanu Reeves) and a pretty girl (Sandra Bullock). After watching this film, I realized first impressions can sometimes be wrong.

The plot may be a bit out of the ordinary. But if you suspend logic for an hour or two and believe in the magic of the story, it will draw you into a deeply passionate story. There are some twists that may or may not surprise (especially if you're as quick as my wife).

Although Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock have had some iffy acting performances in the past, both put in excellent performances that made their characters come alive. Each characters has a very earthy feel that makes them seem real and relatable.

Overall, I have to say this is a beautiful movie, from the story to the acting to the beautiful cinematography.

Flawed

[moviemanMA · 6/10 · 5 June 2007]

A love that knows no boundaries and can withstand the test of time. This is what true love means at least in the movies. If a love can still have the same energy no matter how far apart you are, then it is true and everlasting. But can love exist when two people live two years apart?

Apparently it can. Alejandro Agresti's take on the Korean film Siworae is the story of two people living in Chicago. Dr. Kate Foster (Sandra Bullock) lives in 2006 while Alex Wyler (Keanu Reeves) lives in 2004. They both however occupy the same lake house outside of Chicago. They communicate through letters left in the mailbox. Impossible as it may be, these two become pen pals, writing about who they are, what they do, and what they have gone through. Also living at the house is Jack, the dog that they both share.

Jumping back and forth between 2004 and 2006, we see how their lives, although separate, become intertwined through a series of planned encounters. Their relationship relies on patience, just like the romance of the novel Persuassion, a favorite of Bullock's character. The one connection the two share is their love of the lake house, a solid foundation for their romance.

There is a certain mystical element to the movie that is captivating. The way the two cross the sea of time and interact through the mailbox is romantic and charming. At one point Bullock's character mentions that she misses the tress by the lake house and how there aren't any where she lives. Reeves plants a tree in 2004 so that in 2006 it will be there for her. Cute things like this make their relationship fun to watch.

Agresti's camera work and overall display of the conversations that Bullock and Reeves have is adequate. In some scenes, both characters are present in the same place, talking to each other like you would with anybody else but the overlap on screen of the two years is put together nicely. There is however one rather large flaw.

The short story by Ray Bradbury A Sound of Thunder is the story of a group of scientists who travel back in time and in doing so unintentionally kill a butterfly. This act has a ripple effect, changing the future drastically. This one little event changed the course of history. I realize that this short story is fiction but it does make sense. If you change the past then in fact you change the future. By planting the tree Reeves might have altered the environment or caused something else that makes a big impact.

Keeping this in mind I can't truly enjoy the film. Certainly Robert Zemeckis's 80's classic Back to the Future delves into this but the outcome is desirable. Whow knows what can happen if you change the past? Luckily, The Lake House isn't a science fiction movie so it is not such a big deal.

Overall the film is cute and original, at least for American Cinema. It has a nice story and a creative premise. It doesn't break any boundaries like the love in the film. For what it is, The Lake House is a nice piece of romance.

Dumb movie

[Linnea1928 · 1/10 · 6 September 2006]

This movie has horrible acting and the whole plot of the movie doesn't work. I get that there is a 'magic mailbox' and I am actually OK with that. It's not that this plot is 'implausible', it's just that the plot doesn't follow its own rules. SPOILERS: Sandra Bullocks character is a doctor and early in the movie Keanu Reeves character dies in her arms and after that fact her boss tells her to take time off at a place she loves (ie the house she sold, 'the lake house'). So when she is there, that is when she finds the first 'magic letter' from two years in the past from Keanu Reeves character. So they start corresponding through time and ultimately fall in love. OK, I'll buy that. But when she figures out he dies on that day, she tells him through the 'magic mailbox' not to be where he died on that day. So he doesn't get hit by that bus and he doesn't die. Then she tells him to wait two years and then meet her at the mailbox (ie that very day she warns him about his impending death) And he shows up. But if he hadn't died that day, she would never have found his letter because she never would have gotten the advice to go back to the house she had sold. He changed her past in that he didn't die, but the rest that happened because of it still happened. END OF SPOILERS. So that is why the movie was implausible. It didn't follow its own rules.

