He Said, She Said

1991 "The story of true love. Both versions."
5.7| 1h55m| PG-13| en| More Info
Released: 22 February 1991 Released
Producted By: Paramount
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

Womanising, right-wing Dan Hanson and quiet, liberal Lorie Bryer work for the Baltimore Sun. Rivals for the job of new writer of a vacant column, the paper ends up instead printing their very different opinions alongside each other, which leads to a similarly combative local TV show. At the same time their initial indifference to each other looks like it may evolve into something more romantic.

Genre

Drama, Comedy, Romance

Watch Online

He Said, She Said (1991) is now streaming with subscription on Prime Video

Director

Ken Kwapis, Marisa Silver

Production Companies

Paramount

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial
Watch Now
He Said, She Said Videos and Images
View All
  • Top Credited Cast
  • |
  • Crew

He Said, She Said Audience Reviews

Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!
Evengyny Thanks for the memories!
Micitype Pretty Good
Darin One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.
SnoopyStyle Dan Hanson (Kevin Bacon) and Lorie Bryer (Elizabeth Perkins) are TV commentators who do a local show called "He Said, She Said". Her frustration with him wells up and she hits him with her coffee cup. The movie flashes back to when it all started. Dan is a womanizing conservative and Lorie is a liberal. They both work for the Baltimore Sun and both end up writing for op-ed column after the old writer retired. Their often combative opposing views become very popular. They fall for each other and Dan dumps Linda (Sharon Stone) to go with Lorie. After doing a TV show together, station manager Wally Thurman (Nathan Lane) is so impressed that he produces their new TV show. The movie shows the events according to him and then it shows her side of the story.The best part of this movie is the two endearing leads. They probably make a fine rom-com couple. There are some minor problematic things about the story. The biggest problem is that I don't think the concept of doing the same story twice works that well. Sometimes the duo storytelling is fun but the movie loses a bit of suspense the second time around. I wonder if they could get across the idea of two different viewpoints better without doing the story twice. They could possibly use two different narrations to work the same concept.
Amy Adler Dan (Kevin Bacon) and Lorie (Elizabeth Perkins) work for the same newspaper publisher. When an editorial columnist retires, Lorie and Dan both apply for the position. The publisher likes both of their work so he decides to run a column of the "crossfire" nature, with both Dan and Lorie giving their opinions on diverse subjects. This is workable because, naturally, they stand directly opposed to one another on most matters. A television show gets hatched, also. However, they fall in love and move in together. How long will it be before bliss ends? This film, although made quite a few years ago, is still relevant today. The concept of couples who disagree on topics but, let love triumph, is neverending. Both Bacon and Perkins show off their comedic and dramatic abilities well and are very attractive people to watch. Nathan Lane and Sharon Stone lend their many talents to the movie as well. The settings and costumes are a hit while the couple's apartment is very beautiful. Last, but not least, the script is clever and fun. If you are searching for a "date movie" to show while you and your partner are snuggling on the couch in front of a fireplace, try and get a copy of this film. It's sweet and thought provoking nature makes it good choice.
suhaasa I just saw this movie last night & was looking it up, when I found so many negative comments on the film at this website. One user says that he agrees with Maltin that this film is 'piffle': which makes me question Leonard Maltin himself. This movie is far from deserving to be termed 'piffle'. It is a clean, honest movie about typical men & women & the film itself goes into all sorts of very interesting (& light-hearted, thank God) psychological aspects of the two main characters. Another user says it's bad enough to see the story once, but then the torture is doubled when the story starts over from the woman's point of view! I am quite disappointed with this because the obvious point of repeating the whole story from a different point of view are the differences between the two. And these differences are subtle & very significant to the matter of the film. I suspect people do not want to admit that this film touched them -- well, actually, I think people are so conditioned so as to dismiss such a film as 'cheesy' or 'piffle' because of acquired motions of being & seeming brave. In fact, the people who do not respond positively to this film are very much like the male character in this film, who is incapable of allowing himself true feelings, for if he does, he loses his bravery construct. This film is a very compelling, very sweetly made film that will really change you if you allow it to. And that's the point really, we have to ask ourselves how much we do or don't allow ourselves to be changed by the things around us. In my opinion, everyone should watch this film and judge for themselves. Forget Maltin & the other cynics, we're just ordinary people trying to lead better lives, you know. And this film is very much about that, and in my opinion is something like a minor classic, the 'Casablanca' if you may, of modern-day cubicle romance.
berdang This is a delightful romantic comedy. It offers a really rare glimpse of Sharon Stone being funny, and a nice match up with Bacon and Perkins. I've watched it several times, and it always makes me laugh.