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 |
|---|
Canada
Movie Reviews of Proof of Life
Movie Review: Screenwriter Tony Gilroy Insulted Audience's Intelligence
Summary: 4 Stars
Russell Crowe is truly one of the greatest actors of our era. His very presence virtually guarantees a film worth seeing. Nevertheless, "Proof of Life" was definitely not a box office winner. It may even have lost money. Why did this happen? After all, "Proof of Life" was released later in the same year as the fabulously successful "Gladiator" and also co-starred a number of notable actors like Meg Ryan, David Morse, and David Caruso. How much blame should be directed at screen writer Tony Gilroy who insulted the audiences intelligence with the infantile character portrayed by Meg Ryan?Crowe's 1999 film "The Insider" focussed solely upon the immorality of the companies marketing tobacco products. The movie was fair and balanced, and definitely not a per se attack upon our capitalist economy. This, however, is regretfully not what occurred in "Proof of Life." The wife of the kidnapped victim is depicted as an pampered former hippie who embraces an immature and unsophisticated grasp of economic reality. She utterly fails to comprehend how the expansion of capitalist investment is mandatory if poverty is ever to be eradicated in the Third World. Throughout the film we had to endure the wife's mindless comments on matters she knew little about. I personally got to the point where I cringed every time Meg Ryan came onto the screen. The very premise of "Proof of Life" seems to imply that oil companies are innately evil. This supposed fact is so self explanatory that nothing further needs to be added. Tony Gilroy apparently believes that politically correct hitting below the belt extremist Liberalism is the appropriate way to create a film script. That movie goers stayed away in droves should give Gilroy and the producers of "Proof of Life" something to think about.
Why didn't David Morse receive an supporting actor's Academy Award nomination for his splendid performance of the kidnapped husband? It irritates me to no end to see great work ignored likely because the film failed to attract long lines at the box office. Meg Ryan did the best she could considering the awful lines provided to her by Gilroy. David Curuso filled in admirably as Thorne's (Crowe) mercenary comrade. Why is Curuso unable to make the leap as a leading man? I can't put my finger on it, but so far Caruso does much better as a supporting actor. The subject matter of hostage taking is also very timely. This is a growing crisis in every area of our planet. It is a relatively easy way for criminals and political ideologues to acquire substantial funds. "Proof of Life" does a fine job in revealing the mindset of these despicable groups. I have no problem recommending this movie. One must merely grit their teeth whenever the Alice Bowman character makes an appearance. This film is unfortunately doomed to be seen only by the true fans of Russell Crowe. It deserves far more adulation and respect, but the damage resulting from Tony Gilroy's ultra left-wing script is too overwhelming. Is "Proof of Life" a five star movie? No, but it still earns four stars because of the acting greatness of both Russell Crowe and David Morse.
Movie Review: Not a bad movie at all!!
Summary: 4 Stars
I don't undersand why this movie was mutilated so badly by the critics...it's not a bad movie! I'm not saying that it is perfect. In fact I'm not even saying its great, but it is still more intelligent and interesting than most of the stuff that's out there nowadays. I'm going to try to explain the levels at which this movie works well and the levels at which it fails.First off, it fails as a love story. It tries to develop the forbidden love relationship between Crowe and Ryan but falls flat in that regard. Their feelings for one another are never truly portrayed in depth enough to make an effective love story. And personally I find it ridiculous that they could have Meg Ryan's character so distressed and preoccupied with saving her beloved husband who is in dire jeopardy while at the same time falling for Russell Crowe. Can you imagine having the state of mind and desire to cheat on your spouse when he/she is being held hostage by terrorists and you are the only person who can do anything to get him/her back safely? Its possible I guess, but it seems unlikely. But this is the only major criticism I have of this movie. Now, let me tell you why its good! First of all, it gives a very interesting and accurate portrayal of the turbulent nature of certain areas in the world today. It gives the viewer a very up close taste of third world terrorism and violence. What "Traffic" did to portray the North American narcotics trade, "Proof of Life" does for Kidnap & Ransom terrorism. This is one of those films I think people should see if for nothing else, then as an informative portrayal of some of the uglier aspects of our world as it is today. It even takes a bit of time to explain that much of the increased corruption and instability is a result of the Cold War ending. I found these aspects of the film very interesting. David Morse's desperate situation as the terrorists' hostage is portrayed very well. Although this film isn't intended as a pure action movie at all, it culminates in a high risk covert rescue mission led in by Russell Crowe once it becomes obvious that all other options to save Morse's life are gone. And this was definitely my favorite part of the movie! From a military perspective, the planning, insertion and tactical execution of a covert operation is one of the best, most accurate portrayals I've seen in a modern film. If you find this kind of thing interesting, you will really appreciate the attention to detail in "Proof of Life". When it gets down to it, this film isn't going to please everybody. If you want to see a dramatic love story, this isn't going to do it for you. If you want to see a Hollywood rock n'roll action flick, this isn't going to do it for you. But if the subject matter interests you, or if you are a fan of Tom Clancy type real world fiction, you won't be disappointed.
