I thought it was absolutely brilliant. This film is a masterpiece in every sense of the word, from the impeccable direction and production design to the powerhouse performances delivered by every cast member. Angelina Jolie is just phenomenal here, delivering the best performance of her career. Every bit of her performance feels genuine and realistic, and Jolie makes the character unpredictable and someone the audience definitley roots for throughout. This is really her movie and could potentially garner her a second Academy Award. John Malkovich is also strong here and Amy Ryan is effective as well, but two of the standout performances from the supporting cast come from Michael Kelly and Jason Butler Harner. The former stands out as the one cop to root for in a corrupt organization, and the latter is quietly terrifying as murderer Gordon Northcott. I wouldn't be surprised if Harner got some unexpected acclaim for his turn here - many of his scenes were among the most disturbing movie moments of the year (from the bone-chilling sequences at the Wineville Ranch to the incredibly haunting scene near the end). The story is incredibly compelling and perfectly dramatized thanks to a strong script from J. Michael Straczynski, who perfectly fleshes out each character and keeps things engaging throughout. Clint Eastwood's direction is fantastic - he manages to transport the audience back to 1920's Los Angeles thanks to the great attention to detail on display, and I loved the way the film was developed - with the Wineville segment not getting much play at the beginning (a brief reference) to slowly becoming the focal point of the story. Eastwood essentially puts the viewer in Collins's shoes, allowing them to feel the frustration, anger and fear that her character is going through. The only flaw the film has is its length. After what feels like the climax of the central storyline, there is far too much time spent on an epilogue of what happened to the various characters and Collins herself. It does allow for an absolutely brilliant sequence near the end, but things start to drag a bit and this portion could have definitely been edited. Otherwise, this is a must-see film. It's riveting, thrilling, heartbreaking and powerful - featuring top-notch direction and a phenomenal turn from Angelina Jolie. Do not miss it - it's sure to remain near the top of my list of the best films of the year. A+


The sequences at the Wineville Ranch were absolutely terrifying and brutal to watch. And when all is finally confessed, I definitely got chills hearing about what was described. I couldn't believe that all of the events in this film really happened.

It's bad, guys. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Eastwood and screenwriter J. Michael Straswhatever-his-name-is make no real choices with the narrative here. Rather than giving us a clear focal point or line of dramatic action they just decide to tell every last little nook-and-cranny of this admittedly interesting true story. They pay no regard to what would be a logical beginning-and-end point to this film. And it's just terrible folly. There are about 6 different movies jockeying for position, and none of them can take. What we ultimately get, then, is a straightforward, TV-style retelling of events, told entirely, entirely, without nuance. The last 30-40 minutes are the biggest clusterfuck in 2008 cinema; this movie effectively ends almost as many times as Return of the King. And, unfortunately, each new ending became less and less appropriate before the movie finally settled on the most commerical, audience-patronizing finale in recent memory. Awful, awful section. If this movie had ended before the courtroom section, I probably would have, in Siskelian terms, been thumbs-up on this. But, no. Never.

What I would have done was to Bunny Lake the film; in other words, not bring us into the movie until after the abduction so that we, the audience, are never sure if Jolie's character is right or lying or simply crazy. It would have added much needed nuance and ambiguity to our tale of noble, one-dimensional crusader for justice vs. cartoonishly evil police force. There's one moment where Jeffrey Donovan (with the worst accent...ever?) gives Jolie a speech about all the slander the police will give to the papers, including, and I paraphrase, how she'd gotten used to being without the burden of a son over those few months and now resents the fact that she's had responsibility thrust back upon her. And I thought, "man, wouldn't be it great if something like that was in play?" But it's not. This is really simplistic movie-making. Sometime that works for Clint. Not here. Not with this bad script.

The first movie of the year that I would even consider for a Best Picture Oscar. Truly awesome movie.

Yeah, I'm not a Clint fan at all but I loved this movie. Great story. I do think that Anjelina Jolie wasn't given too much to work with in terms of character development, but she was awesome with what she had. Not a Best Pic material but very good nonetheless.

I think you completely missed the mark there Yosh, which is rare. The movie is not about her being crazy or not, and it wouldnt be more intense to not know if she was or not. The point of the film that the audience is in complete agreement with Jolie, and to show the true horrors and mistreatment of women and the brutality and so called unquestionable LAW luster during the time period. In the Asylum, when she met with her doctor for the first time was one of the most intense scenes I've ever seen. I was just chilled.

No, I totally understand the movie is not about her being crazy. You misunderstand. I merely wish it had been. What I'm lamenting above is that fact that instead of moviemaking that was even slightly imaginative or ambiguous, we are stuck wading through sequence after sequence of noble Angie demanding her son and the just-so-gosh-darn-evil police standing in her way. Black and white. No gray area of any kind. Evil villians and righteous heroes. How stale (and, again, TV-like) this movie is.

This feels like something Clint would have made back in the 70s and 80s when he was on Dirty Harry sequels, not a work that sprouted from that the supposedly thoughtful old sage that made Unforgiven or Letters From Iwo Jima. It's like he was doing his best (worst?) Don Siegel impression. Again.

How dare the critics not like this masterpiece? Angelina Jolie gives one of the best acting performances I have ever seen. The is one of the scariest films ever, despite it not being in the horror genre. It was soooo realistic and haunting you couldn't help but cringe while watching it. My 5th favorite film of the year, but the second best.


A

I count about eight things wrong with this review. How many can you spot?

I count 11.

I think the issue was that the cops just wanted a happy-ending story to boost their public perception. They knew they had the wrong kid but didn't care so it was pointless to get a picture.

Well, Photos were more for people of higher classes at the time. She may have had a photo, but it could have been from years earlier.

well, it was just the one cop making the call.

and was he really fooled and thought it was her son? as he never really said or implied otherwise.

but to your picture point, I think the 4 inches smaller was a much better show of proof and that didn't even convince them. To everything, they blamed it on stress and time change.

Personally I liked it better the movie way. Mainly thinking she was right and seeing how harshly she was treated in the psycho ward was chilling.

Much better than I expected. Then again, the trailers and TV spots made it look like a big budget version of a Lifetime Original Movie so being better wasn't too difficult.

That's weird, I counted 0.

It's called hyperbole, Ev@n. You use it too often.

It's ok, not everyone understands math.

Okay, now I'm confused.

Anyway, I see eight grammatical errors, but some are a stretch and should not be expected.

Uh - huh. Well would you mind telling me what exactly is wrong with it?

It's not just the hyperbole, it's particularly this statement:

I cannot even begin to tell you how wrong that is.

Sure, trixster. Aren't you the guy who said it was his second best favorite and fifth least worst best?

No, that was that mysterious makeshift fellow.

Ev@n sees a distinction between a movie he respects and a movie he enjoys.

Not saying it's the best way to review a movie, but I know what he means.

Come on, he's 14. 4 years ago, he thought girls carried cooties and fart jokes were cool.

well honostly I never thought either of those things but that was very funny.

Trixster a lot of people think there is a difference between best and favorite, I don't see why it's so hard for you to accept.