StunnaKrypto Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

SanEat A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Kodie Bird True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Davis P This movie really is very well made and is entertaining. Halle berry was great as Zola Taylor, she really had the persona and what Zola was like down pat. Vivica A. Fox was awesome too! She was so spirited and energetic in her role all throughout the film. The costume design was spot on throughout all the different time periods. Also, the script is very well written and thorough, it really showed the talent of the writers. This movie is funny, entertaining, dramatic when it wants to be, and is acted very very well! 8/10 for Why do fools fall in love. A great fun time! I would highly recommend and suggest this movie! I'm surprised this film did not win more awards than it ended up winning, I think the actors deserved more recognition for their great work in this Frankie Lymon story.

Lextical An interesting (but flawed account) of the battle over pop star Frankie Lymon's estate by three women claiming to be his widow...The story portrayed here is actually semi-fictitious, but the background story of Frankie's life is entirely true.From his starts as a fresh-faced Harlem kid to a haunted drug addict, Larenz Tate (one of the most underrated talents in Hollywood) shines as dreamer Frankie, and does well to give perspective to Frankie's conflicting attitudes towards his relationships with the women, which the script muddles- Frankie appears shallow yet introspective at the same time.Halle Berry tries to make more of her understated and thin role as Zola Taylor, wifey no. 2, but provides an adequate performance.The most developed of the three female characters, is Elizabeth Waters (Viveca A. Fox). Loyal yet dishonest, gritty Elizabeth is the only character aside from Frankie that seems to be real. This is a combined effort by the characterisation and the performance by Fox.And Lela Rochon does very well cast against type, as a school marm dragged into this battle. Rochon clearly understands the character well, and manages to make her mark on the story despite being developed late into the film.The period detail of this piece is well captured over the 20-odd years that this story is set (particularly the performances of Frankie with the Teenagers), and even the small scenes which provide insight into Frankie's younger days.The main flaws of this film lie essentially in the struggle to develop some of the themes. As mentioned earlier, Frankie's reasons for bigamy are not established at all or how he copes this with this, or whether one of the wives in particular is lying about the legitimacy of her marriage.Some of the characterisation is a bit thin, caused by some of the later events of the film and because this deep story of fame, loss, betrayal and torment has such a muddled structure the whole film comes across as sketchy by the end which clearly was not intended.But never the less this is an adequate tribute, to the world of fame and its inevitable clingers-on, and those just caught up in the action. This will never be top of its genre however...

Joseph P. Ulibas Why Do Fools Fall in Love? (1998) was an interesting picture about the troubled life of Frankie Lymon. Three women claiming to be his wife are in court to fight over his meager estate. Gregory Nava (fresh off of SELENA) does a better job in capturing the lost soul that was Frankie Lymon. But he just scratches the surface of this very bizarre and complicated individual. Larenz Tate does one hell of a job in the role of Frankie. His wives (Halle Berry, Vivica A. Fox, Lela Rochon) are very good in their roles. An entertaining film that I wished was more in depth. A good start but it needs to be fleshed out some more. Maybe Mr. Nava should have focused more on the group when they were younger and rising through the top of the charts. A younger actor would have been helpful as well (Frankie Lymon was a small dude). But the film wasn't all that bad, they even showed us a side of Mr. Lymon I never even knew existed. Not an offensive film, just a nice timer waster.Recommended.

xyumaboy The most interesting thing about the movie was the insider's look at a tortured artist after his popularity is gone. Frankie Lymon was Michael Jackson (of the Jackson 5 vintage) before Michael Jackson. The film never really brought out the fact that Frankie was 13 when he hit it big with the Teenagers (probably because the director didn't think Larenz Tate could pull it off). 3 wives fighting over his estate, mercurial rise and fall, and dead at 25, there is a good story here. The movie however falls a little short. I recommend with slight reservation.