Avis des utilisateurs

The film starts out very simple, a dead body and a kid as the most likely suspect. Toni Collette plays a psychologist trying to get an idea of whether or not he is guilty. The rest of the film is told in flashback, starting with Alex, the kid suspected, being introduced to the world of Nigel, his new roommate, who believes that he is something more than what people see him as, and he wonders if Alex may be a part of it. From there, the events leading up to Nigel's death is unraveled, leading up to the final climatic ending.

This film tries to do what several successful films have done in the past by posing a semi-twist ending. Unfortunately it falls a little short of getting there, and becoming more of an open-ended film to think about, open to your own interpretation.

Watched this because Eddie Redmayne seemed interesting in 'Savage Grace' but the film was perfectly dreadful. This again, actually his first feature film, isn't in a genre I'm at all crazy about, but, far-fetched and derivative from various sources though it is,it's still quite good for what it is. The directing has some merit, the cast is fine, the tech package (to use the Variety jargon) is first rate, and it's clever of them to adopt a cold, pale look instead of the usual chiaroscuro for spooky horror stories and also to avoid an excess of gore. This is a supernatural murder conspiracy mystery for people who don't like such stuff.

I am not of the opinion that Tom Sturridge is vastly inferior to Redmayne as some have said. The whole film would be a washout if that were true, since it's the unwilling symbiosis of the two youths that's the heart of the piece.

An excellent "making of" with the US DVD package shows Tom and Eddie are friends in real life and points out that the chemistry was evident from the first moments of a screen test. Good use is made of the spooky waxen perfection of Sturfridge's face. Tony Collette is a very good actress but often appears in overwrought roles; here, she is admirably toned down and also helps keep the movie from getting too genre or too pumped-up. Roxburgh and all the others do very creditable work and one can appreciate newcomer writer-director Read's alertness and enthusiasm. The "making of" introduces us to the main crew members and cast in interviews that are brief but feel natural. It also does an interesting job of explaining how remarkably the filmmakers fulfilled the requirements of shooting half in Australia and half in England in two opposite seasons and totally unlike landscapes and making them blend seamlessly together.

The final twist may seem just one more absurdity, but in the film's own terms it felt quite neat and right. The thing about Redmayne is, he has a chilly self-possession that is fascinating to watch in action. (In person he seems quite normal and pleasant.) It's quite worthwhile also to see somebody starring in a film about a public school who actually went to the preppiest English prep school of all, Eton. (Sturridge went to Winchester, which isn't far off.) I hope Redmayne's special talents and looks don't always lead him into films that are as campy or over-the-top as this and 'Savage Grace.' He seems to be "hot" now so he's going to have a chance to try different stuff. I'm curious to see how he does in two US productions,'The Yellow Handkerchief' and "Powder Blue.' Only time will tell if he gets good opportunities and makes good choices, but there's no doubt that he has something.

"Like minds" starts out from a very interesting and engaging premise, whereby we find the 17-year-old Alex charged with shooting his classmate Nigel dead. The police detective in charge of the case (Richard Roxburgh) firmly believes Alex is a psychopath, and asks psychologist Sally Rowe (Toni Collette) to interview him and try to get a confession from him. But Alex is a smart, mysterious and secretive kid, and Sally will quickly be intrigued enough to get personally involved in the case. Little by little, we'll find out there's much more to Nigel's death than the gunshot incident, since Alex will tell Sally that Nigel had, and still has, some strange and powerful form of mental influence on him.

The movie starts out well, but quickly goes downhill, and fast, up to a crashing finale. The first few sequences aside, it never manages to offer anything remotely close to suspense or thrill, even though you can tell it tries hard. The characters are only barely written, and, despite the writers' efforts, Alex and Nigel are little more than the stereotypical teen thriller weirdos with little depth to them. The movie fails at every thing it attempts to be: a psychological study of characters, an "original" thriller involving teenagers, a drama about teen angst in a hostile world... you name it. There are bits and pieces of all those subgenres, but the movie just goes nowhere, and does so at a killing slow pace.

I give this movie three stars because it has such good actors as Richard Roxburgh and Toni Collette (although neither is at their best here), because of the settings (very somber and well made; too bad the story wasn't at par with them) and because the idea was good.

