Um Sinal dos Céus

I have long been a fan of Nora Roberts, but never had the chance to see any of her work retold in a movie. It was definitely worth the wait.

I don't think the plot was altered all that much from how the story was originally told, although there were some things added or changed a bit to throw suspicion around.

The parts that were cut from the story(understandably) did not detract from the movie version - both were excellent.

I could identify with both of the lead actors as playing their characters straight from the book. Johnathon Schaech was especially good as Brody and was well matched with Heather Locklear as Reese. The other characters fit in almost as well, with some minor differences that I had pictured in my mind. But, of course, everyone sees things a bit differently.

I hope the next three movies are done as well as this one was.

OK book adaptation - acting was fine but the movie storyline was very choppy and didn't allow for real character development. Although I like Heather Locklear, I would not have cast her in this role. In the novel, Reese is a brunette in her late 20's - a Rachel McAdams-type would have better suited the part. Jonathan Schaech was decent as Brody but again the lack of character development leaves you not really caring about anybody in this movie. Overall the movie leaves out some of the best climax moments in the book and the moments that are captured in the movie seem forced and over the top. Where Nora Roberts' novel draws the reader in with realized characters and steady plot flow, this movie speeds through this sleepy Wyoming town barely giving you a real glimpse into the story itself.

I actually love this movie. Love the locations/ scenery- and the story. Is it Academy Award material? No- but it's doesn't claim to be anything then what it is- I watch it every Fall-

where the faces are different, but the underlying message is still the same. This is a brand-new movie, and yet I've seen it a thousand times before.

The last fifteen minutes of it are as predictable as a sunrise, right from the opening credits.

Can the Hollywood producers not come up with a different idea, a new ending for their so called "thriller"s? Do they still believe that this type of ending has any thrill at all, when it's been done so many times? I'm not familiar with Nora Roberts as a writer, but this looks like it could well have been written by Mary Higgins Clark, or by me, for that matter.

I wouldn't rate this higher than 4 on the Richter scale.

I am a Nora Roberts fan and this book I really loved. I think the movie is OK. Not great, but all right. At least they kept to the story. I see why it is described as a TV movie. It is made decently, but it has nothing extra.

I understand that they needed to squeeze everything in to the movie and that they had to cut some scenes. But some things could have done with some more attention. Like the scene when Reece sees the woman get killed.

Most things, like persons and scenes in the movie are the way imagined them. Most of the persons look like they are described in the book. Ther is 1 'BUT'. I usually like Heather Locklear, but giving a 46 year old woman the role of a 28 year old character is a bit of a stretch, I think.