Watch Ben Is Back

Ben Is Back

Ben Is Back is a movie starring Julia Roberts, Lucas Hedges, and Courtney B. Vance. A drug addicted teenage boy shows up unexpectedly at his family's home on Christmas Eve.

Other Titles
Ben Khazar Ha'Bai'ta, Η επιστροφή του Μπεν, Bens ir atgriezies, Regresa a mi, Powrót Bena, Egy fiú hazatér, Eve Dönüş, Ben on tagasi, Ben se vratio, ベン・イズ・バック, Benas grizo i namus, O Ben Está de Volta, El regreso de Ben, O Retorno de Ben, Paluu, Regresa a mí, 班恩回家, Le retour de Ben
Running Time
1 hours 43 minutes
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Peter Hedges
Peter Hedges
Kathryn Newton, Julia Roberts, Lucas Hedges, Courtney B. Vance
Audio Languages
English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

A drug addicted teenage boy shows up unexpectedly at his family's home on Christmas Eve.

Comments about drama «Ben Is Back» (24)

Gary Walker photo
Gary Walker

In the big city, it's the new summer, the winter is still a long way off. Nick (Jonathan Tucker) has decided to make an honest living in the city, and while he is far from perfect, he is looking for a change of scenery. He goes to a university, and begins his new job at a restaurant, where he gets to meet some people, one of whom is Phyllis, (Jenna Fischer), a woman who has just gotten a job in the city. Nick learns that the mother of a deceased child is selling the house she lived in for a massive sum of money, and as he is getting the final piece of the deal, Nick has a heart-to-heart with his wife. With all this money, Nick is completely overwhelmed, and no one can tell him how to live. He is trying to make ends meet, and is still a little child. While he is still a little child, he starts to change his ways, and try to be a better person. It is a simple, yet very effective movie. It starts out a little slow, but with the hard work of the characters, and the help of the two main actors, it is a very memorable experience. It is a very different movie than I expected, and it is a movie that really does not have a single bad aspect. I was surprised by the ending, and how it was not what I expected. The ending is just, as the title suggests, "A LITTLE BIT MORE." I think this movie is very interesting, because it does not end on a big, dramatic, and unnecessary cliffhanger. I do not like movies that end like that, but this is what happens, and I like that. Overall, I would say that this movie is a very good movie, and I recommend it to anybody who has a strong desire to see a good movie, and who is willing to think for themselves. I rate this movie 7/10.

Robert photo

With the amount of time I have been to see this film, I have had the opportunity to review the film. It is a movie which has had a very good journey from start to finish, and has had many good moments. The biggest flaw that this film has is it's length. It was great to see some actors who have been around for a while, such as the great Michael Clarke Duncan and Bill Paxton. The dialogue is not the best, but it's pretty simple. The soundtrack is another disappointment. The first few minutes with the theme was really good. Then the music gets on your nerves, and when the music returns to normal, it's just annoying. It has a really good soundtrack, but there are many times when it sounds so. disjointed. I like the movie, and it is not a bad film, but it is definitely not a good one. It has been a long time since I have seen a movie which has been such a good experience, and this is one of those movies.

Janice photo

This is a great movie. I liked it and think it is one of the best movies ever made. All the actors were very good. It is an interesting movie. The actors give their best and it makes you feel very sorry for the people who were in this movie. I think it is a movie that anyone who has loved a little bit of punk rock or an empty space will love it.