This film tells of a criminal investigation in which a college student is arrested and accused of killing a colleague, but he defends himself by accusing another student. It seems just another police movie, but it gradually turns out to be a deep psychological thriller with a very original story, addressing issues like psychopathy, necrophilia and mental communication between people. With a constantly tense and mysterious environment, for which the dense and misty cinematography contributes to a good extent, it keeps our attention easily, with the plot passing from one mystery to another almost without giving us answers. If there is something that quickly becomes evident is the dubiousness of the story behind that boys. Truth can have more than one face. The ending is amazing and equally open. Unfortunately, script is so mysterious and open that plot holes and unreliable situations are more abundant and glaring than sardines in a school. Eddie Redmayne, Tom Sturridge and Toni Collette are the stars who lead the cast and make a very positive performance, especially the boys.

The forensic psychiatric Sally Rowe (Tony Collette) is called by Detective Martin Mackenzie (Richard Roxburgh) to analyze the profile of the teenager Alex Forbes (Eddie Redmayne), who was found in a train station holding the body of his schoolmate Nigel Colby (Tom Sturridge) and with powder in his hand. Alex discloses his relationship with Nigel, who believes that they were descendants of the Templar Knights, and how Nigel used the power of his mind to control him. Mackenzie believes that Alex is the killer, but Susan investigates the family of Nigel under pressure of Alex's father, and finds that all of them belong to an ancient and powerful secret society.

"Like Minds" is a boring and predictable movie. The character Alex is extremely intelligent, cult, cynical and psychopathic, therefore it is too obvious who the killer actually is. But the greatest problem of this screenplay is the development of the characters, which it is impossible to feel any sort of empathy for none of them with exception of Susan. In the end, it does not matter if the criminal is Nigel, Alex, his father, Mackenzie or whoever, since all of them are absolutely unpleasant. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "Mentes Diabólicas" ("Evil Minds")

For some strange reason the very fine Australian/British film LIKE MINDS underwent a name change and hit the US market as MURDEROUS INTENT. The original title is so much more apropos of the story: the alternate title tends to make the audience pass over 'just another death film' category that prevents this excellent little film from appealing to a wide audience. Writer/Director Gregory J. Reed and his talented cast and production staff deserve better as this is a stunning psychological drama well worth seeing.

The setting is an all boys' prep school and among the students is Alex (a very fine young Eddie Redmayne) who happens to be the son of the headmaster (Patrick Malahide) and is a brilliant scholar - if somewhat of a troublemaker at the same time. Into this setting arrives a new student Nigel (an equally fine young Tom Sturridge) who is a darkly quiet, malevolent, bright lad preoccupied with history and necrophilia. The two boys are placed together as roommates, much to Alex's objections, and gradually secrets are unraveled that show how the two boys become, via gestalt, a sum of evil greater than its parts. Alex is horrified and yet fascinated with the ritual-influenced deaths that begin to occur and when Nigel himself is murdered, Alex is the blamed.

Enter the police: McKenzie (Richard Roxburgh) arrests and charges Alex with murder, but requires substantiation from a forensic psychologist Sally (the always superb Toni Collette). Sally interviews Alex, observes his behavior and manages to get inside his mind, learn about the historical data that has directed the evil from her astute questioning sessions with Alex, and begins to follow her own intuition about the case. There are twists and turns, flashbacks to incidents, investigation details, and discoveries bordering on the occult that spin this dark yarn like a helix of fear. The ending will surprise the viewer.

The script is superb, the acting is top notch, the production design is accomplished and the musical score by Carlo Giacco is simply brilliant. This is a fine art film, graced by the quality of superior acting set by Collette, and is a tense drama that will keep an audience thinking and involved to the final credits. Highly Recommended. Grady Harp

I thought that this movie had great potential to be something really enthralling and special. However, I feel like it shot itself in the foot by being a bit convoluted and almost pretentious in its delivery.

The acting, while melodramatic at times, was excellent. To be expected from this cast. I do think it was too long which added to how convoluted it got. It also definitely feels and looks like it's from 2006, not a bad thing, just a thing.

I think overall this is most certainly worth a watch and I'm surprised I have never heard of it before. But at the same time I'm not, because I feel like a majority of people will watch this and go "I don't quite get what happened or why it happened". Regardless, would still recommend.

Have you ever just clicked with someone? Ever felt they just got you, like they were inside your head? But what if that link had a sinister side? What if their knowing you was involuntary? Like Minds (2006) is the tale of one such relationship; a complicated adversarial tussle between two boys bound by history, mythology and blood. But it is not your ordinary thriller.

