and made $2,514,478 ($5,018 per screen) in its opening weekend. It grossed $9,077,269 in its entire run. Reception The film has a 74% on Rotten Tomatoes based on 27 reviews with the critics' consensus being "It may not [be] Woody Allen's best work, but the frothy, fun A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy is still worth a look." Janet Maslin of The New York Times wrote, "Whatever Mr. Allen is doing in constructing this pretty, slight, gently entertaining movie, he isn't doing the thing he does best. 'A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy' gives the impression of someone speaking fluently but formally in a language not his own." Roger Ebert gave the film two stars out of four and explained, "I don't object to 'A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy' on grounds that it's different from his earlier films, but on the more fundamental ground that it's adrift. There doesn't seem to be a driving idea behind it, a confident tone to give us the sure notion that Allen knows what he wants to do here." Gene Siskel awarded two-and-a-half stars out of four, calling it "a nice picture, but insubstantial." Variety called the film "a pleasant disappointment, pleasant because [Allen] gets all the laughs he goes for in a visually charming, sweetly paced picture, a disappointment because he doesn't go for more." Sheila Benson of the Los Angeles Times wrote, "What's most disappointing about 'Sex Comedy' is that for all its incessant—and anachronistic—talk, there's a serious shortage of new ideas from writer-director Allen. The film's fullest idea is that opportunity, once lost, can never again be recaptured. We might have hoped for this bittersweetness and a great deal more from one of the screen's nerviest innovators." Gary Arnold of The Washington Post stated, "The crucial problem with 'Sex Comedy' is that one detects no persuasive sexual chemistry in any of the alleged, three-cornered mating games. It's impossible to believe that anyone's susceptibilities are deeply stirred or anyone's feelings likely to be hurt. Allen can't establish the basic sense of attraction and the emotional gravity that underscores the frivolity of the romantic hide-and-seek." Pauline Kael of The New Yorker wrote, "The group is rather amusing, and for a while the film seems saucy and fairly promising (when we learn, for example, that the prof and his fiancée met at the Vatican). Viewers may feel that everything must be building toward a big, explosive