Steven Rose photo
Steven Rose

The movie is pretty good. The actors are good. It's quite nice to see non action oriented characters. There are some good scenes. The plot is not that complex but it's not bad. It's worth a watch. 7.5/10

Gloria Green photo
Gloria Green

Al Pacino plays "Stan" a journalist with a family. His wife is in a coma and he and his son are the only people who can see her. He needs to make the perfect documentary. But he finds it hard to find time for work. He starts working at the "Oprah Winfrey Show" and they have the highest ratings in the nation. He is soon a star and his son is good at it too. However, one day he is left alone in a deserted house and realizes he can't live without the family. A bit of comedy, a bit of drama and a bit of romance. Not perfect but it is nice to see Al Pacino and it's definitely not as bad as most people say. A bit better than "Maniac" but it's not as good as "Manhattan" and not as good as "The Shawshank Redemption". It's good but not great. A little boring and a bit too long. Good film, but not as good as "The Shawshank Redemption" and "The Godfather" or "The Godfather: Part II". 7/10

Barbara H. photo
Barbara H.

Now I must admit, I had not heard of this movie until I saw it on TV. However, I'm a big fan of Pacey Jones and her character in this movie made me fall in love with the whole story. It's based on a true story about a girl who survived an arranged marriage with a rich man, and then later her parents refused to pay the bride's parents and instead paid off the bride's family. In her story, Pacey was treated as a slave. So, when she finally escaped and went back home, her parents didn't take her back, but instead paid her the bride's parents a large sum of money to keep her in slavery. In the end, she's a very likable person, and you feel for her when she is captured by her family, but still finds her way to freedom. I would highly recommend this movie to anyone.

Peter photo

I agree that it was not my favorite movie but I was surprised at how much I liked it. I watched this movie alone, because I was having a difficult time sleeping and it seemed like a good movie to watch while I was asleep. This movie was good because it had a lot of strong dramatic and emotional moments. This movie could have been really good but I think that a lot of it had to do with the script and some of the dialogue. The movie was written pretty well and had a lot of believable dialogue. The acting was good, although the two main characters were very cheesy. The reason I liked this movie so much was that I think it is a very realistic movie. It was really easy to relate to the characters and the main character had a lot of emotional issues that I could relate to. I think that this movie could be a great movie for younger audiences because of the emotional themes and because of the realistic elements of the story. I think that this movie had a lot of very believable drama and I think that it was a very good movie for people that are older.

Carolyn Schultz photo
Carolyn Schultz

It was, by far, one of the best movies I have ever seen. I saw this movie in 2007, when it was released in the US, and since then it has been a staple in my movie collection. It is one of those movies that you cannot wait to watch again. This movie, although somewhat dated, is incredibly moving and beautifully done. The story is told in the most personal, non-sensationalist way. The performances by both Helen Hunt and John Hurt are exceptional. The direction, screenplay, and cinematography are all excellent. It is well worth a watch. Even the little details in the movie, like the way one person looks and acts, are done perfectly. This movie is an example of what true art should be. It is a story about the human condition, and a great depiction of family and friendship.

Christian photo

After seeing this movie, I was not expecting much. I went into this movie expecting to watch a typical romantic comedy with a little drama thrown in. I was very wrong. This movie was a true comedy. There are many funny moments in this movie. The characters are quirky and the acting was believable. I loved the message behind this movie, which is to not give up on your dreams. The best part of the movie was the music. It was very "modern". I do not understand why people dislike this movie. It was a good film to watch and I recommend it to anyone.

Madison S. photo
Madison S.

I agree with another reviewer that this film is an under-rated film. I did not watch the original version and cannot compare it. I watched this film on my TV and I did not like it as much as I thought I would. There were no excellent or special moments, but I do not think the film was terribly boring. The characters are interesting and I thought the music was pretty good, although I am a fan of Rage Against The Machine. The ending was also pretty good, but I did not really think it was very well written. The actors are not really memorable but I do not think that the director's attempt to give them some personality is bad. The main actor who played Alex is not good and I do not think that he is as good as he could be. The plot is good, although the movie is not very intense or captivating. The first thing that I did was to check the actors' credits and I found that most of them had a very small role in the film. The cinematography is not very good. I did not like the fact that the camera never takes full advantage of the locations and I did not like that the film does not give any particular view on the characters. I think that the movie is a good watch for people who are into action/thriller movies. I think that I am going to buy this film on DVD.