Alex Forbes (Eddie Redmayne) is a cocky private school boy living with the mantle of his lineage. With more than charm behind his smile, he plays being son-of-the-principal to his favour where he can, but when he is forced to share his room with a beautiful and strange boy, Nigel Colby (Tom Sturridge), Alex finds himself being slowly suffocated by a string of deaths. But when these occurrences culminate in Nigel's death, Alex is taken into custody.

Lacking hard evidence and under pressure from Alex's father, Senior Detective Martin Mckenzie (Richard Roxburgh) enlists the expertise of forensic psychologist Sally Rowe (Toni Collette) to dig up foundation to the charges. Her investigations force her into an awkward and testing psychological dialogue with Alex that continues to delve deeper into mystery and murder. But even as information comes to light, the relationships between the characters prove to be as tightly woven as the rich mythology that under pins the story.

Doused in history, religion and suspense, Like Minds is disturbingly sophisticated, visually beautiful and completely captivating. The acting of Eddie Redmayne is chillingly brilliant, but by far Tom Sturridge's is the most impressive, being haunting and calculated with a cold, unemotional stare that will sink deep into you.

Nigel Bluck's cinematography is beautiful, with a saturated and dark aesthetic that is as melancholic as the soundtrack. Both add so much to the depth of Like Minds.

Like Minds is a complicated contemporary thriller with a jarring twist; hauntingly beautiful and sharp as a knife. And it certainly will cut deep.

Like Minds contains much to recommend it and much to annoy. Overall, it's well acted, atmospheric, intriguing and interesting and if you love Eddie Redmayne, here's a real treat to see him playing against type.

It's a British(specifically Yorkshire)/Australian co-pro with an apparent requirement to be shot in both locations. It's clearly set geographically in the North of England but the entire cast speak as if from the South. OK, it's set in an English public (i.e. private) school and everyone is posh - but the police also are not depicted as local and there's never a reference to where the school is supposed to be. Most jarring is that the scenes set on trains and on railway lines must have been shot in Australia because British trains look completely different and the carriage interiors just can't be in England. In a film that requires suspension of disbelief lack of authenticity in locations undermines the movie.

Toni Collette nearly passes herself off as English but her accent slips from time to time. There's no reason why she couldn't be an Australian in this role. Her part is not written up enough for her - she doesn't have any great exchanges with Eddie Redmayne, although there's an electric scene when she goes into a dark basement where she excels. However Richard Roxburgh is playing a local cop in a rural region of the UK and his accent is all over the place. He is not convincing as British. Combined with the Australian locations, the film loses impact for a British audience, which is its most obvious market, because you start thinking about its bi-national production.

The main protagonist, Eddie Redmayne gives a sterling, mesmerising lead performance that makes the film worth watching. Tom Sturridge is good too, though less beautiful, charismatic and internally haunting than he really needs to be. What they do get completely right is that teenage repressed love/hate symbiotic rivalry thing with undertones of latent homosexuality. Patrick Malahide does his usual thing as an unsympathetic headmaster and his usual thing is superb.

The film starts and ends well, but it does slip into Da Vinci Code/Harry Potter historic mumbo jumbo magic three quarters of the way through. This could be put down to the narrative being based on the deliberately fantastic flashbacks of one of the the boys or on the fantasy ideas of the other troubled teenager. That none of the boys are actually boys but played by men in their 20s again slightly undermines this as they are just too grown up and sophisticated.

But that's the plot McGuffin. The atmosphere, the photography, the tension and the plot outcome and the twists are well handled.

" Murderous Intent" is, at least to this viewer, confusing and frustrating movie. The uneasy mix of thriller and horror, lacks the necessary ingredients of both to fully belong to either camp. The atmosphere of the whole set-up seems forced and contrived, like a staged version of the unfinished play.The characters are wavering, being neither here nor there, and, as it seems,false feeling of promise abandons us completely by the end of this movie. One of the most exciting actresses of today, Toni Collette has almost nothing to do in this film. She seems as incapable to figure out what is going on in this story as most of the viewers.

This film is about two young teenage boys developing a morbid fascination with re-enacting a medieval legend.

After reading the detailed explanation of the plot on the discussion boards, I begin to make sense of the film. The plot itself is interesting, but there are quite a few problems. Nigel's speech is almost always incomprehensible, both the content and his accent are not understandable. Secondly, the non linear presentation of events make it very confusing. Thirdly, the relationship between Nigel and Alex is very ambiguous and is never fully explained. One minute Alex hates Nigel and beats him up, and the other minute they hang out with each other? So, the already complicated plot degenerates into a confusing mess of jumbled up scenes. "Like Minds" is a disappointing and confusing film.

