WasAnnon Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Caryl It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

rivau319 This film was definitely the final nail in Travolta's metaphorical coffin having been preceded by 'Staying Alive' and 'Two of a Kind'. Upon first viewing of the film, I was dumbstruck to find what I thought was Travolta acting poorly and the story seemed to be absolutely forgettable and pointless! But after persevering with the movie a couple of times more, I enjoyed it. I even changed my mind on Travolta's performance and realised what he actually tried to do-a mixture of anger, frustration, fatigue, mild charm-all of which are attributed to a workaholic Rolling Stone journalist such as his character Adam. The music has a pulsating beat although I do admit some songs on the film's soundtrack are better than others but the music does seem to carry this film along. Curtis is dazzling in her role as the 'Aerobics Pied Piper.'(Her sexy body and amazing legs are a plus for this movie.) Jann Wenner deserves special mention even though he's probably playing himself considering he was then the editor and now owner of Rolling Stone Magazine. This is a real 80s movie, and a strange theme involving both journalism and aerobics somehow merging together. Travolta and Curtis both do a great job in their roles bringing a contrast of characters in their relationship. I didn't however like the beginning or ending credits at all. The beginning was just basic and static-a list of credits against a plain background. The ending wasn't great either--Berlin's 'Masquerade' song (which is, in my opinion, a weak link in the film's soundtrack), plays on while ALL of the key characters do aerobics...Is that realistic? Bizarre. I rather liked it when Curtis meets Travolta at the end and they drive off. There, is when it should have ended. But I guess all in all, an entertaining mid-80s movie.

sajeeva sinniah Many of the IMDb users considered this movie to be of no use spending time on - though i was thoroughly reluctant to watch it - i was glad i did - CAUSE I FOUND NOTHING WRONG WITH IT!! Well it was the 80's the time when compared to today, movies were not that great. Well with that in mind - i believe this movie is quite an accomplishment - i remember reading from one of the users of IMDb that this was a bomb, which almost ruined Travolta's career - but i really don't see why - well it is not brilliant - but it is FAR better than all the other razzie winning movies. Performances were not that great - Jamie Lee Curtis is very pretty - and as for John Travolta, he has a brush of Tony Maneiro and Danny Zuko in this character. Well though people may REALLY not want to watch it cause it has been considered as an underdog movie of the eightees era - those people can watch it just for the aerobic workouts - they really sizzle.

NixonNow OK, I know this is a bad, bad movie. It's not like I have any "diamond in the rough" illusions about this actually being a good movie that's merely misunderstood. So why is it that I watch it every time it's on? I honestly love watching this film!Maybe it's the dated 80s setting and the "studly" guys that look utterly homosexual now. Perhaps it's the great lines, like Anne De Salvo looking directly into the camera and saying, "C'mon, guys, make me suffer," or Matthew Reed (in his one and only screen role) saying, "It was love at first sight. I took one look at those tits and my whole body got hard!" It could be John Travolta going through his aerobics routine with a sock in his jock, or Larraine Newman straddling the leg-spreader, proving that not every woman looks sexy in a leotard.Of course there's Jamie Lee Curtis calling Travolta a "sphincter muscle" three different times. There's also Jann Wenner gyrating his fat gut during the closing credits. How about the pointless scene where hundreds of Boy George fans storm the hotel, or Curtis "deleting" Travolta's article by merely backspacing (What kind of word processor is that)? There's even the premise that Rolling Stone is a serious news magazine - HAW HAW HAW!I seriously can't recommend paying money for this, but it's worth a watch if it comes on a local channel just for the sheer badness of it all. This is the definitive nadir of Travolta's career (check that...it is better than Battlefield Earth, but what isn't?) After this, even Look Who's Talking Now looks brilliant.

Poseidon-3 A legendary flop and a legendarily bad movie, this mess is part three in a career-killing trilogy of Travolta's that also includes "Staying Alive" and "Two of a Kind". It took him a long time to bounce back. It also stalled Curtis's career for a while until "A Fish Called Wanda" rescued her. The story, such as it is, concerns Travolta, a Rolling Stone magazine reporter, looking for a story angle within a huge gymnasium at the height of the aerobics and fitness craze. He's already working on another more important story, but wants this as a back-up in case an all-important interview falls through. He zeroes in on high-profile aerobics instructor Curtis who has a huge following (which often kisses her on the mouth following one of her workouts!) Unfortunately, she's had a major disaster with a reporter in the past and resists being interviewed for his story. In order for there to be a movie, he must wear her down and get her assistance even though there are 90 other instructors at this mega-gym. The film is very unfocused and disjointed throughout. It tries to be too many things: a reflection of investigative journalism, an ethics drama, an examination of self-esteem issues, a music video crash-course in Jazzercise and, most obviously, a jiggle movie with emphasis on lycra-clad spread legs and tight behinds. The script is so crass and stupid with ludicrous lines like, "You're a sphincter muscle..." (this one is repeated often!) and unnecessary subplots which lead nowhere. Travolta is awful. He speaks his lines with his mouth almost open, stares blankly with no skill at conveying what's on his mind and, in the films most celebratedly horrendous scene, gyrates his bulging crotch at the camera ad nauseam while sweat trickles down his pale, clammy face and body. Curtis looks very fresh and attractive most of the film (if a bit sexually ambiguous) eschewing the huge hair and heavy make-up of the times. Her character is a little too self-righteous, but her acting is better than anyone else around. Wenner, a non-actor, provides a jarring presence whenever he appears because he (along with several other "real" people cast in the film) hasn't got the polish to really sell his role even though it reflects his position in real life (as the founder of Rolling Stone!) Most of the other actors in the film either overact horrendously or flat-line. More importantly, the audience does not care about anyone in the film and so does not care when various events and revelations come about. There is some inherent camp value in revisiting the hilarious workout clothes of the 80's and in hearing the bouncy, tacky music of the era, but the movie is way too long for it's subject matter and the music montages wear out their welcome very quickly. And for all the sweating and gyration, there are no sex scenes in the film. Look out for pansexual Burt Reynolds look-alike (and alleged Travolta bed partner) Barresi in the cast as a gym rat eager to show off his body.