Tyler Duncan photo
Tyler Duncan

A stylish and interesting film about a man named Fred, who we first meet after his wife died, and is now trying to get back into his former life, but has had to take on a new identity in order to do so. After some rather heavy and difficult emotions, he starts to take on a new identity. He meets a woman, called Karla, and falls for her, but his desire for her becomes more and more strong. This is a very real film about a man in love, and that's the way I liked it. I also liked the music that he makes, and the way the film focuses on the relationship between Fred and Karla. I felt that it was good to see a man's struggles in his old life, and the end, which I won't give away, was very touching. I think the film was a little slow in the middle, and the film was a little to long, but all in all I recommend it. It's definitely worth seeing.

Eugene M. photo
Eugene M.

After the unexpected success of the Oscar-winning film "The Aviator", which hit the movie theaters in 2000, and the subsequent success of the sequel "The Dark Knight", director, Peter Berg, is now back with a very personal film that's more connected to his past than it is to his present. This is an entirely different take on a different era of a different era, and it's definitely not for everyone. However, those that are fans of the director will find much more than they expect in the movie. It's true that this movie has a lot of talking, and a lot of it isn't very well put together, but at the same time, it's a very beautiful movie and Berg shows that he has the ability to make a movie that can stand alone. The story is told in flashback in this movie, and the story tells the life of James Cameron (Morgan Freeman), who is now a doctor. James Cameron comes from a very wealthy family, but his father died when he was young, and Cameron was raised by his mother (Diane Lane) and older brother, Cameron (Rufus Sewell), who is now an astronaut on the space station. He is also a very talented artist, and he is also a very lucky man. Cameron has a good job, a nice car, and his son has been accepted to a university, and Cameron is now a doctor at a university that he also attends. Cameron's life becomes very different when his wife dies of cancer and his younger brother becomes a doctor, and Cameron is forced to care for his younger brother's family. Cameron also has to deal with an odd, mysterious woman named Maya (Felicity Jones) and a young and very attractive woman named Carla (Kelly Lynch), and Cameron must decide whether he wants to become a doctor, a doctor of his life, or a doctor of his family. It's a very, very unique movie, and I don't think it's an average movie. It's not for everyone, and that's what I like about it. There is a lot of talk, and it's also quite interesting to see a character who is not completely normal in a movie like this. There are a lot of characters in the movie, but the main one I liked was Cameron, who was my favorite character, although Diane Lane and Carla were also very good characters. I think the story is really interesting and the acting is very good, but there are a lot of characters that you don't really care about. I was also impressed by Diane Lane's performance. Her character is the most interesting of all of the characters, and I really liked her performance. This movie is definitely not for everyone, and it's definitely not for everyone's taste. I really liked it, but I also don't think it's for everyone. It's not a good movie, but it's a really beautiful movie. It's an excellent movie, and I think you should see it, but I think you should also see it for yourself. I give it a B.

Victoria Grant photo
Victoria Grant

What is good about the film? The first 40 minutes are pretty great, as there is an undercurrent of tension that the audience can feel, and the idea of the story and how the actors deliver their lines is interesting. The problem is that it becomes a little bit monotonous. The whole film, and it's obvious, is about two people who are at a crossroads, and they're going to end up in different places. The whole idea of the film is that if you put the two of them together, it might make it work. It's not, but the two people have a lot of interesting things to say, so it's worth the wait. In the second half, there is a lot of dead space. The writers, unlike the director, have to deal with a lot of the issues of the film, and they don't have much of a grip on them. They don't seem to know where they're going with it, or how they're going to end it. It just drags on. What is good about the acting? Well, the cast is quite good, as it's quite interesting to see the two leads, and see how the actors pull it off. I also enjoyed it, and liked the idea of the director, but it's not the best film of the year. What is not good? I'd like to see the director, and writer write a better script. What I thought was the most interesting thing about the film, is that it was shot in Hungary, and I'd like to see a lot more of the Hungarian actors.

