Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Matrixiole Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Hayden Kane There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

TonyKissCastillo Events in your life can shape and change you...sometimes radically. Before my heart attack and triple bypass I rated this 8*. Now, it is a most resounding 10*! In "Whose Life" the life-altering event for sculptor Ken Harrison (Richard Dreyfuss in an outstanding performance) was a traffic accident that left him quadriplegic.About 6 months after the fact, Harrison begins to to realize that not only his sculptures, but his perception of the world, its interpretation and his own self-image had been shaped through the use of his hands. Of course, his hands "died" on the day of the accident, and therefore, Harrison concludes, so did he.The film focuses on both his day to day struggle to cope with his unbearable condition and his confrontation with the hospital administration, or at least with its decision-making chief medical officer, Dr. Emerson (John Cassavetes-turning in a fine performance), who is intent on keeping Harrison in the hospital and under its care, against his will, even if that means declaring Harrison incompetent.Christine Lahti also has a supporting role. The film is highly effective but not pretentious or preachy in the least. 10*STARS*.....ENJOY/DISFRUTELA! Any comments, questions or observations, in English or Español, are most welcome!

TxMike A lot has happened in the ethics of medicine since this movie was made. I only got around to seeing it now.Thirty-something Richard Dreyfuss is creative sculptor and all-around active guy Ken Harrison. Early on we see him driving home and distracted does not see an accident in time to avoid it. His small car becomes wedged under a truck. Awake in the hospital he finds himself with a number of broken bones but, more importantly, an injured spinal cord which makes him a quadriplegic, at least for the short term.Ken initially makes the most of it, his good humor carrying him through, bantering with hospital staff and his wife, joking about his condition. However, months into treatment when he finally realizes he will never walk again, never sculpt again, and must rely on dialysis for the rest of his life, he loses his desire to keep on.He asks for the hospital to discharge him, but they don't want to because it would mean certain death withing a short period of time. Their medical ethics require that he be kept alive by all normal means.So the most of the movie is about Ken's fight to allow him to make his own decisions, thus the title "Whose Life Is It Anyway?" He hires a lawyer, etc, etc.John Cassavetes is good as Dr. Michael Emerson who fights Ken's discharge. Christine Lahti is good as the young Dr. Clare Scott who achieves a split loyalty, because she understands what Ken is going through. Bob Balaban is Ken's lawyer Carter Hill .SPOILERS - As if anybody still does not know - after a court hearing with experts, held in a makeshift hospital room, the judge rules that Ken can make his own decision to be discharged.

lbinstock This film is among the best of all time. I've seldom seen a movie in which all actors -- from the star to the smallest bit player -- deliver such forceful, realistic performances. I felt as if I were actually in that hospital room with Ken Harrison et al. While the film, which is about a sculpture who becomes a quadriplegic in a car accident and then decides to die rather than live life in that condition, has a seemingly depressing plot line, it is actually uplifting. Richard Dreyfus has the remarkable ability to infuse the main character with humor as well as sadness. It is a tribute to the director, writers, and actors that this movie, which could have easily been a maudlin weepy, turned out to be a paean to the indomitable human spirit.

The_Core This film could have been great, except for some serious scripting and characterization problems. Many of the characters are stereotypical, wafer-thin portrayals, particularly the head doctor who wants to keep Dreyfuss's character alive. The "party scene in the hospital basement" is not only cliched, but nobody got fired or got in trouble (the Jamaican nurse in particular) for smoking dope in a hospital, and taking a quadraplegic patient out of their bed without permission in the middle of the night? Give me a break! Finally, Dreyfuss's decision to "remain in the hospital to die" at the end... the judge's ruling was specifically that he be released (writ of Habeus Corpus), not that he be allowed to die without treatment in the hospital!These serious problems (particularly the latter, where he decides to stay in the hospital) just about ruin the film for me. Never mind that there's never much of a real sense of suspense or genuine emotion here, and everything plays far too liberally off (melo)drama generated by the Dreyfuss character's decision. I'll give it 6/10, and I feel like I'm being generous. Comes dangerously close to trivializing the issues portrayed in the film, and occasionally crosses the line... if it weren't for much more honest films with subject matter just as difficult (like "Dead Man Walking") I might be more forgiving and just chalk it up to the best Hollywood can do with this sort of material, but I know better.