Um Crime Passional

Follows similar story of 1981's Body Heat.

Could tell the director's decisions were aiming to have some sort of artistic value added but were questionable and fell short of the desired effect - odd transitions, meaningless scenes, forced music, and long scenes with dialogue that felt redundant failing to move the story forward.

Hard to root for or get attached to any of the characters - none of them felt real, all kind of forced stereotypes. Each of the main characters (Diane Kruger and Ray Nicholson) were equally mysterious, but didn't feel like any substance between them, just physical attraction. The dialogue and decisions they made felt more like a Hollywood creation than anything based on reality or logical thinking.

Side characters were pretty good. The boyfriend (Yousef Abu-Taleb) at the end stole the movie for me and felt like the only real character in entire story. Parole officer (Hank Azaria) was good, his intro scene playing the role of a no non-sense tough cop was over the top. The deputy (Fred Weller) was even more over the top, but felt more in-line with the spiteful, I am the law, kinda persona a cop on a power-trip gives off.

Entire time watching, felt like a different take on Body Heat. Want to again mention weird transitions - if the director.(Neil. LaBute) reads this, what are you doing??

The movie is well filmed, well played (even if it is not well-written) but makes no sense and has a plot that is weak to say the least.

There are screen cards telling you the time that passes between each scene as in silent movies. I understand the intention : this is not reality but an interpretation of it by the main character. It does not work because these cards are there every two minutes. They become very annoying and cut the fluidity of the story. It gives the impression taht every scene is a sketch independent from the other scenes, thus creating a story that isn't one. You lose interest pretty fast in my opinion.

The story in tiself is pretty basic. I think the directior who also wrote this movie wanted to look at this genre (the erotic thriller) with a cynical eye. But if that was the case, the movie in general takes itself too seriously for it to be a critique piece of this cheap gimmicky genre.

And well the end is a gimmick made to shock us and reveal the absurdity of this kind of movies. But it is a bit forced and cringy.

Maybe I am reading to much in this, but there are not any black actors or extras on-screen. Is the director saying that these thriller-thingys are often all-white. It made me wonder and it is true that these erotic-thrillers that I saw lately (the Affleck one adapted from Highsmith's novel...and others I don't remember the titles) are all-white cast. They are all pretty bad too.

I think it is time to declare these thrillers dead and begin to make thrillers where the story takes central stage instead of the twists. Deceivng the audience is cool and all-that, but not when it impoverishes the plot and takes the audience for a "babbling bumbling band of baboons".

I will give this 4 for the actors and the director's filming but even if it is a critique it is not a well made one.

Absolutely predictable, not one surprise, or novel idea from start to finish. You could call some of it foreshadowing, I suppose, but that would give the screenwriting far more credit than it deserves. Hard to believe that even one 'named' actor signed up to be part of this movie and the horribly obvious faux-plot that it pretends is worthy of your time, attention and electricity to suffer though. Do yourself a favor, and watch just about anything else you can, and skip this one.

This is probably obvious from the above, but I'd be horribly surprised if this didn't get nominated for multiple razzies. If not, the diner scene, and the "I can sit here all day with my **** down your throat" scene alone should get a writer a good, old-fashioned tarring and feathering.

I cannot believe I just got sucked in and watched this entire movie. The main reason for its low rating is the acting. Krueger and Azaria were the only decent actors. I felt like I was watching a Nickelodeon teen soap. Well, with a little more spice and violence. The story itself wasn't too bad but it started spiraling near the end. The very ending was the WORST. Please...with all the creative people in Hollywood I am sure they can do a better job than this! The only thing this movie had going for it was the scenery. Looks like it takes place in the northeast and it's just gorgeous! That's the only way it got its 1 star.

I'm not about to say that Out of the Blue is a good movie or anything, but I believe the reviews/ratings for it are a bit harsh. It has a myriad of flaws, but "one time watchability" is not one of them and that should matter to someone looking for a film to keep themselves occupied for the night. The acting is average, with the exception of Hank Azaria who is pretty funny in his limited role. The plot follows the usual cliches of a "film noir" and is not particularly novel in any way, but you do want to see what happens in the end and that keeps you engaged the whole time up till the obvious ending and the laughable final twist at the very end which is pretty much an arbitrary add on. The biggest flaw which was mentioned earlier is the LAUGHABLE interlude frames which let the audience know how much time has elapsed. It is soooooo cheesy and totally ruins the flow of the movie. Don't know what the director was thinking with that. Still if you're bored, it's not the worst movie to occupy yourself with if you like noirish films.