Madison B. photo
Madison B.

In this movie we see five friends and their respective families. What we get to see is the lives of these five friends, their relationships, what their lives were like, what their relationships were like, and how their families came to be, what their families were like, and how their lives came to be. Each of the characters in this movie is extremely complex and we follow their lives with depth and soul, in a manner which is somewhat unlike watching a movie about average American kids. The five friends in this movie are named "The Five Friends" because they are known for being very awkward and awkward, and their interactions are incredibly bizarre. In this movie they are part of the "Troubled Family" which is a type of family where the parents are very eccentric and show very little affection for their children. The movie takes place in 1983, and is a group of friends who are all in their twenties, living in a small town called Coal Creek, Virginia. The two older boys, Michael and Scott, are the ones who have always been the most comfortable in their relationships with their family, as they have known their families all their lives. They are, however, the most unhappy with their families and are unable to show much affection towards them, which is partly why they were attracted to the isolated town where they lived. The other three friends are Jody, Daniel, and Brad, as they are young, as well as very religious, and as they are the ones who are least comfortable with their families. As the fifth friend, Jerry, is older, he is no longer very comfortable with his family, as he shows little affection towards them and they no longer have much affection towards him, which makes them extremely uncomfortable with their family. The fact that all these five friends are all the same age, and they all have the same beliefs and family background, makes them very strange in a very normal kind of way. These five friends are all struggling with being part of the family that their parents have created for them, and they all have something that the other five don't have, but that is what makes them more curious about these five people and their family. The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that this movie is a wonderful story of life and love and human relationships. The atmosphere is very realistic, the performances are great, and the way the movie is shot is perfect. This movie is perfect for the times that I'm at, and I can recommend it to anyone. 7/10

Victoria G. photo
Victoria G.

Yes, yes, it's the same old scenario, but it's not like any other movie you've ever seen. Well, not really, but it's an absolutely original film. I have never seen a movie like this before. It's just like a documentary, but in the movie's case, they're making it so real. The movie starts out as a film about "Ate" (Clive Owen) who's about to go on an outing with his friends, but it soon gets weird and starts to involve "Ate" and his friends. The characters are all so well-written, but this movie has something else that makes it stand out. It's got something to say. I can't say more about it, because I don't want to give away the plot. But I will say that this is one of the best movies I've ever seen. So in other words, I can't recommend this movie enough.

Eugene Porter photo
Eugene Porter

I liked this movie, I was pleasantly surprised to see that Michael Caine, the star of the movie, is also one of the creators. Michael Caine plays an Irish-American, Jack Dee, who is depressed after his wife dies. He is considering leaving New York, because of his sense of doom. This movie is a blend of humour, sadness, and sadness, but it is about an ordinary man trying to understand the world and the people around him. The story is fairly predictable, but the execution is what makes the film enjoyable. Jack Dee is great, but for some reason, he doesn't have the star-power that some actors have. I don't know why. Maybe it's because of the screenplay, or maybe it's because of the writers (although this movie is a British film, but the screenplay is Irish). It's a very watchable film, but don't expect to be all fun and glee.

Doris Pierce photo
Doris Pierce

I agree with the other reviewers, this is a drama, but it is well acted, has a good pace, and the acting is good throughout. The story of Chris and his family seems to be more of a metaphor, it is not necessarily a drama, but a reflection of a man's need for love. It's an OK film, but if you want a good drama, watch "This Is 40", which is way better than this film. You won't be disappointed, just don't expect a masterpiece.

Daniel Davidson photo
Daniel Davidson

The acting in this film was spot on. The story was well written and the setting was spot on. I felt like I was really there, witnessing a little part of the lives of the characters. I recommend this film to anyone who wants to see an alternative to the typical family film. It's also a great film for people who want to experience life. The film seems to be about the relationship between father and daughter, but I think that it is much more about the relationship between father and daughter and the trials and tribulations that the daughter and the daughter's parents go through. I thought that the acting was spot on and the film was well made. The characters were realistic and were relatable.

