Proof of Life
|
List Price: Our Price: $1.96 You Save: $11.02 (85%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.01 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of Proof of Life
Movie Review: A Most Underestimated Movie
Summary: 5 Stars
This movie has it all. The more I watch it, the more I see the reality of a good, good movie. David Morse is absolutely superb.Movie Review: Edge of your seat suspense.
Summary: 5 Stars
Great acting. Great story line. Visually stimulating. Excellent ending. Great soundtrack. Russell Crow is at his best.Movie Review: EXCELLENT
Summary: 5 Stars
This movie keeps you on the edge of your seat till the very end.Movie Review: Proof of Star Power
Summary: 4 Stars
Based upon a Vanity Fair article ("Adventures In The Ransom Trade" by William Prochnau) and a man's personal account of an abduction by Colombian guerillas (Tom Hargrove), "Proof of Life" sports an exclusive cast and talented filmmakers but retained the misfortune of unfavorable media prior to its release. This $70 million escapade from director Taylor Hackford (Ray) began screening in December of 2000 after much-publicized debate on the relationship between leading lady Meg Ryan and co-star Russell Crowe. Hackford was dismayed by the predatory slant of the press, remarking that "people put a huge amount of time, effort and talent into this and it's being usurped by the tabloids. They say there's no publicity that's bad publicity, but I'm not so sure." Over 20 people reportedly left the production because of altitude sickness (filming took place in the Ecuadorian mountains) and the set was plagued by the death of stuntman William Gaffney, an automobile plunge off a cliff during a routine shot killing him instantly.
Most of the story is set in a fictionalized South American country called Tecala, Alice Bowman (Ryan) currently residing there with her industrial engineer husband Peter (Morse). Peter's job has required him to consistently relocate and Alice has grudgingly packed her bags each time, resentful of their inability to root themselves in one place. Tecala is a state known for its high rate of kidnapping and one morning as Peter braves a jungle roadway, he encounters a guerilla barricade and is taken hostage, his captors hiding him away in the misty and suffocating atmosphere of the Andes. Any hope that Alice had of peace and quiet is shattered, Peter's captors demanding thousands of dollars in ransom for his return. She is well lacking of their demands and becomes desperate for a solution, her sister-in-law Janis (Reed) her only solace. A couple of phone calls later, Terry Thorne (Crowe), a trained negotiator, is brought to the scene and the negotiation process for Peter commences. During his arduous parleys with Peter's captors, Terry's relationship with Alice becomes more than platonic and he is faced with a moral dilemma. It is at this point that the movie loses a little credibility, its histrionic excitement forfeited for the divulgence of forbidden romance.
This is the third collaboration for Hackford and screenwriter Tony Gilroy, the two having worked together previously on "The Devil's Advocate" and "Dolores Claiborne". Hackford admitted during an interview that he had filmed a more explicit love scene between Crowe and Ryan but it didn't make the final cut, stating that it was solely his decision to remove it and that "too much romance detracts from the action-adventure; I wanted the relationship between the characters to be tenuous and ambiguous ". This was a wise choice on Hackford's part because even the desperate kiss that Crowe steals from Ryan before heading out into combat is somewhat superfluous and baffling (yet it remained in the film, a small and enigmatic remnant of Hackford's missing footage).
Morse underwent the grueling task of slimming down for his scenes in the misty mountaintops, getting gaunt on a diet prepared by the doctor who thinned down Tom Hanks for "Cast Away". This guy rarely gives a bad performance (The Green Mile, Hearts In Atlantis, Dancer In The Dark, etc.) and is equally impressive here as the stonewalling Peter. Ryan has the potential to be a great dramatic actress (When A Man Loves A Woman, City of Angels) but because of her numerous roles in romantic comedies, there is the feeling that she is miscast. Ridley Scott's Greco-Roman juggernaut "Gladiator" was released over six months prior to "Proof Of Life", creating a nice buzz for Crowe and giving the film a beneficial boost in ticket sales. It certainly didn't hurt either that Crowe garnered an Academy Award nomination the year prior for the role of Jeffrey Wigand in "The Insider". It's just as well that he gives a good performance here as Terry Thorne. David Caruso makes an appearance in a small role - with what little times he gets, I believe it's the most entertaining performance I've ever seen from him.
Bottom line: If you see "Proof of Life", go for the suspenseful storytelling and remember that it's not very far removed from what happened to a real guy (Tom Hargrove). Truth is far stranger than fiction - and much more interesting.
Movie Review: Unfairly maligned due to an off-screen romance...
Summary: 4 Stars
Do people ever just watch movies anymore? I mean, really, can anyone say that they judge a film strictly on its artistic merit and not on the trash the media is feeding us on the films stars? I personally try to cast aside my personal feelings for an actor, director or film subject in order to give an honest opinion of a film, but sadly it seems that many people will jump at the chance to hate something because of the personal lives of the stars. I remember when Eddie Murphy was up for Oscar in 2006 and many critics were saying he didn't deserve to win because of his off-screen antics. Seriously, what does his personal life have to do with his performance? Same with Crowe in 2001, or Polanski in 2002, or, take for instance Amy Winehouse's gigantic sweep of the Grammy's last year and the uproar that caused.
She makes good music, end of story.
So, that brings me to the bad press that this film received, and the reason I feel so strongly is because `Proof of Life', while not perfect, is far better than one would expect. Yes, critics, fans and movie goers all but destroyed this film with cluttered bad reviews all because of their personal feelings towards the off-screen romance that blossomed between Russell Crowe and the then married Meg Ryan. I'll say it; it is wrong to cheat on your spouse.
That said, celebrities do it all the time, so why should I really care?
I'm not handing them awards for Miss America or electing them into political office (although they may be better fit), I'm grading their film, and their film was actually pretty decent. Why should I allow my feelings towards their bedside manner impress my feelings towards their work?
`Proof of Life' tells the story of Alice Bowman who finds out that her husband has been kidnapped by rebels in the fictional Latin American country of Tecala. In her delicate state she finds herself being taken advantage of, and she would continue to be if it weren't for negotiator Terry Thorne who swoops in to save the day. Thus sums up the film you are about to experience.
Sure, the film is not perfect, and it really could have used some tightening up (I really feel that Taylor Hackford has an issue with tightening up his films) but in the end there is not a whole lot to hate about this film. Sure, parts seem very improbable, and the implied romance between Terry and Alice can leave the audience frustrated (I would have much rather had their romance be more explicit in the sense that it is explored, for it may have brought some closure to the ending) but the action scenes are well filmed and the acting is well done and the script, overall, is nicely constructed. It makes sense, even if it isn't totally believable (I know you know what I mean). David Caruso and David Morse do wonderful supporting work, but the film is all about Ryan and Crowe. I adore Meg Ryan, and she nails her performance, manipulating her emotions to show us an unhappy woman in love with a man who cannot satisfy her; and Crowe, while not at the top of his game, is still effortlessly captivating.
Truth be told; Crowe at his worst is better than many at their best.
So, in the end I must urge you to disregard your preconceived notions, and everyone else's for that matter, and just see this movie. It is exciting, engaging and rewarding. It may not be award worthy, but as far as these types of genre films go it is just about top notch, and without doubt far better than many would have you believe.