L'assassino è tra di noi

Some people who are voting must work for the studio because this film is not as exemplary as everyone is giving it credit for. People who have previously commented have heralded this as the next great mystery, a "thriller," and a complex script with an inspired cast. This film is none of that, it is mindless droll, it is the type of movie you view on the Lifetime Network, and it is not worth anybody's time. I understand some of you out there are desperate to see the resurrection of C. Thomas Howell's career (for the brief period he had one), but that is never going to happen. I'm sorry. I apologize and you have my deepest sympathies, because the only way Mr. Howell can get back in sight of an audience is if he stars on some SciFi Network original program. Then he can go to conventions and your delusions of him being talented and famous will come true, because you will see him signing autographs for an overweight 42 year old men wearing elf ears standing next to their mothers. This script is so horrible my friend and I picked out plot holes from the plot summary! The flashback sequences are cliché, taking absolutely no unique route for presenting them, and don't get me started on the photography! I mean come on, they shot it like it was going straight to TV! There is one plus side though...Sean Young somehow manages to still look good at her age. Aside from that, the film is horrendous. To those who have already seen this film, I apologize. To those who haven't, you will never forgive yourself for wasting your time and money. I saw it for free and was still upset! Please spare yourself, and your children if you can.

Addison (C. Thomas Howell, whom if he's one of the main stars in ANY post 1986 movie is going to suck) who after finding out that his wife has been murdered and being the prime suspect, attempts to catch the real killer. Vargas (Giancarlo Esposito) is an ex-cop who was disgraced by Addison, who comes along to help him reluctantly. This is a typical run of the miller thriller, no more, no less. The ending is a silly. The acting is pretty bad by Howell and even more so from a wasted Ben "Farscape" Browder.All in all, very VERY forgettable. Or maybe that's just me being hopeful again.

My Grade: D+

Eye Candy: Sean young gives a quick full frontal

Very predictable with not much of a trick at the end. The beginning was very clumsy, even embarrassing, direction and not being able to grasp a good performance out of any of his actors, even the much under-rated Sean Young. Mr. Esposito later saved any interest in the movie. Cable then the video store is where this belongs, the director should watch Chinatown. Dallas offers much for a real noir, but this is not it. It is hard for a new director to engage this kind of film with any originality. The genre has been repeated many times , yet it is still valid. Walter Mosely can do it by writing. Donald Goines did it. Polanski did it. The Usual Suspects did it. Time is one thing, but realizing place, a real understanding of local, is another.

I got the pre-screener of this DVD, being a huge Ben Browder fan, and let me just say that he was my favorite part of this film.

For obviously such a small budgeted film, I think the producers did well getting the cast that they got.

It looks pretty good, and at least you can tell this was shot on film. The plot reminds me of something you might have wacthed in the 80's.

It's not gonna win any awards, but the acting is above standard, and there are some nice touches, such as crane shots and fight sequences that play well.

If you like any of these actors(C Thomas Howell, Sean Young, Dedee Pfieffer), it's worth the rental. The underused Giancarlo Esposito is the "stand out". I wish we would see more of him these days.

Typical thriller with a twist at the end.

A 6 out of 10.

The movie was decent. Kind of shallow in some of the acting and I question how the brother(?) was able to act as an attorney when he didn't seem like an acting attorney but as a paralegal instead. My biggest question, however, is about the item on the fireplace mantel. What is that object in between the candles? Is that male genitalia? Who puts that on their fireplace? Was that intended or was it a reference to something? Was this made for TV? It cracks me up a little bit.

Aside from that strange, burning question that others must have missed, I also question why an attorney would offer up so much information to the police as he did. He should have known that bringing up wanting children would have made the cops ask more questions.