Virginia Murphy photo
Virginia Murphy

I saw this movie at an art-house in Mexico. It was more interesting than "Guerrilla", although it does share a similar story. "Guerrilla" was full of twists and turns and was very interesting. "Neon Machine" is a bit boring and may be a bit too long, but it is definitely worth seeing. It is not the greatest movie I've ever seen, but I still recommend it.

Walter H. photo
Walter H.

Well. I have to say that I thought that this movie was a real shame. It was advertised as a thriller, but it just seemed like a really cheap thriller. A really boring movie, but it just didn't deliver. I was really surprised that it ended so quickly. I never felt the suspense. I never felt the pressure. I never felt that the characters were going to get away. I never felt the pain of loss. I never felt the joy of love. I just didn't care. I just wanted to see more of them, but I didn't. This is a very disappointing movie. It's not a bad movie, just a really cheap thriller. It's a shame because the cast was really good and the storyline was really good. I would have really liked to have seen more of them.

Katherine photo

When I first heard about this film I thought I would love it, but upon watching it I was reminded of a lot of my problems with the films of the 70's. First, I'm not going to try and dig up a decade and an era to justify this film's existence, because I think that would be to far. The only reason I watched this film in the first place was because I was bored one night and needed to kill time. I don't think I was ever even slightly bored with it. It's a typical film that could have been made by any of the many TV sitcom's that were at the time. The acting is mediocre, but there are some performances that I just didn't care for. The script is really simple, the actors have no life and they all seem to be delivering their lines like it was their first time in front of the camera. Some of the humour is more corny than some of the more "realistic" films of the 70's. I don't really think that there's anything that could be seen as good in this film. I have to admit that I wasn't overly impressed with the cinematography or the direction, I thought it was weak at times and I was even kind of bored during some of the shots. Some of the dialogue is just terrible, but it's really not the fault of the actors, it's more of a fault of the script. I'm sure that I'm not the only one that thinks that this film was made because of the stars. It's obvious that the writers had no problem putting themselves in front of the camera. I think they all just thought they could sell it as something that they had no problem with, but it's not something that they actually really did. The cinematography is not something that's really bad, I mean, I love the cinematography of the 70's films, and the colours and lighting are wonderful. It's just that I don't think that it's really good enough to have earned a 7/10 rating, and I don't think that the cinematography is that great to merit a 6/10 rating. If you're looking for a good action or action-comedy, then this is definitely worth a watch, but if you're looking for something that's really worth the time, then I recommend you look elsewhere.

Joshua P. photo
Joshua P.

I've seen a lot of crappy movies and some of them are made by big budget studios, but this one was just okay. It was all good stuff, but it was just okay. The acting was okay and the script was good, but the direction was just okay. It wasn't that good of a movie. The whole thing just kind of dragged on and it seemed like it was trying to cover every possible angle. I gave it a 7 out of 10 because it wasn't too bad of a movie. But it wasn't too good of a movie either.

Donna photo

Is This film really about an artist? The film does an excellent job of showing how "it" is done, but it doesn't have anything to do with being an artist, and so it is all too obvious. It is a film about a man who did a "thin" thing and lived happily ever after. This film should have been an insight into the art world, but instead it is all about the man who did it. It was a great film, but I would have liked to have seen more of the artist.

Nicholas H. photo
Nicholas H.

One of my favorite movies ever is "Blues Brothers" and I am not just saying that because I am a big fan of that movie. If you are a fan of classic film, you will certainly enjoy this movie. I remember watching it when it first came out and I liked it then, but the fact that it is now almost ten years later, and I can see some flaws in the story, which were corrected in the sequel. It is not a bad movie, it is just a good movie and I am glad that I saw it.