An Uppity Prep School is the Setting for This Somewhat Creepy Psychological Story of Two Smart Students Clashing Over Issues Involving Mind Control, Secret Societies, and Historical Cult and Religious Practices.

It is a Dense and Diabolical Unfolding of Police Procedures and Eerie Encounters Involving One of the Students Being Arrested for the Murder of the Other and the Details are Told In Flashback from the Point of View of the Suspect.

Interviewing Eddie Redmayne (the aforementioned suspect), in His Debut Film, is Toni Collette as a Police Psychologist Trying to Uncover the Truth. Of Course the "Truth" is Evasive and Anything But Easy to Follow or Get a Grasp Because it is Vague and Illusive.

What Unfolds is a Complicated Tale of "Old Male Bonding" Rituals Involving Club Membership that has Existed for Centuries. Exposed in the Backdrop of the Crime/Crimes are Links to "Knights Templar", and Secret Clubs that Reach the Families of Most Everyone Involved Here, Including the Police.

The Movie Can Meander and Lose Track of Itself From Time to Time, and the Viewer May Be Confused and Disoriented, and that Seems to the Be the Point of the Mystery. Because the Participants are Manipulative and Deceiving the Investigators About the Ritualistic Crimes and it is Never Clear Who is Telling the Truth and What is Going On, by Design.

Most Casual Viewers of Crime Procedurals are Most Likely Going to Be Frustrated Because the Film is a Heavy Load and the Twists are Many and in Some Cases a Long Time Coming in This Intriguing Creepfest Layden With Mind Manipualtion and Bizarre, Grisly Murders. Worth a Watch Because it is Unusual with Wordy Explanations Combining Ancient History and Current Abnormal Psychology.

Private school limits, stuffy atmosphere, secret societies, generation issues - when all combined, you could create a plot similar to Like Minds' one. It is all interesting to watch in the beginning, but the more the events develop the more crazy and "jobbish" they become. Luckily to me, all the bad events really took place - I am not into films when something is twisted in someone' s mind and imagination.

The cast is strong and all the main stars are great: Toni Collette as Sally Rowe, Eddie Redmayne as Alex Forbes and Tom Sturridge as Nigel Colbie. Ms Collette is a real gifted star, but the two young males are worth remembering as well as their prior and later performances have demonstrated their talents.

In short, Like Minds is quite OK, but it is still no e.g. Usual Suspects. Could be interesting for younger audiences though (hopefully not as an example).

I got this DVD without knowing a thing about it, other than the fact that the cover art looked interesting, and it was an Australian production. What i saw was perhaps the most precisely weird film I have ever watched. And 'weird' is a good thing, in a time when seemingly everything has been done, and it is so hard to achieve originality. 17 year-old Alex discovers that a new guy has been placed in his dorm room at the private school which he attends. Nigel is quiet, cold, and has a preoccupation with history and pure blood lineage. He also has an obsession with dead things. He is into taxidermy, and spends most of his time gutting and stuffing animal carcasses in his room. This drives Alex crazy, however Nigel manages to insinuate himself into Alex's life, and the relationship that develops between these two guys is one of the strangest ones i have seen portrayed in cinema. Surprisingly Miramax has purchased the rights to this film. Surprisingly because, although "Like Minds" is a fine, and very special movie, it is doubtful that it will have a commercial success in the states, as it is just too dark, murky and off-beat for most mainstream movie-goers. It is also quite morbid. However i can see this one developing a cult following among fans of strange and sinister films. The cinematography is beautiful, and the scenes with Nigel and Alex are mesmerizing. There were of course, a few scenes that were not quite as effective. Mainly the ones that focused on Toni Collette's character, as a criminal psychologist. A couple scenes made the movie look like it might turn into another average murder mystery thriller. But those moments are few and far between, as the film refuses to be predictable, or normal in any way. The story becomes more bizarre, and more fascinating as it goes forward, and a couple plot twists really blew me away. And the character of Nigel, as portrayed by Tom Sturridge, was evil and menacing, and his pale, haunted look made for perfect casting. Eddie Redmayne as Alex was no less compelling. There were some really nice touches, and a couple tributes paid to other classic films about evil. Such as the rotweiller that protects Nigel, very much like the demonic dogs who protected Damian in the classic "Omen." And a grisly murder, featuring a young woman crucified with two rowing oars crossed. A similar ritual murder that featured in William Peter Blatty's 'Exorcist III." Oddly there is no one that the audience is urged to sympathize with, as both boys are very cold and unfriendly. Another fact that makes this so different from a Hollywood production. "Like Minds" is a very strange and unique film. I imagine that many people will hate this, and others, mainly those with a fixation on the darker sides of the human soul, will find it fascinating.

