Nearly all of the reviews for Side Effects refer to director Steven Soderbergh's recent declaration that he intends to put filmmaking behind him -- and that this is his last film. Several use almost identical words. Kenneth Turan in the Los Angeles Times writes, If this does prove to be Soderbergh's final film -- and I wouldn't hold my breath -- he picked a heck of a one to go out on. Mick LaSalle in the San Francisco Chronicle says, Probably nobody besides Steven Soderbergh really believes he's retiring from making feature films, but if it's true, Side Effects isn't a bad way to go out. Joe Morgenstern in the Wall Street Journal remarks that in each of his films, Soderbergh has given us something new to chew over or delight in. If this is the last Soderbergh film for the big screen, as the filmmaker has been saying it is in recent interviews, the movie medium will be much poorer for it. Says Lou Lumenick in the New York Post: What Soderbergh claims will be his last theatrical feature for a long time'' is the sort of movie best appreciated by us jaded movie critics -- and those Soderbergh fans who share our fascination with his daring, sometimes perverse, experiments with film. And Roger Ebert, in the Chicago Sun-Times notes that there are elements from previous Soderbergh movies that are evident here and suggests it's all a kind of summing-up for him. Soderbergh came he saw, he conquered, and now he's moving on, he writes. But Rex Reed in the New York Observer is no Soderbergh fan, calling him pretentious and overrated. His final jibe: Steven Soderbergh keeps giving interviews confessing that he is bored with movies and promising that Side Effects will be his last one. Not a moment too soon, if you ask me.