SmugKitZine Tied for the best movie I have ever seen

SparkMore n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

Yash Wade Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

Jemima It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

fificahill I am very interested in the Belle Gunness story , and I had great hopes for this movie before reading the reviews here. I hope its not as bad as I hear. I'll be back to give my opinion. I would like to see some really well investigated movie made on Belles life. I would like questions answered that apparently aren't in this film. Although it is bound to be enjoyable if taken at face value, I got interested in it because it was supposed to be about Belle and the murders at LaPorte.. when I went to look to view it , I find its called something else other than Method and is only loosely related to Bele Gunness after all. Shame . Its called Dead Even outside of the USA. .

Joe Bob Jones Jeremy Sisto and Elizabeth Hurley very earnestly work hard to make this shockingly bad film decent, but they simply can't. It is a maudlin mess of poorly written and directed dreck from Duncan Roy. Plot summary already attached to this film's IMDb posting, I will dispense with much of the redundant plot summary, but when Hurley barks out of the shack door to drifter Sisto's character "Hey, can you mend a fey-ance?" (it is turn of the century Indiana after all, so expect heavy accents), I knew this thing was heading down state in a durn hurry. Perhaps five minutes later, gentleman callers are arranged by mail to come see the impossibly beautiful Hurley to arrange marriage. With heavy brows does our fence fixer Sisto disapprove of Hurley's mail order suitors, referred to as her brother. Do we even need to delve into the budding melodrama of this period piece? Wait! O dreaded gimmicks, worse than a triptych, first person narrative, or chapter supertitles, we are fed a steaming dish of a film within a film. My word, I don't think this kind of thing has ever been done before! Oh wait, well, you know. The only interesting things about Method are Hurley's beauty, Sisto's effort, and the infamous off screen battles between the insane director Duncan Roy and Liz Hurley. The final product, though, stinks to high heaven.

TwoCrude I admit I have watched many of Liz Hurley's movies. Almost every one of them has been a disappointment (she was actually very good as an addict in "Shameless" about 15 years ago).Hardcore Liz fans should stick to "Bedazzled" and "Passenger 57". Sisto has plenty of good work in circulation; I am amazed that he stooped to this tripe. The DVD set of the short lived TV show "Kidnapped" is worth the price of admission. It even has Carmen Ejogo, an Englishwoman who can act circles around Hurley.Do not waste your time on this poor excuse of a mystery. You'd be better off doing your income taxes. And at least the tax return has a conclusion worthy of being called that.

hdeckeraz In the real world people learn from mistakes. Players in Hollywood apparently feel no need to learn from mistakes. Case in point: METHOD. This beautifully shot but badly edited film is eerily similar to the beautifully shot but badly edited film THE WEIGHT OF WATER. Producers of these films obviously spent a lot of money on stars, sets, costumes, locations, equipment, etc. Directors of these films actually had good story to work with. Yet, in the end, both films don't work. In an attempt to dazzle the audience by interweaving the past with the present using slick editing techniques, the directors weaken the credibility of the story as well as confuse the audience. Regarding the story lines, both employ some type of mysterious karmic influence between people of the past and people in the present. Although this is probably a good plot device, it has to be believable, which it isn't in these two movies. Once last point: Elizabeth Hurley happens to be in both of these movies. I would love to know if she tried to point out to the producer and director of METHOD that THE WEIGHT OF WATER was very similar and didn't really work. If she did, why didn't they listen? And if she didn't, I guess she only wants to collect a paycheck.