User Reviews

OK already! The debate scenes don't reflect true-to-life college debating environments. The characters were clichéd and one dimensional. Some of it is preachy. I grant you all that, other reviewers. But first of all, what a cool concept for a movie...a debate team at Pepperdine. I love it. I consider myself creative, but I could never have come up with that idea. Score one for the screenwriter, or whomever pitched the idea. Roy Scheider is so appealing on screen. I love that guy. I understand he was a Liberal in real life. I don't care. I still like him.His best scene is when he tells a story about his mother. Kirk Cameron's best scene is when he is trying to get his debate partner and date to loosen up in his dorm room. He played it with down-to-earth realism and sincerity. The biggest mistake of the film is Cameron's accent. Why not just make his character be from a small town in Eastern Oregon, OR hire an actor who is actually from Oklahoma or Texas?? His earnest attempt to do the accent drew away from his effort to portray the other aspects of his character. Abortion?? Come on. College kids debating that before the Supreme Court in the late 80s? What a lazy choice. It was like the writer or the film makers didn't want to rack their brains a bit and come up with something more original. That choice kind of ruined the film for me, although I realize that the whole Jami Gertz character was based on it's tie to this issue. Wow, Tim Quill nailed the noblesse oblige patrician with a hankering for the written word. But can't you be both a politician and a writer at the same time, or maybe write, before or after a political career? His character was choosing between the two career paths, but maybe he didn't need to. The politician Fred Grandy was an actor on the Love Boat before politics. Fred Thompson combined the two. Law and Order and politics. So I don't buy the conflict. Get rid of the sketch artist. I didn't get it at all. There is a kid who keeps sketching the people we see, but he never speaks. It was gratuitous. I loved the use of the classic 80s tune "Forever Young," set to a driving sequence on the Pacific Coast Highway, as well as the Celine Dion opening track, long before her fame. Watch it for its' camp, for the early resume of Gertz and Cameron, for the beach setting, and for the unique plot vehicle, college debating.

Granted this movie is a horrible representation of college debate. That being said, the movie itself is not horrible. It's not a thought-provoking power movie either. However, unlike the previous review I enjoyed this movie for it's entertainment value. If you enjoy dramatic movies that are a bit "cheesy" then you will enjoy this movie. It's not ever going to win any awards, but it was not produced to either. Do not take this movie so seriously and you will get some enjoyment out of it. It also does deal with some serious issues and although others may not like the way it was done, those you have a personal attachment to the topic will take comfort in knowing that the emotional side was handled in a considerate fashion. All in all, there are positives to this movie, so don't take it as a "How To" on college debate, as it was not meant to be one and does not portray it accurately. It's just a movie, get over it already!

First, I concur completely with the other review listed here. Beyond that, let me say this movie is an insult to college debate. As a former debator, coach, and director of debate, let me just say that our activities are nothing like these. Debators work hard, practice hard, and win through argumentation, strong evidence, and effective persuasion. Not through hoke, schmaltz, and a total lack of ethics. This just had to be said, as I am tired of people saying, "Oh, I know what college debate is like--I saw 'Listen To Me' a few years ago." Uh, no, you don't. Also, the plot is sophomoric, predictable, and the acting is terrible. This movie's only value is as a joke. A sad one, and only when you have an incredible amount of time to waste. P.S.--the Supreme Court has no interest in hearing college debates, and hackneyed, worn-out topics like "abortion" were debated back in the mid 1970's. Real debators are academicians, and they deal with topics that are relevant and timely. Aw, need I go on? This movie was horrible, and a horrific representation of a worthwhile activity. Please, if you see it, don't insult anyone associated with college debate by saying you know anything about what they do.

