Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Noutions Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Sarita Rafferty There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

steved-999-828699 Without Larry Hagman, it was terrible for me. They should have paid Larry Hagman enough to still be Tony.Even worse, when Jeannie went back in history to show how they met on the beach, it was nothing like how they really met, and changing Tony even going back to the beach was a brutal mistake.As a big fan of the original series, this flopped for me during the whole movie. The chemistry between Tony and Jeannie disappeared.Just like in the original series, Jeannie's sister tried to break them apart. Evidently it worked in this movie (Very fitting as the 'new' Tony Nelson was horrible with the relationship with Jeannie anyway).The ending was also bad. It was not like Jeannie to leave, but I understand now since the new Tony was nothing like the original.Perhaps younger people who never watched the series didn't notice how far it went from the original and rated higher, and am sad about that.All around it was so disappointing.

Richard Latanville I like the original series, such a simpler time and nostalgic era. The reason why the 60s series worked is 2 things.1. Cast! Tony and Jeannie had chemistry! And a lovable Roger and a running gag Dr Bellows. This 4 core cast was the reason why the series worked.In this movie, there is no Larry Hagman, we have a new Anthony Nelson. But together there is no chemistry. In the series, Jeannie was a carefree, reckless genie who's actions inadvertently causes Tony to be in jeopardy. Where this movie, she is more mellow and mature, that kinda took away from her core character. When do a reunion movie, try have core cast come back or it just wont work.2. Location Location Location...The series was located at cape Kennedy and Cocoa Beach in Florida, back in the 60s NASA was in the frontier of technology and were fascinating at the time. In this movie it was Houston, why? Overview: This movie lacks continuity and a major one. The series sub-plot says Jeannie was 2000 years old, and this one it says shes over 4000 years old! I know ladies do lie about their age, but come on! Only thing worthy of the movie was the telling her son of her secret and putting the two at that beach where Tony and Jeannie met, so nostalgic. Only they screwed it up by having the new Tony instead of replay the pilot of the series.

Gravity06 Jeannie has always been a bit on the feisty side (that's a quality I like about her; she's nowhere near as domesticated as Samantha). I can understand her feeling a little taken for granted after so many years (she's not a robot, people -- she has feelings too).Great idea ... but they messed up the ending. It caused a MAJOR continuity problem for its successor, "I Still Dream of Jeannie".It had its moments (I liked the scene where she has to tell her son about her ... "secret identity").

S Bradford A seemingly ageless Barbara Eden reprises her role from the 60s sitcom as a genial genie married to her mortal astronaut master. Jeannie, who seems to have discovered women's lib since we last saw her, is anxiously awaiting husband Tony's retirement from the space program, so he can be at home more to help her raise their teenaged son, TJ. But Tony's agreement to undertake one more space mission threatens their marriage, and even his life.The script tends toward corny, and Larry Hagman is missed as Tony Nelson (Wayne Rogers from "M*A*S*H" fills in). And the ending makes the whole thing smell like a failed pilot to revive the series. Still, there are some nice nostalgic moments with Eden, Bill Daily (as Tony's best friend, Roger), and Hayden Rorke as the always-suspicious Dr. Bellows.