A Sombra do Medo

This past Sunday evening while waiting for SIX FEET UNDER to start, & having nothing better to do & being a JAMES SPADER fan I watched this.

This is a very confusing film, hard to understand for a few reasons. 3/4 this of the dialog is incomprehensible due to the fact that an annoying music score is heard that was louder than the actors voices. Many times the actors spoke so low I doubt that the actors they were speaking to heard them.

Matt Davis, a newcomer(very good looking) is the lead performer, SORRY TO SAY HE NEEDDS ACTING LESSONS. James Spader, Peter Coyote & Aiden Quinn all accomplished actors in other movies do not shine here.All the actresses seem to walk through there roles.

At 88 minutes it is very long. I cannot remember it being shown in theatres when it was released in July 2004

rating IMDb 4/10 ** out 4 53 points/100

I liked this movie. I even watched it a second time so that I could catch the little things I missed the first time around. I suppose it was a lame plot with lame actors (average B movie), but I liked it. James Spader plays his usual sleaze-ball rich guy and as usual, he does so quite well. I thought he was pretty tricky in the way he trapped society's best. I have to admit I was a bit confused the first time through as to the exact purpose of the Tuesday meetings--things became clearer as the movie progressed. Overall I thought the "secret Tuesday society" was a pretty cool (albeit sick) idea. The ending was very cool and worth the wait. I love murder mysteries and this was a good smooth-flowing storyline.

I felt quite at a loss after this movie. I wondered and wondered, remembering fine details that might contain some important clue for the story. There might be, but I found none. So I concluded either it may be a very intelligent mystery thriller, or it may be just pure crap. So when they showed the film again four days later I began to see it again and found it intolerable after 30 minutes.

I don't know just what the screenwriter was thinking. Same old premises, average locations, predictable camera angles and not-too-bad acting. You can't make a masterpiece out of this. Probably the director or screenwriter set a goal too high. Well, James Spader as an actor is always nice to watch and here's no exception. But the others were below average (especially Robin Tunney). Really, I expected the film not very good, but I didn't know I won't get the story at all.

"Shadow of Fear" draws upon the elements of suspense from the famous genre of film noir. It also shares similarities to films from earlier decades in "The Brotherhood of the Bell" (1970) and "The Star Chamber" (1983). All three films focus on a secret male society that goes outside the law to protect the interests and advance the agendas of its members. I admired director Rich Cowan's camera angles and stylish cinematography in "Shadow of Fear." There was also good suspense sustained in the mysteries activities of the secret club.

At the heart of the action is the character of Harrison French, admirably played by Matthew Davis. Harrison is caught in a web of intrigue after an unfortunate incident of manslaughter while driving in a blinding rain. He is subsequently manipulated by the ringleader of the secret brotherhood, performed with great relish by James Spader. The cast is rounded out with veteran actors Peter Coyote and Aidan Quinn, along with good support from Robin Tunney, Alice Krige, and Lacey Chabert.

Beyond the effective and suspenseful plot, I was especially intrigued by the consistently morose and clinically depressed cast of characters. Despite the great affluence portrayed in the film, the main characters all suffered from guilt for their past conduct and by the obsession of keeping their skeletons in the closet, through assistance of Spader's oily attorney, William Ashbury. It is especially revealing when throughout the film, the protagonist Harrison is chomping on prescription antidepressant medication in order to cope with even the slightest setback.

In "The Brotherhood of the Bell" and "The Star Chamber," the secret society went outside the lines of society's ethics in the pursuit of such concepts as "truth" and "justice." By contrast, in "Shadow of Fear," there were no redeeming ideals as the members of the society sought only to cover up one another's past transgressions. Literally, no one seemed happy in this film. Not even the powerful attorney Ashbury could remedy their sorry state of depression.

"Shadow of Fear" has some pretty good production values for a low budget direct to DVD movie. It also has some decent acting by the various participants on the screen. Unfortunately, it's hard to build any enthusiasm for the rest of the movie. The story elements and the characters are often so murky that it's hard to understand what is going on at times. It's like starting a novel at chapter 3, since a lot of the elements in the movie movie go are never explained at all. Some elements are (eventually) explained, but much of the movie remains confusing. What went wrong here? Since I find it hard to believe that production would go ahead on an incoherent screenplay, I suspect that the original cut of the movie ran a lot longer, and when the movie was subsequently cut down to run at a more reasonable length, a lot of explanation was removed. It's too bad, because there are signs that the original cut would have been engaging despite its length. You'd be better off waiting for a director's cut instead of watching the movie as it is right now.