Don't listen to the negative reviews

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

We look for the perfect love for our whole life since we start to understand the need of love, meaning of love, meaning of having someone to care for.. think of all day and die to meet up... What if that person comes from future or past.... No meeting no nothing just some letters, handwriting, different dates and smell of the person.... and still your heartbeat can't be tamed... your eyes wants to see this person, wants to see this person's world. Yes that's just the kind of love you find in 'Lake House'

"The Lake House" is almost a perfect romance, drawing upon one of the classics of literature in Jane Austen's novel "Persuasion." Austen was writing about "second chances" that are rare and unusual in life. Her story of Anne Elliot and Frederick Wentworth is one of two decent people who get another chance to set things right. So, too, "The Lake House" brings together two strangers passing in the night, who are separated only by two years in time.The interesting conceit of the film is that Alex Wyler is an architect living in 2004 and Kate Forster is a doctor living in 2006. Sometimes the film blunders in making this far-fetched fantasy scenario even remotely plausible. For example, it is never clear how the dog named Jack gets transferred from Alex to Kate. Or, why Alex fails to show up at the appointed time at the restaurant? Or, when Kate separates from her husband? Or, why Kate did not remember the identity of a man she treated following an auto accident in Chicago? Etc., etc. Still, the lapses are redeemed by the clever concept, the beautiful photography, and the excellent performances.Bullock is great as Dr. Kate Forster, and Reeves is acceptable as the taciturn architect. The couple's long-distance relationship occurs primarily through exchanging letters in a "magic" mail box outside the Frank Lloyd Wright-inspired lake house. Christopher Plummer is good as the crusty old Wright wannabe, who was the designer of the house.The architect's son, Alex, puts in succinctly when he states that his father designed a house, not a home. It is up to Alex to set things right by connecting with Kate in order for the couple to bring warmth to airy lake house.The film included good location work in Chicago, effective camera angles, and, above all, work with lighting. There is a good discussion of the aesthetics of architecture between Alex and his father. The dad made the point that light is different in buildings designed depended on the locale. Part of the magic of this film was bringing a breathtaking cinematography to the locations in Chicago and the marvelous lake house nearby.And, now, with a perfect atmospheric arrangement, we are ready for your close-up, Alex Wyler and Kate Forster!

I recall the Chicago of the era with new friendships not easy to come by and very otherwise focused people accustomed to the nation's most forward looking urban architecture. I saw patients at the hospital in the film. There is a truth in the Chicago of the era as photographer and director see it. Neither Sandra Bullock nor Keanu Reeves knows the pace and feel of the art movie genre which weakens their performances. The movie would have garnered more recognition on the art film circuit than it did in the family circuit Hollywood multiplex. Real time warp and thoughts of those left behind following a death are its principal themes.

It's tough after reading negative User Reviews for me to accept that critics still expect movies to follow the rules of science or the known facts of the universe. I completely agree with them that a movie has to make some sort of sense or be structured in a manner where you don't feel as though you just wasted 2 hours of your life that you'll never get back in return. But, I simply watch films to temporarily get away from the normal conventions of society and the real world, so I don't expect too much prior.The idea of two complete strangers communicating thru time via mailbox in front of a Lake House is rather peculiar and for you realists, merits absolutely no logic in its finest sense. Living and connecting thru letters separated by 2 years, while realizing they're both falling in love within some unknown void of space doesn't make it that much easier to believe as well. Also, I'm not even going into detail about Keanu Reeves' acting ability, knowing that the last time he reunited with Sandra Bullock was 12 years before their big break, blockbuster movie - Speed. I'm sure you all remember him winning the Academy Award for Best Actor in 1994. WINK.But, somehow and somewhere, in the imaginary land of Motion Pictures, the movie works. IMO, it's a solid picture, with the giant boulder being lifted by Sandra Bullock's genuine acting skills. Her ability to combine and express an array of emotions in a realistic and believable way even challenges Keanu Reeves to raise the bar on his own artistic work as well. Not the absolute best chemistry between both actors, but the audience is sold and it's a wonderful movie to watch with someone you care about.For me, ridiculous movie plots can be clearly explained. It might seem difficult to fathom, but I just tend to think of it as some kind of divine intervention, the forces of the earth uniting for that one single chance in time to occur, or a giant twist of unknown magical fate. It makes me want to believe that it can happen. A mailbox, telephone booth, or a hot tub, whatever works. It just allows the film to easily move along and I'm biting my nails in hopes that the ending is as believable as humanly possible.BTW, this is an adaptation of the 2000 Korean movie - il Mare (aka Siworae), which means "sea" in Italian. It stars Ji Hyun (Gianna) Jun and Jung Jae Lee. Both credible actors with much better professional rapport between the two, in comparison to the lead actors of this remake. The original version is superior, regardless that it has been 17 years since its original release. The plot is almost exactly the same with slight variations and a definite "must see TV" if you enjoyed the Lake House or if you happen to be a Korean cinema junkie.IMDb UR#1 (1/25/17)