Prova de Vida

While I would probably reccomend seeing the epic Gladiator (one of the best films of the year as I now see it) if you want a case of Russell Crowe as a perfectionist actor, if you want to see a movie with him in good form (and in the cinema now), this is good too. With him in the lead, plus 2 other really good performances, it almost (and almost) seems like there are no flaws.

The plot follows an expert K & R consultant (Crowe in great acting shape), who goes in assistance for a wife (Meg Ryan in one of her better roles) who's husband (David Morse who follows up and tops his Dancer in the Dark performance) has been kidnapped. Then the thrilling tension ensues, as they try and get him back. With the few flaws possibly being not enough tension and not the greatest delivery I expected, it definately hits the mark on It's acting and delivery (and what an ending). By the way, if you are looking for Crowe's famous Australian accent, then this is surely for you. B+

Maureen O'Hara stars in a movie where her husband gets kidnapped those damn commies in South East Asia so she hires tough and dashing soldier of fortune Clark Gable to save the day

That's not the cast or the location of PROOF OF LIFE but it does have a very similar plot . Did someone mention this was a 1940s matinée blockbuster ? Just curious because while I was watching the movie I was struck by how old fashioned everything felt . Russell Crowe plays an Aussie who served in the SAS and saves a Frenchman from the Chechens in the opening sequence , but you could have had Gable playing an American paratrooper saving someone from the Red Army on the River Elbe in May 1945 . Different actor , different period of history , different enemy but still the same basic story with the action switching from Europe to say South East Asia in 1950

That's not to say PROOF OF LIFE is a bad film . It's not and I found it mainly entertaining though perhaps a little too long . It's just that it is so old fashioned that you can see where the predictable story threads are going to begin and end . You can't deny that both the cast and action scenes are good , it's just that you also can't stop thinking it would have been better if it'd been filmed in monochrome and directed by Michael Curtiz with no bad language or sexual references

Proof of Life might well satisfy those more knowledgeable in real-life military matters. When Terry (Crowe) explains to Alice (Ryan) how he started out in the Australian Army, but left for the British Army because there wasn't enough action...he was stating a very plausible possibility. The British Army does indeed accept recruits from Commonwealth nations. Terry also says he is veteran of the elite British Special Air Service, and again, it is true that a huge proportion of ex-SAS members end up in private security efforts of various kinds. When the big raid is carried off, the costumers took enough care to dress Terry in British DPM fatigues, while the American Dino (Caruso) wears American BDU fatigues. Again, this is plausible as these are the sorts of fatigues both men took with them when they left military service. I've seen a lot of reviewers here criticize the end raid sequence.

I found the actions scenes very good and a welcome change from most movies. Terry and Dino actually plan for covering fire from higher ground, fields of fire, etc. So many military raids in movies (The Dogs of War is a good example) just have the characters march out in the open and fire from the hip, with no seeming plan of movement other than to run around, destroy stuff, and look dramatic. Terry and his team never stuck around any longer, nor killed any more of the guerrillas, then necessary to rescue the hostages and escape.

I can see where these details failed to find appreciation with the general viewing public, but I only hope others doing such movies continue to try to be authentic and realistic.

Its an OK movie overall. There is no arguing that Russel Crowe has some charisma in this film. And Meg Ryan... is Meg Ryan and really not a good fit. Overall not anything to get that excited about. But the action sequences, both when Peter is captured and the film ending hostage rescue sequence in my opinion are some of the greatest and most accurate in film. Not perfect, this is a movie so some creative/dramatic license was taken, but way above par compared to most any other film I can think of with very rare exception. Its pretty clear that they had a rare combination of fantastic military consultants along with a director and cinematographer willing to listen and make the most of it. Tactics, equipment, effects (with obligatory gasoline added to explosions...), even hand signals, how the guerrilla's operate... Spot on! Quite the rarity and very refreshing.

Really can't say enough good things about the action sequences. Movie is worth seeing just for this. The rest... meh.

Peter and Alice Bowman are working on a dam in South America in the employment of a large oil company. When Peter is kidnapped the company bring in expert negotiator Terry Thorne. However when the oil company runs out of money due to no insurance, they take Terry off the case and he leaves for another job. However a pang of conscience brings him back to help Alice and he replaces the corrupt locals. As he tries to help get her husband back he also falls for Alice.

As a fan of David Caruso, I was annoyed that I missed this film at the cinema (I blinked and I missed it!) and by the time the video came out it had slipped my mind. Shown of tv last night was the perfect time for me to see it and, despite negative reviews, I actually quite enjoyed it. I think the problem is that the critics struggled to get past the handful of problems (more later) to find that the film was an effective, if talky, drama with a thriller edge. The premise is good and it allows tense scenes where Terry tough talks as well as scenes with Peter with his captors. It's not perfect in this regard as it is a bit talky but for me it was engaging - I got the impression from other comments that people had expected raging gun battles all the way through the film.

However what does damage the film is Alice Bowman. I can see the potential behind Terry and Alice's romance - it could have been another layer of drama. In reality it doesn't work a bit and only serves to take away from the main thrust of the film - their relationship never convinces and nothing of interest is actually done with it. Likewise the character of Alice doesn't really work either - I never believed she was emotionally going through the wringers to the degree the script suggested she would be. A big part of the blame for this must lie with Meg Ryan herself. She is miscast in the first place, but on top of that she is too pristine throughout the film - hair and makeup perfect no matter what and a stupid little hippie-girl personality that stops her being a real person. It is a bad performance and the film would have benefited from a shorter running time which lost the romance subplot and scaled back on Ryan's time.

However she is carried by a real star turn from Crowe. It may not be that clever a role but he does `tough' really well and he helps improve the tension of several scenes. Morse is a good actor and he does well here. The only downside of his performance is that he seemed fit and well outside of his makeup; I was looking for him to look thinner and mentally battered as the film progressed but he didn't - it's not his fault, I guess the film had no time to do this. Caruso gives the same tough performance he does in every thing he ever does so if you like that then you'll like him here - I do!

Overall this is an enjoyable film if you can get past it's major problems surrounding Alice and Terry's relationship. Script-wise this aspect was weak on paper, but a comparatively rubbish turn from the miscast Meg Ryan just makes it all the weaker. Thank god that the basic premise is tense and the male leads' tough talking is good fun.