The Lack House.

[prufrock5150 · 1 July 2006]

Have you ever contemplated time travel? Have you ever pondered parallel universes and the complexities of communicating across years instantaneously? If so, great - go see "12 Monkeys" or read a Phillip K. Dick novel, because the writers of "The Lake House" clearly haven't. The characters of this faux-ontological exploration, while a shred sympathetic, clearly have more of a willing suspension of disbelief than I was able to. While I can forgive their shockingly rapid acceptance of the mind-bending discovery of being able to write letters spanning two years' distance, I simply cannot accept that they would become *so* immersed in their little emotional exploration and cute "long-distance relationship" bit that they would *never* actually test the limits of their connection (or even try any tricks with lottery numbers, splitting the winnings - it's kind of a no-brainer). Furthermore, while "KeAlex" (since he is *always* Keanu to some degree no matter what role he's playing) makes some strides to contact her in his time, she apparently fails to make a single attempt to find him in her time (which is actually a contrived, necessary plot point to make the "climax" work). In essence, a movie which promises so much in the realm of pseudo-sci-fi mystery, it resolves with the moral "look both ways before crossing the street." A major disappointment.

"Can this be happening? "

[Galina_movie_fan · 6/10 · 16 April 2007]

"The Lake House" is a romance in letters which is "kind of a long distance relationship" between two people that live it the parallel worlds separated by a span of two years and somehow connected by a time-traveling mailbox. If anything, this movie connected once again Sandra Bullock as a physician who moves out of her lakeside house to live and work in Chicago and Keanu Reeves, an architect, who lives in the house right now (the concept of "right now" plays an important role in the movie). Two begin to communicate via letters left in the mailbox and suddenly realize that they are as far away from each other as 2004 and 2006 are. If you watch the movie in the right mood with the right person, you could think of it as a sweet, moving picture about longing, about getting close to someone whom you may never see but not be able to get them out of your mind, and who become to you more real than anything you've ever known. You will see the gentle and intimate site of Chicago that you did not know even existed. You will be moved and entertained...If you are not in the right mood, you'd begin looking for the logical faults and plentiful holes in the plot and you would say scornfully, "another chick flick with Keanu as a romantic hero" - so, it is up to you.

6.5/10

Valentine's Day 2004, 2006, 2008

[jotix100 · 7/10 · 2 July 2006]

Having seen a few of Alejandro Agresti's Argentine films, we decided to see what he had done with "The Lake House", his North American film debut. The choice is odd, because Mr. Agresti's films have never dealt in subjects so esoteric like the one in this before, something that American studios' higher ups love to give their audiences in the form of a romantic film.

"The Lake House" is a re-make of a popular Korean film, "Il Mare", which seems a strange title for a film from that country. The original screen play by Eun-Jeong-Kim seems to be the basis that David Auburn, its adapter, used to "translate" the film and made more accessible.

We are taken to a beautiful property by a lake near Chicago, where both Alex Wyler and Kate Forster lived in. There are things that keep puzzling the viewer as he sits through the movie. The best has to do with the way the letter box outside the house serves as the indication of how Kate and Alex communicate with one another, but is it real? We keep getting indications along the way that perhaps their meeting, fleeting as it was, only serve to frustrate the two lovers because of the constraints of time.

Kate and Alex loved one another deeply, but they were never to enjoy the love they felt because things kept getting in their way. There's always the two year difference that at the end seems to make sense, but which keeps us guessing throughout the movie.

Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock worked together before. They show an easy chemistry that makes the viewer root for them because we believe they sincerely love one another. Both actors make a great team and one can see why they were cast together. Others in the cast include Christopher Plummer, Shohreh Aghdashloo, Dylan Walsh, Ebon Moss-Bachrach, among the featured players.

