Dirtylogy
It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.
Frances Chung
Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable
Jerrie
It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...
Nikolay Peev
First of all I'm no movie critic or someone pretending to be expert in the cinematic art I'm just a regular Joe who likes a good movie, with that being said I have to admit that this is one of my all time favorite movies. I like pretty much everything in it:•I find the plot to be quite unique and fascinating. It kept me in nescience until the very end (and this is something I experience rarely those days)•The acting is at its best imo, Evangeline Lilly and John Malkovich are mesmerizing… don't get me wrong Romain Duris was great too, maybe an idea lesser :)•Atmosphere is just breathtaking - mysterious, kind of noar and very, very… real.•Soundtrack is nothing short of perfect, I have nothing else to say just WOW.Overall this is one of the few films that makes me shed a tear every time I watch it (me & my girlfriend if I have to be honest) and I do recommend it with all of my heart.P.S. Sorry for my poor English :(
sonja_kiki
The movie overall was... ooookay. Performance was almost realistic, but I couldn't relate to the main character, though I don't think it's the actor's fault, it's just bad directing. I mean, seriously awful directing. It almost has nothing to do with the book. Honestly if I hadn't read it, i wouldn't have seen the movie.It is completely different from the book. Of course, the book is always better, but this is just too different. First of all, the clinic that is run by Dr. Kay ( Gudrich in the book ) is supposed to be a nice place, that does not look like a clinic at all. It is supposed to be an almost happy place, if that's possible. I don't think Duris should've been chosen for the role * though he did play it well considering the movie*, because Nathan is supposed to be a completely different personality.Secondly, the relationship between Nathan and Claire has not been shown consistently.The whole movie had this dull, tiresome atmosphere and nothing's ever happening. They've shown everything in a different light. In the book, there are ACTUALLY reasons, excuses for characters actions and all of the characters have an emotional depth that the movie just does not show.All in all, this is a movie probably worth watching if you haven't read the book, because it does have some life-is-worth-living motives and it actually can make you appreciate it more, but if you, on the other hand HAVE read the book, I'm begging you not to watch the movie, it will just ruin it for you.
rgcustomer
Here's yet another film that attempts to seriously suggest the existence of such things as life after death, clairvoyance, and whatnot, and have us get all misty-eyed about it.Instead of treating these Final Destination subjects as the comedy or horror or comedy-horror themes they rightly are, we're given a dull sort of mystery that's supposed to also be a love story. Who is going to die next? (Not a big surprise if you've seen more than two films in your life.) The fact is, we're ALL going to die. Nobody gets to live forever. And only those who take their own lives get to decide when they die. The rest of us gamble a minute at a time that we won't suffer a fatal brain aneurysm or get killed by lightning.The thing about death is that it's final. Sure, there's medical death, which can be survived, and is sometimes intentionally used for surgical purposes. But then there's the death we all know about, the death that is either embalmed, plastinated, burned, or allowed to rot, beyond which nothing ever returns. Ever. It will happen to all of us.If people actually knew when or how death was coming, this would be a markedly different world. There's a lot of money to be made in things like setting up your will the way you want it before you die, instead of what it was 10 years ago when you last revised it. Or trimming back your insurance policy so it doesn't go all the way to age 90. Or stepping down from an organization so it won't be left suddenly leaderless. Probably the best use is so that would-be assassins and other murderers are caught and prosecuted immediately after their (apparently unstoppable) crimes.Of course, this film's biggest mistake is in the idea that we really only need to care about people when they're about to die. Most of us know that's not true, and we don't need the supernatural to justify it.I've noticed some negativity about Romain's performance, but I thought it was reasonable for the role.
rpmmurphy
A carefully constructed and beautifully photographed film. Very successfully and thoughtfully utilizes diverse North American locations- from rustic summertime Quebec to New York City to White Sands, New Mexico and SW environs. Features classic Atom Egoyan narrative/plot/hook structure: that keeps you "learning" -up to the final frames- just what you have been watching. But...... the film is so thick- both thematically and with its sumptuous imagery- that by the time you get there (the end)- the reasonable 1hr45 screening time seems about 30min past due. You are worn out as if you've been force fed a fine cheese cake. Less would definitely be more. Also... the film comes so close to Egoyan as to practically- and I believe at one point actually- lift some lines directly from THE SWEET HEREAFTER (1997): "...Someone didn't do his job... There is no mystery..." - although here, the character's arc carries him beyond being imprisoned by this thinking.Overall: good, meaningful, thought provoking, flawed- underrated by the IMDb score.