Movie Review: A Solid Movie
Summary: 4 Stars
First of all i have to mention that i saw this movie both in the theater and on DVD. And, suprisingly, i enjoyed it more on DVD format. The reason is actually that seeing it on the small screen makes you pay attention on the slightly different aspects (believe me, it happens to EVERY movie). The splendid scenery that seemed (to most critics and the public) to be the main star of Proof Of Life in the cinema steps aside on the small screen and gives a viewer a better chance to examine the script, the directing and the acting.Well i'm not going to say that script and directing suddenly proved themself to be WAY better. But... as it appeared to me, at least, they have also some highlights. Mr. Hackford isn't a great director but he's a very experienced and a qualitative one. Alas, he isn't a great storyteller either. That's why he coudn't improve the weak script full of unexplained holes. This doesn't come to say that the scriptwriter shoudn't take his share of guilt in the movie's critical failure. But he did manage to provide some powerful scenes with believable dialog. And overall, inspite some loughable potrayal of the terrorists, anti-capitalist attacks, unbelievable romance, etc., they both succeded to create some authencity of the situation. Something i, personally, rarely can find in a Hollywood (and, let's be honest - any kind of) movie.
Acting... Well everything is already said by other reviewers. Meg Ryan's is weak, David Morse's ranges from OK to powerful, David Caruso perfectly nailes his role and i'm one of the few who liked Pamela Reed as well. Russell Crowe is one of the rare actors whose perfomance the more seen - more appreciated and he is the main reason for the additional star i gave to POL, 'cos otherwise it would be 3 stars only.
Make no mistake - it's a drama. Some of you may find it boring. There's some action (which is quite good though) and some hinted romance (mostly in Russell Crowe's eyes only) but the movie definitely not about them. It's about kidnapp and ransome business. It's about how your life can be turned into the nightmare during one beautiful morning and how you can do nothing about it. Because it's already a very scrutine and boring procedure throughout the world - without any Rambo coming to rescue in crucial moment. And all you can do is wait, mostly for the miracle. Because in real life Terry Thorne won't come back and save you (at least not for the reasons stated in the film).
But hey, it's only a movie, after all. And it's a very solid one. It deserves a look and you'll enjoy it if you're in the mood for serious and qualitative drama, even if doesn't extend any genre dimensions. But it may make your evening in the warm armchair relaxing in front of your TV set. And remember - you have a huge advantage of "playing forward" the tape in the Meg Ryan's scenes.
Movie Review: Nice Ode to Russell's Muscles
Summary: 4 Stars
I'll be tactful enough to refrain from discussing the real-life drama surrounding Meg Ryan and Russell Crowe that began on the set of this movie, as there has been more than enough said. The storyline and acting were believable, the scenes of Ecuador lush and beautiful, and the sexual tension between Ryan's frail-looking but steely Alice Bowman and Crowe's cool-as-a-cucumber Terry Thorne is the engine that makes this story run.The story centers on the kidnapping of Alice's engineer husband Peter in the fictional country of Tecala, and on Thorne's attempts to retrieve him. It is a journey that an audience can feel they have taken along with those involved, and it makes us wonder how we'd fare in similar circumstances.