"The Lake House" is a romantic film that will delight especially those that have loved and lost a dear one.

"Somewhere in Time" for the 21st Century

[UKBio · 9/10 · 22 June 2006]

I saw this movie on opening night, June 16, 2006 in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.

My favourite movie of all time was "Somewhere in Time" (1980) which starred Christopher Reeve and Jane Seymour. I have often wished that someone would remake, not that movie - because it is perfect as is, but more the sensibility and many of the themes of that movie.

There are many parallels here. It is partly set in Chicago. It is about time travel of a sort that relates to time blocking you from the one you love. Christopher Plummer, who played Jane Seymour's manager in "Somewhere in Time" here plays a variation on that crotchety character in the role of Keanu Reeves' father - nicely bookending his career. Also, the similarity in the last names of the lead - Christopher Reeve; Keanu Reeves.

There are so many things I loved about this movie. The soundtrack was pitch perfect, including everything from Nick Drake to Carole King. The wardrobe was beautifully chosen, conveying warmth and romance. The script was measured and never overblown. The performances were genuine and real, even though the subject matter could be taken as fanciful by the unromantic at heart. The direction and cinematography were breathtaking. I would have given it a 10 but for the fact that in some spots the looping for dates was a bit off.

There are many twists and turns, and you never know until the last moment how it will actually end. I was on the edge of my seat the whole time and sobbing by the end of it. This is the movie I have been waiting for Keanu Reeves to make for the longest time - I always knew he had this performance in him, but was disappointed by the artificiality of films like Sweet November. And Sandra Bullock has never been better. This is a new addition to my all time top five movies.

You will never look at slow dancing the same way again. I promise.

Almost perfect

[jdavidbakr · 7/10 · 25 March 2007]

We rented this movie after seeing (and being disappointed by) Preminition and reading reviews that this movie is much more solid than Preminition. After seeing them both on back-to-back nights, I agree. The only reason I'm giving it a 7 and not a higher ranking is because I felt that the directing and editing was a little weak (the pacing of several scenes were distracting, it took me a long time to get into it, and I was jarred out of the movie into being an audience member several times because of the way it was edited/directed.) But the story is nearly perfect. There are a few nit-picky things that when analyzed thoroughly don't fit within the rules that the filmmakers set up, but you have to think kind of hard to find them (as opposed to Preminition where the flaws are so obvious and so easily fixable that you want to take the filmmakers out and shoot them for squandering such a brilliant premise... but I digress, this review is about The Lake House...) It is strange that Sandra Bullock did two so similar movies back-to-back like she did, but I guess they are very different even though they are so similar. If the director of Preminition had done The Lake House, I probably would have rated it a 9 or a 10.

Waiting for the Right Time and One

[jon.h.ochiai · 10/10 · 17 June 2006]

In a great scene from "The Lake House", Kate Forster (Sandra Bullock) tells Alex Wyler (Keanu Reeves) what she loves about Jane Austin's "Persuasion". What Kate loves about the book is that love can occur at the wrong time, and even when the characters wait it doesn't work out. Alex again inquires why it is Kate's favorite. Kate laughs. Magical chemistry. This is part of the brilliant charm of Director Alejandro Agresti's "The Lake House". It is a touching and funny love story about Kate's conceit that you wait for the right time and for the right one. Those familiar with the movie's trailer know that in the story by David Auburn (based on previous work by Eun-Jeong Kim and Ji-na Yeo) that time is the insurmountable obstacle posed to Alex and Kate. As the story opens, Kate (Bullock) is a lonely doctor dedicated to "helping people" who leaves this exquisitely designed lake house outside Chicago as she begins her residency in the city. She leaves a note to the incoming tenant in the mailbox. Alex, a talented architect who sold out on his craft to build tract homes, receives Kate's letter. However, for Alex it is 2004. For Kate it is 2006. Yes, this involves time travel. But fear not. There are no treaties on worm holes or Special Relativity. Agresti instead focuses on impact of completing relationships and true love.

