Marketic It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Fulke Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Prabhat_KS_1729 When well made, crime thrillers have the ability to keep viewers on the edge of their seats. And when the plot is based on a real-life incident, the transition on to reel becomes all the more captivating. Usually crime thrillers narrate the incidents from a third-person perspective. But 'Blue Caprice' is a film that investigates the genesis of real-life horrific events from the point of view of the perpetrators. Therein lies its ingenuity which also helps to universalize the narrative. Thus, as a conservative middle- class Indian, I also feel uneasy with the sordid murders. The remoteness of events gets telescoped.I think, it must have been difficult to even write such a film. There must be so many competing narratives and so many different points-of-view to reconcile - especially when you are dealing with serial killings of innocent middle-class citizens. Perhaps the writers and director need to be emotionally detached from the narrative too so as to objectively present the story from such a perspective. Blue Caprice is a slow moving, linear and intriguing drama about a distorted father-son relationship which facilitated their long and bloody journey across north-eastern US. Recently Bollywood also attempted a similar narrative in 'Main aur Charles', in which the plot is narrated from the perspective of a police officer. But 'Blue Caprice' is superb in more ways than one. It gets in deep into the nitty-gritty of relationships - friends, family and strangers. The transformation of an impressionable teenager into one cold-hearted killer is captured with brevity. As I discovered during post-viewing research, the filmmakers do take some artistic liberty with the events. For example, in real-life the mother of the teenager (Lee Malvo) was well-acquainted with John Muhammad. And they moved to Florida first not to Washington. But that's OK. In the end, the film succeeds in getting across a solid story. The acting is splendid from the whole cast. I was really impressed by the character of Jamie- played brilliantly by Joey Lauren Adams. She has that unique voice which matched the character. Its one of my things though - I always give more attention to supporting cast. They are like the props which take lead cast to pinnacle.

Adelio 007 Be warned, if you came to this movie expecting action don't bother.The film started off with sparks but didn't catch fire. I went into this film with few expectations and I was still left in the cold considering the film had the chance to make it big. First off, the biopic loses the audience too quickly.The movie shows unnecessary scenes, questionable cuts coupled with an unintelligent and very slow paced story line. With that said, the movie revolves mainly around the relationship and partnership of John Allen and Malvo leading up to the shootings but just doesn't cut it. Instead, it spiritlessly drags around for 90+ minutes and spirals out of control shooting away past the main point. It's a superficial portrayal of a grander problem given that the movie doesn't explore fully the mind and emotions of the characters and how deep the problem really is.Rather, it breaks from scene to scene barely scratching the surface. It leaves the audience, who want to feel the heart and mind of the characters, uneasy and unsatisfied .Still, I've gotta hand a round of applause to Washington and Richmond for giving chilling performances that actually made the colorless film watchable. Also, the mood and atmosphere blends well with what the director tries to show us. All in all the film is a solid 5.

Turfseer Who remembers the horrific Beltway sniper shootings which left 10 dead and 3 seriously wounded in the Washington, D.C. area in 2002? I remember a friend of mine who lived in Maryland telling me how he was afraid to leave his house at the time. Was it really necessary to bring back up all the horrible memories? The American-based, French director, Alexandre Moors certainly thought so.Moors' approach is to explore the relationship between the two killers, the adult John Allen Muhammed and his teenage partner in crime, Lee Boyd Malvo, avoiding any sensationalistic aspects of the shooting spree. That's a good thing, because what is the point of rehashing such tragic events that brought so much grief to the families of the innocent victims? Moors approach is psychological. But is there enough meat to the story to keep us interested and perhaps gain insight into what drove these psychopaths, to do what they did?In Moors' narrative, Malvo is abandoned by his mother in Antigua where Muhammed just happens to be vacationing with his young daughters. Muhammed saves Malvo from drowning in the ocean and they quickly bond. The only problem is that Muhammed never saved Malvo and it was both the teenager and his mother who met Muhammed and she left him in his care. So the angle that Malvo bonded with Muhammed because he owed him his life, does not hold any weight.After Muhammed brings Malvo back with him to the United States, we basically figure out what motivates Muhammed in about a half hour time. Most of those involved in law enforcement will tell you that the most dangerous type of criminal is the one who commits crimes of domestic violence. Indeed, it's Muhammed's loss of his children in a custody battle, that leads him to become extremely bitter and later paranoid. Finally, in Muhammed's deranged mind, it's the 'system' that is to blame; so taking lives methodically (and not randomly as the psycho killer puts it) is the name of the game. That's really all you have to know what Muhammed's motivations were and Moors has his anti-hero express those sentiments throughout the rest of the film.Malvo on the other hand comes off as an empty vessel; a follower who utters few words. Muhammed boasts that "I've created a monster", referring to his young charge, who he now dubs his "son". It's not surprising this zombie-like kid would do the older man's bidding—when they're living with Muhammed's old Army buddy, Ray, a rabid gun nut, Malvo gains access to an entire arsenal of weaponry. Tutored on violent video games and actual target practice, Malvo becomes a crack marksman and later does the paranoid killer's bidding. There's one semi-violent scene where Muhammed ties Malvo to a tree in the forest and abandons him there, in an act of 'tough love'—expecting the teenager to toughen up, so he's ready to enthusiastically become a cold-blooded sniper. Moors' treatment of the Beltway snipers is antiseptic. We never learn who the victims were nor experience the anguish of the families. Instead, 'Blue Caprice' is a beautifully shot, 'art' film. Moors seeks to illustrate what the concept of 'the banality of evil' is all about; but it's a slow tour through the wasteland. Ultimately, the killers' machinations are mundane—and inconsequential. Moors deprives his audience of the satisfaction as to how Muhammed and Malvo were captured and processed by the authorities (a routine police patrol check in a parking lot only suggests that this is where M&M reached the end of the line). And the most interesting information about the man-boy relationship is left out entirely: the assertion after Malvo's conviction, that he was sexually abused by the older man (see the Musical 'Thrill Me', which chronicles the gay affair between the two 1920s thrill killers, "Leopold and Loeb"—the author there was not afraid to explore the homosexual relationship between the two men).Alexandre Moors is not without talent—usually with many of these neophyte filmmakers, it's in the realm of technical wizardly, as opposed to acumen with the script. Yes, 'Blue Caprice' has some mighty impressive cinematography and the two principals who play the killers, Isaiah Washington and Tequan Richmond, are completely believable as the brutal Muhammed and stone-cold Malvo.In the end, the best word to describe Moors' examination of the Beltway snipers, is opaque. In perhaps better hands, this could have been a gripping crime story. But something also tells me that this was a story that does not really lend itself to good drama. 'Blue Caprice' is one such example that is better left to the history books than to the silver screen.

