Inclubabu Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

Libramedi Intense, gripping, stylish and poignant

Limerculer A waste of 90 minutes of my life

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

vincentlynch-moonoi It's often 3 things that make a movie: a story, interesting characters, and competent actors. One out of three ain't bad. Well, actually, one out of three is bad.The one thing this movie has going for it is good acting. James Spader has always been a competent actor, and as he has matured his acting has improved to the extent that he is one of the best on the small screen. Personally, I've never cared much for Susan Sarandon, but that's not to say I don't think she's a talented actress. She is. I just don't often like the films she appears in. She does nicely here. There are some good performances (though not much screen time) by supporting actors -- Jason Alexander, Kathy Bates, and Eileen Brennan (perhaps the best characterization in the film). Most of the rest of the actors here play rather stereotypical Jewish people...like Jewish people are portrayed in almost every other film; not very imaginative.The main characters here? Well, for me, relatively unlikable. People I would have no desire to associate with. So, where is the connection.The story. Not really anything unique at all. Boy meets girl from different class and different age. Will their relationship survive? Ever heard that one before? Sorry, but the good acting wasn't enough to "save" this movie for me.

srdipaling The year this came out, I was a freshman in college and, at eighteen and not exactly "seasoned" in the cinematic viewing experience, had not too long before saw Pretty Woman and fell head-over-heels in love with Julia Roberts. I would've seen anything(and I mean ANYTHING) she was in back then. So when an acquaintance--really, a friend of a friend of mine living in the dorms--one night heard me glow over that movie, he scoffed at that and said that it wasn't as good as White Palace, which had just come out recently, in terms of the love scenes and scenarios involved.That stuck with me for a long time, LONG past my infatuation with Miss Roberts, and when I would years later, read another(sadly,I believe the last)novel from Glenn Savan, the author of the book for which White palace was adapted, I was so impressed with it that I decided that if I had a chance to catch White Palace, I would.Just recently, I ran across a copy at the local Video store, and while I probably SHOULD'VE bought it(it was going VERY cheap), I instead rented it and finally checked it out. While I cannot say I was overly impressed with the WHOLE package of the movie, I WAS taken by the chemistry between James Spader(as a numbed, still-grieving widower architect) and Susan Sarandon(as a Burger joint waitress/cashier whose blythe spirit veils an unhappy past of her own)and found the interpersonal dynamic of the two characters interesting. I cannot help but feel that there may've been layers to the novel and story that were truncated(and thus shorting potentially interesting story buttresses such as Jason Alexander as Spader's longtime and newly married pal and the keen, palmist sister of Sarandon's played by the late Eileen Brennan)in order to focus in on the meet, date, escalation, conflict and resolution of the romance/relationship between Max(Spader) and Nora(Sarandon).Overall, an appealing, sexy story that might lack the "zazz" of a Pretty Woman or Ghost(the two biggies of calendar year 1990), but a very worthy--if not superior--offering in regards to a romance movie. I feel like if I ever spoke to that gentleman again, I'd say that while White Palace ISN'T quite everything I might've wanted to see when I was eighteen, it was a much better "grown-up" movie. And I'd say it DOES compare favorably.

smatysia James Spader seemed to only play characters who behave in off-beat ways. I suppose that if everything was normal, then there wouldn't be anything to have a movie about, but he corners the the market on creepy obsession. Anyway, aside from that the film isn't particularly bad. And people do fall for spectacularly unsuitable matches all the time. When I first saw this film, I was closer to Max's twenty-seven than to Nora's forty-three, and I understood the characters in a different way than I did yesterday, when Nora is now a young woman to me. She loves Max, but makes no effort to fit in in his world. She is too angry about the class differences. It was/is the way of the world.

nimbus13 The film was not very impressive to me, but Susan Sarandon's characterization was interesting. The actual dialog was a little embarrassing, not the language, but the situations that sometimes take place between other people, that make you want to blend into the scenery and just get out of there. I saw them film some of the outside scenes in St. Louis,including the "White Palace" which was leased from some small burger joint similar in format to the White Castle chain. I worked on the 4th floor of an office building (which apparently no longer exists) overlooking the "Palace".About 3:00 in the afternoon when the sun and weather was just right,the film crew would shoot some footage in the vicinity of the "Palace". For several days all the staff would take a short break and watch. At the director's signal all the period cars, buses, and taxis would start down the street. It was like stepping out of a time machine!However, we never did see the two stars. I think this is what they call an establishing shot.