Sandra Bullock and Keanu Reeves are awesome together as Kate and Alex. Along with Agresti, they create Kate and Alex as both lonely characters, not in the morose sense rather people caught up in their lives without any compelling romantic relationship. Bullock is wonderful as Kate. Reeves, who is often much maligned as wooden, embodies an ease and compassion in Alex. Bullock and Reeves are great looking, and they are a great looking couple. Their screen chemistry overcomes the inherent narrative constraints. "The Lake House" so works, because we want to see Alex and Kate get together. David Auburn's story enrolls us in Alex and Kate's love story. Alex is estranged from his father Simon Wyler (the cantankerous Christopher Plummer), who is a legendary architect in the realm of Frank Lloyd Wright. Upon the prodigal son's return after traveling the world and selling out on his gifts, all in an attempt to "forget" his father, Simon asks "Did it succeed?" When Alex was 8 years-old Simon built the Lake House for his wife, Alex's mother. As Simon became successful and famous Alex's mother suffered and she eventually left. Later she became ill and passed away. Simon did not even attend her funeral. His cold words to Alex remained with him. In his eyes his father is a monster, but he is still his father and commands his respect though not necessarily his love. Kate (Bullock) had only one significant relationship in her life that being with attorney Morgan (a good Dylan Walsh)—a nice guy, but not "the guy". Kate has also sold out on love, under the guise of dedication to her work. In a touching moment Kate's Mom (Willeke van Ammelrooy) tells her about the forsaken great love of her life. The preposterous dual time line works, only because Kate and Alex are smart, running with it without ponder. And they fall in love. Alex says to his brother Henry (Ebon Moss-Bachrach), "She's more real to me than anything I've ever known."

Writer Auburn brilliantly weaves the plot twists throughout and the results are funny and poignant. Acknowledge Auburn too, for the clarity in retrospect within the story particularly at the end. Throughout there are hints that Kate and Alex have met before. There is the train station scene that is so heartfelt, the theater was silent. Agresti and Auburn are great romantics. "The Lake House" is a testament to true love, and having one's life being whole and complete. They manage a sense of yearning and regret with humor and compassion. Sandra Bullock is stunning in her understated performance. She brings such a grace and authenticity to Kate. Keanu Reeves compellingly displays the swirling emotions just below the surface. Here his subtle charm is impressively leveraged. "The Lake House" is an amazing and timeless love story well worth seeing.

The Lake House remains afloat... barely

[Flagrant-Baronessa · 6/10 · 22 October 2006]

'Implausible' is an unfair label applied on its own but if the story itself cannot overcome its implausibility or make it into something interesting, then it deserves the stamp. Right in the forehead. Bullock-Reeves reunion The Lake House (2006) not only merits it, but demands it due to its disjointed treatment of parallel story lines and its inability to ultimately make something interesting of this mystery mess. Nevertheless, the film proves a fair diversion and pasttime.

The centromere of these two story lines is the Lake House – a majestic, remote little estate with walls of glass and pillars of steel that overlooks a lake. When lonely architect Alex (Reeves) moves in there he finds a letter in the mailbox from a woman who claims to be the house's previous tenant, something that appears logically impossible... and is. Out of curiosity, he tries to seek out this woman but finds that the address she has given him to forward her mail does not exist; it is today a mere construction site. Confused, he sends her a reply through the Lake House's mailbox which she receives and responds to, thereby sparking the fuse of a fully-fletched long distance romance – two years apart in time.

