18 Again (1988) from Tuna

18 Again (1988) starred a then 81 year old George Burns, who changes bodies with his college freshman grandson (Charlie Schlatter) after an accident. With natural charm and ability, burns turns Charlie's life around from being a nerd and kind of a loser to the most popular guy on campus, track star, and dating the most beautiful woman on campus.


The only exposure was breasts and buns from Connie Gauthier as a model in an art class.

DVD info from Amazon.

  • widescreen anamorphic, 1.85:1

I am a huge fan of the late George Burns, but was not impressed with this film. His comedy timing was still evident, but the material was not dry enough to fit his sense of humor. Through most of the film, Burns is doing voice-over -- supposedly his thoughts inside his grandson's body.

The Critics Vote

  • Ebert 1.5/4 "Burns is a beloved institution, and any opportunity to see him is welcome, he is not given much to do in the movie, and he doesn't do much with it"

The People Vote ...

  • with their dollars ... only $2.5 million domestic gross
IMDb guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence, about like three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, about like two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, about like two stars from the critics. Films under five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film, equivalent to about one and a half stars from the critics or less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well.

Based on this description, I have to give it a C-, as a technically ok comedy starring one of the all-time greats, but very short on substance or humor.

Return to the Movie House home page