Stephen Holden in the New York Times admits in the first paragraph of his review that he has a problem assessing "the cuter-than-cute, sweeter-than sweet" Hotel for Dogs. "After watching the movie," he writes, "only a grouchy critic-- one who shares W. C. Fields's conviction that a man who hates children and dogs can't be all bad -- would shout 'Bah, humbug!' and summon the truant officer and the dog catcher. I wouldn't dream of it, but ..." He then goes on to write pretty much a bah-humbug appraisal of the movie. So does pretty much every other critic. But Betsy Sharkey concludes in the Los Angeles Times "Ultimately, Hotel for Dogs is a simple story with a few simple lessons woven in Nothing is disposable, kids don't have to be cynical to be smart, and families can be built out of just about anything. Not such a bad message for a Hollywood movie."