The Lake House is a shameless chick-flick, it needs to be said. It is also the reason why chick-flicks in general are given a bad name (when there are many good ones like Pride & Prejudice, Love Actually and Clueless). Here we have pseudo-magic, angsty vulnerable and lonely characters and their newfound crushes wrapped in Hollywood mush. The film pretends to be so sweepingly romantic that Alex never bothers to ask Kate (in the future) for the daily newspaper or winning lottery numbers. Instead they patiently communicate through insightful love letters, sigh romantically and stare longingly into space. It soon spirals into a messy, talkative and slow-paced "You've Got Mail" romp on magic.

Keanu Reeves wears his confused, wooden expression during the film and Sandra Bullock opts for her usual mellow, sweet face. Yet for all their imperfections – and perhaps BECAUSE of their imperfections – they are two likable normal characters. I also think that the two have very good chemistry; indeed, were it not for that device the Lake House would have sunk almost immediately. Now it remains afloat thanks to occasional comedy, well-placed saccharine sweetness and an even level of modest 'watchableness'. The final twist is wielded with deft strokes and things finally work. But it never elevates above generic rom-com formula. Although serious props for playing Nick Drake.

6 out of 10

This is ridiculous.

[sillyrabbit77 · 2/10 · 7 November 2006]

Here's the actual cause-effect chain of events as it would happen: Kate realizes that Alex is the dead guy, hit by the bus.

Kate writes him to warn him not to go and look for her, but to wait two years.

Alex does so to protect his life. Alex never gets hit by the bus.

Kate never sees the anonymous "guy" (Alex) get hit by the bus, so she never gets depressed by not being able to save him (she would have recognized him at the beginning of the movie as the "Alex" guy she kissed at her birthday party two years prior, anyway -- another ridiculous point that is never addressed) and never goes to the lake house to begin communication with Alex in the past.

Alex never gets to know Kate through that communication, so he is never in any of the places that we see him throughout the movie (the "walk" together around town with his little note at the end of it, the party, etc., and definitely not at the plaza on Valentine's Day.) By saving his life, Kate essentially would have instantly had no recollection of him or communication with him at all, and the entire thread of time-space would have placed her immediately elsewhere (probably with Morgan), totally oblivious of Alex's existence, and Alex would have gone on to form Visionary Vanguard with Henry, totally oblivious of Kate's existence.

Furthermore, if Kate and Alex never started their communication through the "time portal" mailbox, as the chain of events above states, Alex would have no reason to attend Kate's birthday party when he is invited after meeting Morgan when Jack runs away, as the name "Kate" would mean nothing to him. Thus, Kate and Morgan would never have moved into the lake house at any time in the past, so she would have no recollection of a lake house, much less a mailbox/time portal, much less Alex himself. She would have never known Jack, and the only interaction between ANY of them would have been Jack's running away to Morgan's front door, and Alex's brief, meaningless run-in with Morgan.

So Kate never would have sent any correspondence to Alex or anyone else through the lake house mailbox, so she would never have had to save Alex, but that's OK, because he wasn't there for the bus to hit. Cycle complete, happily ever after.

Overall, it was a typical Keanu Reeves BOMB. He hasn't had a good role since Bill and Ted's. And yes, that includes, in my opinion, The Matrix's "Neo." I'm surprised they got Sandra Bullock to play opposite him. Way beneath her intelligence level. "Speed" must have been a real good time for her.

To address the comments that proclaim ignorance on the behalf of the movie's critics who state its "implausibility":

It is not the fantastical nature of the plot overview, in that it attempts to incorporate time travel as a theme, that is repulsive to fantasy lovers, or that draws such harsh criticism.

Here's the problem that intelligence has with this film. The plot is not concerned with staying true to its own rules of cause and effect. It's that simple. Focused on drawing tears from young girls' eyes, it is a romance that completely forgets the logic of its own endeavor: When you make a movie about time travel (whether it's a person OR just messages through a mailbox), and you make changes in the past, it affects the future. You must consider holistic as well as fragmented causation, for the parts ultimately and linearly constitute a finished, although revised, timeline. You cannot cut and paste the changes it will make, you have to consider ALL of them. Movies like "The Thirteenth Floor," "The Butterfly Effect," and the "Back To The Future" series succeed where "The Lake House" fails in this regard.