This is, perhaps, the worst film I've ever seen- all apologies to "Plan 9 from Outer Space," "C.H.U.D." and everything Van Damme. Kirk Cameron is, as always, brutal. His schoolboy grin and squeaky voice may have played in the insufferable world of TV sit-coms, but he should never- NEVER- again attempt to actually act. This movie is nothing more than the Breakfast Club meets the Pro-Life movement. It is preachy and condescending to its viewer and serves as nothing more than a platform for Douglas Day Stewart's right-wing pontification. His characters continually allude to Dostoevsky in a transparent attempt to gain some vestige of intellectual credibility. The film rings so hollow that, if it were a room, one could walk around in it for an eternity without encountering any substance whatsoever. As for the usually bearable Roy Scheider- I wonder what favor he owed and to whom that he wound up in this overblown, self-important waste of raw stock?

This movie is single handedly responsible for crippling or destroying the careers of all actors associated with it. Gertz, Atkins, Cameron, Roy Schneider - none could survive this horrible thing.

I must say that Kirk Cameron's poor display of acting is surpassed only by Vanna White's performance in the TV movie, Venus the Love Goddess. The on again off again southern drawl makes Costners Robin Hood look positively Shakespearean.

An Opus of thespian ugliness, it has no rival, although Lost in Space (the movie), and showgirls come close. Required watching material. I forced my wife to watch it because it simply must be seen.

I saw this movie when I was 19 years old and it always stuck with me. I remember then renting it on video (Yay VHS) and still liking it very much. So, now at nearly 46 years old I decided to watch it again to see if I still felt the same emotional impact that it first gave me all those years ago. YES, I still really like this movie. I still feel the heart of it and still appreciate most of the film for its emotional elements. I am pro-choice and will always vote pro- choice, but hope that most women never have to make such a difficult decision. I will always hope that women & men try their best with birth control so that they don't have to be subjected to such a painful life decision. For me as a supporter of pro-choice, to like this movie that was definitely more pro-life, means that it was well done, in my opinion. As far as the debating team not being realistic with regard to how it really is, I can't know that as a lay person, so it didn't affect my opinion of the film. I could see why it would annoy true debaters though. Anyway, I think that this film is well worth watching even with its flaws.

I was living in Southern California when this film came out. It wasn't the first choice for me and my group of about five friends; however, it wasn't sold out on that particular Saturday night, so we bought tickets.

To explain the title of this review: While I was living in LA, I had the opportunity to see several films that just didn't make it into wide release. This was one of them; others included The Chocolate Wars (a bit overwrought), Some Girls (very nice work), and Track 29 (just plain weird). I soon grew to appreciate living in SoCal for the ability to see films that don't make it to the rest of the country until they catch them on cable at 3:30 am.

Many of these films probably just didn't play well before the test audiences; hence, no wide release. But Listen to Me was just plain bad, the kind of film that teaches you about filmmaking by showing how not to do it. The acting was inexplicable; the plot, unrealistic (how many college students greet debate with the same enthusiasm they have for football?); the pacing, bumpy; the dialogue, unbelievable. I couldn't shake the impression that what this film needed was somebody with the experience to catch these flaws; instead, Listen to Me seemed like it was made by beginners. The fact that the film's plot deals with such a heavy issue as abortion only highlighted the shallowness of the movie.

And this film pretty much nixed Kirk Cameron's career on the big screen. Make of that what you will.

This movie uses a fairly ridiculous premise to argue a position on abortion (of which consumes most of the latter half of the movie), even if this was not the sole intention of the writers or filmmakers.

The story is about a team of college debaters. Two of them, Tucker (Kirk Cameron) and Monica (Jami Gertz) are among the prestigious newcomers who are the fortunate recipients of the only two debating scholarships received by the incoming Kenmont College freshman class. They are, of course, total opposites at first with Tucker being the out-going former Okie with some kind of laughable rebellious past. And Monica is the quiet, obedient young woman from Chicago.

The team "coach" is Charlie Nichols (Roy Scheider) who is secretly scheming with the star debater and all-around guy, Garson's (Tim Quill) Senator father who predicts that success on the debate will naturally lead his boy into success in politics, carrying on the family tradition. In fact, Garson's father demands it, while Garson just wants to be a writer. This point in the story is fairly idiotic in and of itself, despite the attempts to elicit our sympathies for the guy who should be left alone to make his own decisions about his career plans, especially when he's both dedicated and good at what he does.

