Is Simpatico Worth Watching?
Answer: Maybe not, Simpatico is likely a skip if you enjoy Comedy movies.
It features a runtime of 106 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.

Verdict:Simpatico is a confirmed FLOP based on our analysis of audience ratings and box office momentum.
With a rating of 4.8/10, it has delivered a mixed experience for fans of the Comedy, Drama genre.
Answer: Maybe not, Simpatico is likely a skip if you enjoy Comedy movies.
It features a runtime of 106 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.
Last updated: January 18, 2026
Released in the dynamic cinematic landscape of 1999, Simpatico emerges as a significant entry in the Comedy, Drama domain. The narrative core of the film focuses on a sophisticated exploration of As youths in Azusa, Vinnie, Carter, and Rosie pull off a racing scam, substituting winners for plodders and winning big bucks on long odds. Unlike standard genre fare, Simpatico attempts to deconstruct traditional tropes, offering a conventional take on its central themes.
The success of any Comedy is often anchored by its ensemble, and Simpatico features a noteworthy lineup led by Nick Nolte . Supported by the likes of Jeff Bridges and Sharon Stone , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
In summary, our editorial assessment of Simpatico (1999) is negative. With an audience rating of 4.8/10, it stands as a highly recommended experience for genre enthusiasts.
Quick Plot Summary: Simpatico is a Comedy, Drama film that brings laughter through clever writing and comedic timing, offering both entertainment and social commentary. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
Ending Breakdown: Simpatico attempts to tie together its various plot elements. The finale presents its approach to comedy resolution.
The emotional climax centers on character transformation, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
The final moments of Simpatico reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Consider Watching If:
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Production Budget | $10.0M |
| Worldwide Gross | $929.6K |
| Trade Verdict | FINANCIAL DISAPPOINTMENT |
The estimated production budget for Simpatico is $10.0M. This figure covers principal photography, talent acquisitions, and visual effects. When accounting for global marketing and distribution, the break-even point is typically 2x the base production cost.










Canal+
Moviecult Amazon Channel
Amazon Video
Apple TV
Google Play Movies
Amazon Video
Apple TV
Google Play MoviesAnalyzing the audience sentiment, IMDb rating of 4.8/10, and global collection metrics, Simpatico stands as a challenging project for the creators. It remains an essential piece of the 1999 cinematic year.
Simpatico is considered a flop based on audience ratings of 4.8/10 and lower collections.
Based on the low rating of 4.8/10, Simpatico may not be worth watching unless you are a die-hard fan.
Simpatico is currently available for streaming on Canal+. You can also check for it on platforms like Canal+, Moviecult Amazon Channel depending on your region.
Infertiile Neo-Noir? Simpatico is directed by Matthew Warchus and Warchus co-adapts the screenplay with David Nicholls from the play written by Sam Shepard. It stars Nick Nolte, Jeff Bridges, Sharon Stone, Catharine Keener and Albert Finney. Music is by Stewart Copeland and cinematography is by John Toll. Three young confidence tricksters have orchestrated a horse racing scam tat is making them big money. However, when the scam is unearthed by a top official they set him up for blackmail and make off into the sun. Twenty years later the three of them are brought together by circumstance and the time of emotional reckoning… It was met with disdain by critics and film goers alike, and even now some 20 years after it was first released it holds below average ratings on the main internet film sites. Is this fair? Does it at the least deserve to be revisited and re-evaluated on its neo-noir character driven terms? Well sort of… Off the bat it deserves better scores than those afforded it on line purely for the acting alone, this is a high grade group of actors breathing life into damaged characters. Very much a talky character driven piece (stage origins boom out from the off), the screenplay does have a deft potency about it, dealing as it does about shame and guilt and the foundation of success built out of financial gain, with the kicker being the long term repercussions of youthful criminality. Dialogue is often sparky (helps being delivered by those fine actors of course), Toll’s cinematography around the Kentucky locales is beautiful, and come the final resolutions to the main characters journey we get a huge emotionally metaphorical whack. However, there’s an overuse of the flashback structure to show us the principals in their younger scamming – life altering – days (played by Kimberly Williams-Paisley, Shawn Hatosy and Liam Waite). Annoyingly there’s also the puzzling question hanging over the play as to if this is a simple life story of errors never mended – of cheats prospering only to fall at the later in life hurdle? Or is this attempting to be a complex study of the human condition? Maybe even giving us a stark warning, a message piece if you will. Of course, maybe that’s Shepard’s thing? to not have definite answers? Either way it’s a little frustrating to not have an absolute with such a strong character piece. It’s hardly a must see recommended picture, that’s for sure, in fact Warchus’ first time direction away from the actors is uncomfortably staid. Yet there’s some nice craft here, and a tantalising “more than meets the eye” question mark that keeps you interested if you be so inclined to stick with it. Infertile or interesting? 6/10
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.