Therefore, critics of this movie certainly may, without self-contradiction or cognitive dissonance, simultaneously praise fantasy for what it bold-facedly claims to be: fantasy. "Superman" does not violate its own established rules or step beyond its own paradigm to dumb down its audience with inconsistency. What is consistent at the beginning of the film(s) is consistent at the end. The same goes for the Lord of the Rings trilogy, The Neverending Story, Jumanji, Peter Pan, or a host of other fantasy/children's' movies that possess, and proudly boast of, a realm or occurrences that are otherworldly or imaginative. The complaint, once again, is not that fantasy has been attempted. The complaint is that the task of accuracy in the parameters of the cause-effect design has endured one of the following: careless neglect, complete omission, or incompetent butchery.

To repeat, the crime is not that the movie is implausible in scope, but in its outcome. The problem that the movie makers faced is that the outcome that they wanted, and that the audience wants, is incongruous with the outcome as it naturally unfolds according to the causation chain. Consequently and regrettably, they opted to make 2+2=13 or some such analogy.

In conclusion: Let fantasy be fantasy, but remember that it must, too, unconditionally obey its own individual and customized "non-negotiables," clearly set and understood by its audience, a group of rules for which time causation is the primary (and missing, or abducted) poster-child in "The Lake House."

Oh my gosh people, just go see it!

[dlboulder · 10/10 · 23 June 2006]

I've been a pretty avid movie fan for many years. I've seen countless romantic movies from all ages of film, and this one absolutely stands up well with the majority of the greatest of them.

Don't believe the critics, I don't. I've been disappointed and angered by being suckered in to seeing movies I disliked or absolutely hated on many occasions, and with greater frequency recently. I haven't a clue what makes the critical media tick, and I'm not sure that they do either.

This is very simply a lovely film on every level, from dialog, to direction, to cinematography, to consistently outstanding acting performances across the board. The delicately-embedded sheer decency of this film makes it a totally recommendable film for persons of all ages, although I'm guessing that most really young ones would get bored and fidgety before too long.

Bullock's and Reeves' performances and chemistry here can be described in one word: luminescent. Please avoid coming into the theater with a bad attitude, that is seldom helpful in gaining enjoyment from quality film-making. Just don't be overly critical of what you may conceive as plot holes and inconsistencies. After all, the first and foremost goal of film is to entertain you. And entertained you will be, in the grandest fashion of great Hollywood cinema.

I am deliberately refraining from specific description from the movie. Too many people are posting spoilers without warning here. But the chemistry is magical, the plot logical if entirely implausible, and the complete package is as satisfying as Hollywood is likely to provide.

I came out of the theater thinking that this is the kind of movie that is seldom made anymore, but then I realized that it's the kind of movie that has seldom been made at any juncture in the history of film.

An extraordinary effort, and a stunning success. Don't miss this one in the theater, because you'll later wish that you hadn't. I expect word-of-mouth to provide this film with a long theater run, but don't wait until it's too late.

Note to Hollywood: You have in these leads potentially one of the great romantic pairings in the history of film. Don't blow your chance.

Though somewhat predictable, a good "watch".

[vtstar1-1 · 7/10 · 16 June 2006]

Two years apart? OK, time warp, speed of light thing?....Don't know, don't care. The characters work, the premise works( allow 1 large suspension of disbelief) and you end up with an entertaining little film that allows for a couple hours escape. Can't tell you about the one little plot thing that may be slightly off without giving something away. May not be anything at all, would have to see it again to be sure. Did miss Jack at one point though. Even allowing for that one suspension of disbelief, it was a fun "watch". Who said all films have to be "masterpieces" whatever that is. I just like to watch a film for the shear enjoyment once in a while and this was one I enjoyed.

