सैन जुआन का एक अमीर वकील एक पार्क में 12 साल की लड़की का मृत शरीर पाए जाने के सिलसिले में "10 मिनट" की पूछताछ के लिए पुलिस स्टेशन आता है. हफ्तों पहले एक अन्य छोटी लड़की के साथ भी बलात्कार कर... सभी पढ़ेंसैन जुआन का एक अमीर वकील एक पार्क में 12 साल की लड़की का मृत शरीर पाए जाने के सिलसिले में "10 मिनट" की पूछताछ के लिए पुलिस स्टेशन आता है. हफ्तों पहले एक अन्य छोटी लड़की के साथ भी बलात्कार कर उसकी हत्या कर दी गई थी और सबूत उसकी ओर इशारा करते हैं.सैन जुआन का एक अमीर वकील एक पार्क में 12 साल की लड़की का मृत शरीर पाए जाने के सिलसिले में "10 मिनट" की पूछताछ के लिए पुलिस स्टेशन आता है. हफ्तों पहले एक अन्य छोटी लड़की के साथ भी बलात्कार कर उसकी हत्या कर दी गई थी और सबूत उसकी ओर इशारा करते हैं.
- पुरस्कार
- 2 कुल नामांकन
- Maria Rodriguez
- (as Jackeline Duprey)
- Reina
- (as Sahyly Yamile)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Everyone loves a good thriller so it was a surprise to me how quickly this film with it's heavy-weight cast managed to slip through the UK cinemas almost unnoticed. There is nothing significantly wrong with it to justify the low box office it seemed to generate, so I'm not sure why it happened. The story is set, for unknown reasons, in San Juan, a fact that is only distracting as none of the principals are Puerto Rican and their presence there is never really settled. Anyway, the film is very much a play that is carried by the two main characters. The revelations and movement of the plot is engaging and it is great fun to watch. The ending is difficult though - we are taught to expect a certain type of ending in this sort of film and it is slightly disappointing when it doesn't come.
I expected a big twist and, in a way, that happened but the fall out from it isn't well explained by the film and a lot is left for you to think about. In that respect it is difficult, again because we are not expecting that type of ending but also that it is quite hard to understand as it is very tied up in the emotions of complex characters - complexities that we having been watching because we've only been seeing them as `twists' and revelations. That said, I still enjoyed the ending and thought it was brave to be different - just a shame it was badly handled.
The cast are roundly great and are a big reason that the film remains gripping. Hackman and Freeman are great actors and having them both in the same film was enough of a draw to get me watching. The vast majority of their scenes are shared and they interact together really, really well when it comes to the dramatics. What they don't do as well is convince that they really are old friends. Jane is good but his character is far too simplistic and brash. Bellucci is better than I have seen her, but she is a little too wound up emotionally. She is very good looking and I was glad that the film didn't just trade on that, but it didn't (or couldn't) get a great deal out of her.
The director manages to add energy and style to what could have been a rather contain piece (like a play). Visually it is exciting but, looking back, it was more important to develop character than deliver a slick thriller - something he didn't do well at all. The ending is weak because it takes thought, as we have not been forced to look at the complex characters. It was Hopkins' job to make us do that but he can't manage it.
Overall this is an enjoyable film that will frustrate many with the ending. Despite being a clever and different conclusion, it doesn't really work because of the director making the wrong sort of film to suit that ending. However for the vast majority it really works and the strength of the two lead performances mean that, for all it's flaws, this is never a dull film.
The material may not be worthy and the directing style is poor. This is a four-handed play with four great actors. There is good possibilities but ultimately, the story is unsatisfying. This deserves more cinematic style. It may be compelling for completists but for everybody else, these actors have been in better.
There was a strange case here where the movie was a different type of movie to what I thought it was, but I didn't realise that until the final five minutes of the film. I won't say any more to avoid spoilers, however if you've seen it you likely know what I mean by that. I liked the mystery element the movie had going for it. I enjoyed playing along to see if I could work out what was happening. I could not, but it was still a fun ride.
For a movie with very little in the way of action, it still moves along at a brisk pace. Some well written dialogue and how well it is delivered helps in big part on this front. It didn't turn out to be the movie I wanted it to be, but it was still a fun journey along the way, and it's hard to be mad at that. 7/10.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाRemake of Garde à vue (1981), directed by Claude Miller with Lino Ventura, Michel Serrault and Romy Schneider.
- गूफ़Chantal Hearst spits on the one-way mirror When the mirror is seen again, her spit has disappeared.
- भाव
Captain Victor Benezet: Go home. Put on a funny hat. Do whatever it is morons do.
टॉप पसंद
- How long is Under Suspicion?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $2,50,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $2,60,562
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $1,09,863
- 24 सित॰ 2000
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $13,08,242
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 50 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.85 : 1