As the victim, David Morse is frightened and cautious, but doesn't always refrain from expressing hostility towards his captors. Helped by a crazed missionary, he proved to be plucky and rescourceful.
David Caruso's Dino is the comic relief of the movie but smooth as cream when assisting Terry.
Pamela Reed is Peter's anxious sister who comes to Tecala to lend support to her sister-in-law. Interestingly, she and Peter didn't get along, but we see the strenghth of family ties in a moment of crisis from watching her.
Sarahi Echverria's Cinta is the emotionally fragile housekeeper who is instrumental in identifying the the mastermind behind the kidnapping.
The casual chatter between Terry and Alice is a pleasant and poignant diversion. Crowe displays a certain strength when consoling women and a certain pensive charm when listening to Alice's story of a personal loss. When Caruso mentions a comical incident involving Terry, Crowe momentarily lights up with laughter, flashing pearl-like teeth from a delicately crafted mouth, almost lighting up the room a bit more brightly than the candles being used to combat a power failure. Ryan's amusement at that moment has a frail majesty to it.
Apparently, at some point in a Crowe flick, there is usually an obligatory display of his powerful looking arms that are as thick as tree trunks. Scenes of him in his black tank top were/are used to hawk this movie, of course, and they were brief, but very effective.
We follow the movie to its poignant and slightly humourous conclusion, during which Thorne once more proves to be an astute miltary man, and Bowman gets to take a shot at his tormentors.
Ultimately, Thorne proves to be an honorable man as well, renouncing Alice once he completes his task.
I have to wonder about the accuracy of this movie as far as the kidnap and ransom trade is concerned. But if I haven't really learned anything new about hostage negotiations, my curiousity has been stimulated.
Movie Review: A very under-rated film!
Summary: 4 Stars
I hate when a film fails in the box office due to off screen antics versus actually sucking. It still baffles me that 'Dukes of Hazzard' can overtake 'Cinderella Man' in the box office, all because Russell Crowe has a temper. WHO CARES!!! Cinderella Man was and is a far better movie. Now this brings me to 'Proof of Life' which failed in the box office mostly due to the offscreen affair between Meg Ryan and Russell Crowe. Now rumers circulated that it was Russell Crowe who ended the marriage of Dennis Quaid and Meg Ryan, although Ryan claims that their marriage was already on shakey grounds. Again, WHO CARES!!! This movie is still a great movie, a great plot and some equally impressive acting. WHile not Crowes best performance he still puts his heart and soul into Terry, a H&R negotiator (Kidnap and Ransom)...anyways...the story is like this. Alice (Ryan) and Peter have a rocky marriage. They are at ends with each other because Peter is to involved in his work that he neglects his wife. he's never around and when he is he's always preoccupied with getting his dam built. That is all until he is kidnapped and held ransom by a group of terrorists in South America. That is where Terry comes into play. He is sent to help negotiate Peters safe return. There are a few plot twists and it ends up that Terry is doing this mission seperate from his company (kinda probono). The movie realy revolves around the emotions of the charactors. You know, I feel it's unfair to feel that Meg Ryans charactor is unsympatetic because of the assumed affair between Alice and Terry. As the beginning of the film helped us see, her husband didn't pay any attention to her, and that is one of the main reasons that women leave their husbands in the first place, not because they don't love their husbands but because they don't feel their husbands love them and find that love in the eyes of a strager who gives them attention. Like Terry did, just by asking the name of her dead daughter, like she says "no ones ever asked me that before". I thought that this movie was very well done, and is worth a watch even if you aren't pleased with the off screen lives of the actors, it doesn't change the fact that they deliver above par on screen. The only, and I mean only, reason that I did not give this movie 5 stars is the fact that it is all to common to rate a movie R for no apparent reason. This movie has very little violence and NO sex (although a sex scene between Crowe and Ryan would have been welcome) and the only reason for an R rating is the unnessisary F-Word use...if only these words were ommited then my children could watch this great film!