Some good, some bad

[Nilsosmar-2 · 5/10 · 5 September 2012]

The Lake House is an okay movie. It held my attention about half of the time.

The performances were just okay. The characters were pretty flat.

The scene in which Bullock and Reeves dance and kiss had some nice emotional tension.

The SF/fantasy element was somewhat interesting, but would have been better if just a little more thought had gone into it.

Moving on to some serious story problems (SERIOUS SPOILER ALERT -- stop reading if you haven't seen it):

• About halfway through the story, Bullock's character makes a date with Reeves. He doesn't show up. She assumes the worst (though it's never said what exactly she assumes). Why? Why totally break things off, when you're in a deep romantic relationship, because of one broken date? Why doesn't it occur to her (as it does to him, and surely must to the audience) that something might or must have happened to him? Bullock's character does little that's decisive in the movie, but her abrupt decision to dump the guy because he didn't show up, without any explanation, makes her seem shallow and a little stupid.

• Not a big point, but the story was set in 2006 (and 2004), but the characters did not have access to the internet. There did not appear to be an internet. If there was one, her first action, if she had half a brain, on realizing she was corresponding with a man from the past, would have been to look him up and see "what's he doing today." If he missed her date, she would have done some more digging. A world with magical mailboxes, I can accept; a world without an internet is actually harder to believe.

• It's more than passing odd that in the time-line when he dies in her arms, after being hit by the bus that collided with the car, she didn't remember him. It's true that she had only met him once, at a party, but she had danced with him and kissed him there. Her boyfriend certainly remembered Reeves, enough to recognize him in the street and walk up to him angrily years after the kiss. Why didn't Bullock?

• Minor point, but, who was she paying rent to, when she was renting the Lakehouse?

• I can understand why he turned around and avoided being killed in the car/bus crash, but it appeared there was no crash in the altered reality. Why didn't it happen? And if it didn't, why did he need to stay away?

• The story had so many sentimental elements, and the dog had so much to do with the sentiment, it seems odd that it wasn't around in the final scene. It could easily have been worked into the story, with a tiny amount of thought.

I don't mind a few story holes, but the ones in The Lakehouse could have been avoided with a little care and forethought. It was touching... I do understand why people liked it.... but I also think we have the right, as moviegoers, to expect that the plots will make basic sense. It's fine if they drift into fantasy, but the characterization has to make sense.

Magic Mailbox Of A Fascinating Glass House

[Chrysanthepop · 13 December 2008]

Alejandro Agresti's 'The Lake House' is an unusual love story where two lovers are separated by two years. It couldn't have been easy to bring such a story on screen and there are some confusing moments and a few plot holes but Agresti makes up for this with some wonderful visuals, the actors and the overall subtle romantic feel. Generally, I am not a big fan of romantic dramas but there is a certain gentleness, innocence and subtlety about 'The Lake House' which works for me.

Moreover, the lead actors Sandra Bullock and Keanu Reeves (reuniting on screen after 12 years since the 1994 movie 'Speed') share an electric chemistry. Their scenes together are among the highlights. Reeves, though he is a little off in a few sequences, is suitably restrained most of the time. The actor shows improvement and growth. However, the star of the movie is Sandra Bullock. Though, at times, Bullock's Kate does remind one of her Lucy character (from the 1996 movie 'While You Were Sleeping'), Kate is more ambivalent and indecisive. The viewer can easily empathize with, and on some level relate to, Kate's loneliness and her strive for happiness. Shohreh Agdashloo and Christopher Plummer lend fine support. The soundtrack goes well with the silence and tranquility of the film and the cinematography is good.

My first viewing of 'The Lake House' was two years ago and I had mixed opinions mostly due to the confusion of the plot. I watched it again recently and this time I really enjoyed it. The flaws are still there and bits of it are still complex to follow but this time I took more notice of the positive. It's a great date movie but also a brilliant choice for a rainy day or for a cold winter's night.