This familial struggle starts to make the rest of the film fairly wishy-washy because we keep wavering between focusing on this element and that of the two new debaters trying to stake out their own successes on the team. And then, there are a few subplots still (such as the odd moments when Donna--Amanda Peterson--a disabled member of the team is frequently and reluctantly courted by fellow teammate, Bruce--Chris Atkins).

In the meantime, while all of this goes on, the team is leading up to a competition in a major tournament in which it will debate abortion before the Supreme Court. In the filmmakers defense, the arguments made on both sides are very thought-provoking, but makes a policy argument so dramatic and climactic that this hardly seemed like an adequate forum. Picture something like the near-defeated Mr. Smith (in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington) making his heroic hours-long speech about the Constitution and morality.

It gets about that corny and not to mention, the film has portrayed a college debate team in such a way that as to make it comparable to the image of a great football team or some other great academic team setting. Even student government might've worked better. And I agree with another who said that debate participants are trained on arguments and ethics and not the kind of false sympathy trials that the teammates here stake (and win) their case on.

This drastically unrealistic and uneven approach, coupled with ample moments of corny dialog, does not make for an especially good film. However, for nostalgics who don't mind b-movie tripe, I would recommend it simply for the cast alone as it was not only a vehicle for Cameron, Gertz, and Scheider, but also Chris Rydell (How I Got Into College), Quinn Cummings (The Goodbye Girl), and Peter DeLuise, among others.

Is this movie ever going to come out on DVD? I love this movie, it has stayed with me for years because it captures the turmoil of teenagers learning how to live with the past and be a good person in the future. I would recommend that all teenagers see it, because it is so sincere and earnest. The emotion and confusion of being a good person, and a good student and a good friend is phenomenal. People are always wondering what they can do or say to be a better person and this movie teaches them that we all make mistakes, but we all survive. If a child or adult learns anything from this I would hope that it would be to treat each person fairly and compassionately. This movie shows that we all have our own demons and with the help and support of family, and friends we can all learn to deal with those demons without hurting those we love and using them as shields from our own pain.

This surprisingly good movie is best described as an intellectual "Rocky", with the showdowns taking place in the halls of academia instead of a boxing ring. Kirk Cameron excells as the leader of a small college debate team facing the challenge of arguing the volatile abortion issue against a team from a renowned institution with a reputation for excellence in rhetoric. (The movie's working title was "Mismatch" before being released as "Listen to Me")

The abortion arguments are handled with such balance that the movie drew no significant objections from either side of the issue. I thoroughly enjoyed watching this entry and would enthusiastically recommend it to others.

Though it has been years since I saw "Listen", I remember it not for the quality of the acting, which I thought was fine, but for delivering the most eloquent argument against abortion I had ever seen, even to this day. Any movie that gets the range of comments that have been posted, from rave to rage, is certainly has to be called controversial. So the debate scenes did not match up to the life experiences of some, it is a STORY. Its message is very, very strong, and delivered quite effectively. Isn't that what movies, books, plays, photography, et al are about? I just saw "Cider House Rules", the flip side of the abortion discussion from "Listen". Try watching "Listen" and "Cider House" back to back for what should be quite an emotional and intellectual experience. I rate both films at least 9 out of 10.

PS: I am 64, male, anti-abortion, and pro-choice.

If you're a debater, especially if you're an L-Der, you'll probably be at least mildly entertained by this movie. Unless you have actually been involved in debate, high-school or college, you will not understand a lot of the little things that are going on throughout the movie. Definitely not for those who dislike debate, and probably not for those who have never been involved either. Unless you're a huge Cameron and Scheider fan.

I was a debater in high-school. I loved it.

This movie has the same qualities as breakfast club and the movies about the group of young people from the st. elmos. So if you like either one of them, you owe it to yourself to try and see this movie too. The actors all do a superb job.

