Sorry, this movie sucks

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.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

It's 1992. Abbie Reynolds (Madonna) is an L.A. yoga teacher. Her best friend Robert Whittaker (Rupert Everett) is gay. She gets dumped by music producer boyfriend Kevin Lasater (Michael Vartan). They go to the funeral of their friend David (Neil Patrick Harris)'s gay partner Joseph. Abbie wants a baby and Robert assists during one drunken night. She gets pregnant. His father (Josef Sommer) is angry while his mother (Lynn Redgrave) is happy. Abbie and Robert decide to raise the baby together. As their boy Sam grows up, their simple arrangement gets less simple. Sam has questions. Abbie starts dating perplexed Ben Cooper (Benjamin Bratt). Robert hires Elizabeth Ryder (Illeana Douglas) to sue for custody.This should be a drama. There seems to be a desire for this to be a comedy but the subject matter does not allow the funny. At best, this could be Kramer vs Kramer and I can't see how that could be accomplished either. It's really a hopeless case and Madonna does not help. They could rewrite this a million more times and it still won't work. It's all problematic and the child seems to be lost in the mayhem.

Hundreds of years from now, I imagine historians and archeologists, not to mention film preservationists, will spend years and years gazing in puzzled horror at Madonna's body of film. It will evoke feelings similar to the nausea, fear and disbelief we feel now while studying Mayan hieroglyphics of wholesale human sacrifice and ritual slaughter. Only much less interesting, naturally. What is it about Madonna? In movie after movie we have to endure the excruciating process of her struggling with all her might to bring a human emotion to her face. This Herculean labor, brought to its absolute zenith in Evita, but not much abated here, may be great fun for afficionados of porn acting, but for the rest of us: sheer torture. Then there's her voice. She delivers her lines like a tenth-grader playing Hamlet's mother, but with less conviction. Madonna seems entirely incapable of expressing intelligence or emotion, but if she would just let her hair down and act like the good old all-American tramp she is, all might be forgiven. Alas, she seems to have some curious delusions of grandeur. She is the most self-conscious bad actor who ever disgraced a movie screen, and yet she doesn't have the nerve to be camp. Is it possible to be wooden and plastic at the same time? Madonna manages to make Jenna Jameson look like Judi Dench. The movie? Couldn't tell you a thing about it.

With a beautiful Madonna and gorgeous Rupert, "The next best thing" is just a drama. A drama with the best intentions. But with a plot that down and down until a obvious thing. So,"The next best thing" is not the "best" like they say.The story is about a girl with his best gay friend. One night, with all the drink you can imagine... the next best thing born. Sincerely, i think the plot could be better, but that don't means the story is bad. The movie talk about about the new couples and families and how is better handling the things with tranquility. Of course you can be with other person and be good parents and have, at same time, good l life and sexual life. But you must have carefully with the children. For that reason "The next best thing" is not bad. Because, in some way, makes us reflecting about the new life of XXI century. Oh Kay, maybe is not the "best thing", but after all is a "good thing".*Sorry for the mistakes... well, if there any

This movie is really not as bad as the rating wants to make you believe. I admit that the beginning is just cheesy and absolutely horrible, riddled with stereotypes and awkward performances. It gets better from the moment on when Madonna confronts Rupert Everett's character (Robert) with his upcoming paternity. The moral implications of a gay man and a straight woman deciding to raise a child together are indeed challenging and very much up-to-date. Here the comedy aspect is overlaid by some sincere issues that make this movie more interesting than the beginning has implied.The movie even turns into a family drama and becomes very emotional. You will love Malcolm Stumpf as Sam, the protagonists' son. He is very convincing and shows substantial natural talent, which adds considerable quality to the story. The final dramatic climax is an ensuing court room struggle for custody of the little boy between Robert and Madonna with her new boyfriend Ben. This causes very strong moral and emotional implications. Robert's desperate struggle and his honest commitment to be together with his beloved son goes straight into your heart and addresses the issue of homosexuals and their rights to raise children. Here again Malcolm Stumpf bears a significant part of the emotional burden, and does so genuinely.This movie is very simple in its equipment, but the messages delivered and the characters portrayed make it worthwhile. Rupert Everett does a great job, and Madonna shows that she can act if she has to. It is a very tough subject, and in the end you will not consider the movie a comedy any longer. This is a good thing.