Amari-Sali I have an unfortunate curiosity when it comes to Black films. I say this because, while there are good ones out there, I don't find too many of them which aren't comedies. So, whenever a drama comes up like Blue Caprice, and it is an indie movie, I cross my fingers and toes and hope for the best. Now, besides the draw of being a Black drama, there are also a few familiar faces in this film. The first one I noticed was Tequan Richmond who most surely will know for his work on Everybody Hates Chris; then there is Isaiah Washington, whose career went to hell after he called someone something derogatory on Grey's Anatomy; and there is also Joey Lauren Adams who I know from Switched at Birth. Now, the characters in this film, I feel, aren't that terribly compelling. Richmond's Lee, is a complicated role, but at the same time it only seems so because Richmond, thus far, is known for working in comedy. Due to this, seeming him as a mostly silent kid who is trying to figure out a way to survive, even if it means doing bad things, helps him be the only actor who benefits from this production. Washington, on the other hand, plays John, who you can tell has issues, but you aren't fully sure if he has PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) from being in the military, though he worked more so in the motor pool, or if he may be truly crazy. Both, for me, didn't really have well developed characters, and pretty much every other character in the film was put into a supporting role and, while given names, they gave you little reason to care about their characters.Which sort of is why the story felt so dull. You see, Lee is a kid who might have been abandoned by his mother as she goes to work in America and she says she'll send for him soon. Thing is, we are left wondering who is going to take care of this 16 year old boy? He doesn't seem to have any family to help, or friends of his mother, so he just ends up wandering the streets until he meets John who is on vacation with his kids. From there, the story begins to make you question things, and seemingly it even deviates from its source material of the Beltway Sniper Attacks. So, for reasons never fully noted, John brings Lee to America and begins training the boy in the ways of handling a gun. After that, the boy slowly morphs into a hardened murderer who sees this man he didn't know for 16 years of his life, as his father who he would do anything for. Including shooting men, women, children and even pregnant women.Let me first state, I have no issues with seeing Black people as villains. Part of the appeal of this film was seeing Washington and Richmond play something evil without being some sort of comical character or gangster. That, perhaps, was one of the few refreshing things about this movie. Also, I think Richmond did really well in his performance of Lee. I must admit though, his appeal as Lee is similar, but not as powerful, as Mo'Nique's performance in Precious. What is meant by this is, you don't really expect much out of Richmond since he has thus far worked in comedy, so you have little to no expectations out of him. So, while he surely didn't give the type of performance like Mo'Nique did, it did however have the similar "Oh, so you can do dramatic roles too?" type of effect.But, outside of some praise for seeing Black villains and Richmond, this movie was just bland. Washington's character John has all this drama in his life with his wife, mistress and situation with his kids, and though it is mentioned a bit throughout the film, you aren't ever really sure what the catalyst was for all the issues the man has. Add onto that, Richmond's Lee, while an interesting character, I don't think they once said the boy's name in the film, or if they did it was rare. Also, they film snatches away the idea that Lee's mom knew John, so they make it so this boy wandering in Antigua finds this man and his three kids and forms a bond with him to the point where he forgets about his mother, and even finding her in America, and decides to stick with this guy who wants him to kill people to prove his love and loyalty. Now it could just be me, but that whole scenario just didn't click as logical, or possible, in my head.Overall: SkipTo be honest, this may make a good film for background noise since the soundtrack has a lot of classical pieces in it, but those intent on watching the film for the story will be left disappointed. It takes a real life event, or better said: tragedy, and while it uses the actual act which would draw you to the story, everything else seems to be an overuse of artistic license. Because of this, I can't even say it is Sunday movie watching, for really why waste somewhere around $10 on a movie which tries, but sadly fails?