I would give it a 8-9 out of 10..

There is a saying among theatre people that "good drama requires a suspension of disbelief." Perhaps this film isn't meant for the more experienced movie goer...perhaps it is meant for the young and/or innocent. I love sharing this film with my high school students. I think it is the best treatment of the abortion issue I have ever seen or read. Of course, it is not a completely accurate portrayal of a college debate, but that is not its purpose. It does clearly demonstrate one sometimes effective debate strategy...tell your opponent he may not be wrong, but that he isn't handling the problem in the best possible way--then offer a better way of handling the problem. If we took the advice offered in this film, we could resolve a great many of our problems with the abortion issue.

People harp about this movie because ... what? The debate isn't like what they had in college? That some of the scenes wax sophomoric? Who cares? It's a movie. It tells the FICTIONAL tale of a poor boy and girl who are introduced to the fairy tale life of the rich. It's the story of dealing with the past, coming to terms with the present and hoping for the future. If you want reality, then go watch the channel 9 news or watch 'Supersize Me.'

The acting, while maybe not stellar, but what movie really is? Was okay and fun to watch. The characters and players are appealing.

The sentiment runs a bit deep, maybe too deep, but then we're dealing with a movie and not a soap opera. If there's really any criticism for me to make, it would be that they should have lost the debate. Contrary to the movie, I believe that facts always win out over sentiment. But then... I was happy that it didn't. After all, it was just a movie.

This film brings up the tail end of the 1980s "John Hughes-ish" movies about earnest teens and young adults. As a tail-ender, it's not as rewarding as The Breakfast Club, St. Elmo's Fire, or even Some Kind of Wonderful. It's not a great movie, not even that good of a movie, but if you like its kinfolk, you may enjoy it.

One caution: its portrayal of college debate is utter fiction. Do not imagine for a moment that college debate resembles this film's view of it in the slightest.

This movie is not a cinematographic masterpiece as far as acting or directing. The script, on the other hand, is very good and imposes on us deep moments of reflection. I consider it to be in between "not so good" to excellent depending on the mood I am when I watch it. Yes, I have seen it more than once. I like the fact that the film contains a character building message absent in many mid to late 20th century Hollywood productions. It also does a good job laying out the issues argued in Roe vs Wade, the supreme court decision that "legalized" abortion.

The script develops very well the matters that are central to today's debate between the "Pro-Life" and "Pro-Choice" ideas. It is well argued. I could even say the script is brilliant, although the director did not squeeze its full potential.

The movie depicts, using the theme of a college debate team arguing abortion, the reality that many teenagers may be forced to face too early in life, that of having a baby before being prepared for having one, and of having to make lifetime decision in a just a few weeks without enough understanding of consequences, without enough support and without trusting people who loves them. The movie develops the "character" of the characters very well. It shows them young, passionate and optimists, but at the same time shows them full of doubt, and just beginning to develop sound judgment in their first year of college.

The two main debaters rapidly evolve from superficial and uninvolved, to profound and involved. In the end they are able to perceive the impact that their decisions may have in defining their "character for life", the one they'll see in the mirror and in the moments of reflection for the rest of their life.

A good movie with a strong message for reflection that every teenager going to college should watch! This movie makes clear that protecting life is ultimately everyone's "sacred" responsibility.

Amanda Peterson! Peter DeLuise! Jami Gertz! AMANDA PETERSON! Wow man.

This is a kick down memory lane. Amanda Peterson, afflicted with "The

Limp": "No - YOU be careful. I'M fine. I'll walk again - normally -

someday. And I'll ride a horse again. And maybe I'll even, dance, again

someday. So don't you or any of the rest of you here - feel sorry for

me, because I won't f**king stand for it." (massive applause from

debating audience).

Can you feel it? CAN YOU FEEL IT? Leave your cynicism at the door and

let this movie wash over you like warm bath water. I don't know what

else to say.