Eddie Redmayne's first film was 2006's "Like Minds" (aka "Murderous Intent") which could have been an excellent Brit psychological thriller (especially with Redmayne's fine lead performance) but writer / director Gregory Read lost his way over its last third or so, as it ground to a sluggish stop (perhaps explaining why it's his only film). Arrested for the shotgun murder of schoolmate Tom Sturridge (meh), Redmayne then explains (via flashbacks etc) to psychologist Toni Collette how his almost supernatural relationship with Sturridge led to this death... and others. It had the ingredients to be a terrific movie, but disappointingly that's not what Read delivered.

Yet another weird psychological thriller added to the collection. Nobody talks in clear sentences. Everything the characters say is cryptic and vague and spooky. Nobody can just answer a damn question straightforward. "Did you kill so and so?" Answer: "Did you know back in 1209 the Pope did this and that and the other thing in the Vatican?" Can't anyone in movies act or speak normally?

Pure torture. I'm tired of these movies with "shocking" twists that we have to wait for at the end. We're still feeling the effects of the Sixth Sense 10 years later. The Sixth Sense is done let's move on. Toni Collette is prominently featured on the DVD box as if she's the main character. Of course another blatant lie as she's barely in the movie. She's a good actress but she couldn't save this because she wasn't in it enough. The two boys in the clichéd boarding school in a clichéd rainy foggy English countryside are clichéd gay I assume. I'm not sure what their attraction was to each other because as I said, nobody acts like a normal human being or says a normal human sentence so we have to guess what these two weirdos are about. Nobody notices that the one boy is a raving psychopath who dissects animals. This doesn't bother anyone at the school. Why? How could the people who made this movie let that happen? Nobody on the set mentioned how unrealistic that is? The story that I barely paid any attention to moved at a glacial pace.

Here's my advice to people who make movies. Make a normal movie about normal people saying normal things. People like those movies. Here's some examples: Sideways. Beyond Sunset. Adaptation. Even the 40 Year Old Virgin is better than this. There aren't too many examples because most people suck at making movies. Enough with the overly weird cryptic spooky creepy crap.

A friend of mine in France suggested I watch this movie seeing as I enjoyed Sturridge's (Nigel) performance in "A Waste of Shame" and was pleasantly surprised considering all the duds I've seen lately.

What I thought started out to be one of those moody, atmospheric boarding-school inter-relationship art-house melodramas turned into a well-done, well-photographed and well-written and for sure well-acted engrossing movie -- far from being dull as some others have commented -- with just enough little plot twists without going over the top and leaving the audience totally confused. Sometimes these told-in-flashback movies don't turn out too well because there's oftentimes not enough information supplied during the rest of the movie to support the big surprise at the end: you feel cheated and tricked because you didn't see it coming. Not so here. If you pay attention and watch closely, you're not at all surprised by the closing scene on the train, and think it was inevitable.

The chemistry between the two leads, Alex and Nigel, is a treat in itself to witness, more so because the developing relationship builds slowly instead of Nigel winning Alex over to his train of thought right off the bat: you're never sure if Nigel won.

Watch this movie, you'll enjoy it. Believe me, it's far from dull.

This movie was a wild ride, but you know what? It could have been a lot wilder if only the script had chosen to go all the way. As it is, it's just a very weird movie that doesn't really deliver. I still recommend it though, because it will probably be considered a cult in the future.

This movie starts well. The actors are all good, the camera-work beautiful, the setting Romantic, the plot plausible if unoriginal. As other reviewers have noted, things begin to unravel about halfway, and by the end the movie would be laughable if it weren't so unpleasant. What begins as a psychological thriller soon degenerates into blatant homophobia. This is either justified or not, depending on your perspective, but little is learned about the experience of being gay either way. Instead, the movie bombards the viewer with crude stereotypes: gay love as an English public school, gay love as corruption, gay love as a secret cult, gay love as narcissism, gay love as misogyny, gay love as Gothic perversion, gay love as a lie and a cheat. At one point I almost expected to Monty Python's Flying Circus to arrive and sing "I'm a Lumberjack." Now, I'm not gay, or even P.C., but the commonplaces in this film are not only unilluminating but downright bigoted. No audience would tolerate the nonsense of associating secret cults and conspiracies and special powers with Jews. Why should they tolerated it with Gays?