IMDb RATING
5.5/10
3.3K
YOUR RATING
A teenage girl travels to Paris in the 1970s trying to find out about her sister's alleged suicide, and falls in love with her dead sister's boyfriend.A teenage girl travels to Paris in the 1970s trying to find out about her sister's alleged suicide, and falls in love with her dead sister's boyfriend.A teenage girl travels to Paris in the 1970s trying to find out about her sister's alleged suicide, and falls in love with her dead sister's boyfriend.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 1 nomination total
Marianne Hettinger
- Drug Addict
- (uncredited)
Edward Olive
- Chef
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
In the early 1960's, two sisters are growing up. Faith is the elder of the two and is the apple of her father's eye listening to all his talk of art and freedom, while younger Phoebe is given less attention. When their father dies, Faith takes it the hardest near comatose at first but then getting into any revolution or cause that the period allows her to support. Heading off to Europe with her boyfriend, it is only a few months before her death brings even more pain to the family. Older now, Phoebe decides to use her sister's daily postcards as a guide and follow her footsteps around Europe to try and work out what happened to her.
With a quite famous cast, I decided to give this film a look but found that despite the professional sheen on it, this isn't that good a film. The plot is too unlikely, unconvincing and delivered in a phased manner that doesn't really work. Phoebe's journey is pretty unnecessary and her reasons for it didn't make a great deal of sense; it relied too much on some form of mysticism that it never earned (or kept consistent). The truth behind Faith's death unfolds but it does it in a lazy way Wolf just keeps revealing a bit more every here and there, why he suddenly feels he has to tell things that he had secret two minutes ago is not clear but the film uses it to keep things moving. Meanwhile, in flashback, Faith's story is unconvincing she is naïve, stupid and her political journey comes across as nothing more than the rebellion of any teenager.
It didn't help to have Diaz playing the role because she can't go beyond the character's surface and just ends up with a very basic performance that never got close to the sort of emotional turmoil that would have been needed to make a convincing Faith. Brewster is much better although it would have been a nice touch to cast two actresses that look like they could have at least come from the same family. Brewster has plenty of clunky lines to deliver but does reasonably well and she is allowed to nail Faith's character bang on the money at the end. She also has a good chemistry with Eccleston, which helps to cover up for the fact that the romance between them is a bad idea that didn't work that well. He is interesting enough though and shows he is a good actor by making more of the material than was on the page. The direction makes the most of nice European locations but it totally fails to capture a sense of time apart from some haircuts and costumes there is very little to tell you when the film is happening and, even if you know, it never feels like the period it wants to be of.
Overall it feels interesting enough and has emotional moments and nice touches in it but generally it doesn't work because the writing is poor and cannot make the story work; like another reviewer has said, it comes across rather contrived. The performances from Brewster and Eccleston are both better than the material but Diaz is too weak considering the weight she is asked to carry.
With a quite famous cast, I decided to give this film a look but found that despite the professional sheen on it, this isn't that good a film. The plot is too unlikely, unconvincing and delivered in a phased manner that doesn't really work. Phoebe's journey is pretty unnecessary and her reasons for it didn't make a great deal of sense; it relied too much on some form of mysticism that it never earned (or kept consistent). The truth behind Faith's death unfolds but it does it in a lazy way Wolf just keeps revealing a bit more every here and there, why he suddenly feels he has to tell things that he had secret two minutes ago is not clear but the film uses it to keep things moving. Meanwhile, in flashback, Faith's story is unconvincing she is naïve, stupid and her political journey comes across as nothing more than the rebellion of any teenager.
It didn't help to have Diaz playing the role because she can't go beyond the character's surface and just ends up with a very basic performance that never got close to the sort of emotional turmoil that would have been needed to make a convincing Faith. Brewster is much better although it would have been a nice touch to cast two actresses that look like they could have at least come from the same family. Brewster has plenty of clunky lines to deliver but does reasonably well and she is allowed to nail Faith's character bang on the money at the end. She also has a good chemistry with Eccleston, which helps to cover up for the fact that the romance between them is a bad idea that didn't work that well. He is interesting enough though and shows he is a good actor by making more of the material than was on the page. The direction makes the most of nice European locations but it totally fails to capture a sense of time apart from some haircuts and costumes there is very little to tell you when the film is happening and, even if you know, it never feels like the period it wants to be of.
Overall it feels interesting enough and has emotional moments and nice touches in it but generally it doesn't work because the writing is poor and cannot make the story work; like another reviewer has said, it comes across rather contrived. The performances from Brewster and Eccleston are both better than the material but Diaz is too weak considering the weight she is asked to carry.
This could have been a good movie, with some intense parts and good play. Unfortunately, it has been ruined by the script, which for all time, tricks the viewer into believing that there will be some kind of final revelation, which never happens. This is what lets the viewer down and therefore ruins the movie.
If the movie was honest from the beginning, then it could have become a very humanly intense road movie, like the kind of '70s movies by Bogdanovich or Altman. But because of the stupid cheat, it only becomes a modest and failed whodunit.
The acting and sceneries are good though. Worth a view - but only to regret how a better film it could have been.
If the movie was honest from the beginning, then it could have become a very humanly intense road movie, like the kind of '70s movies by Bogdanovich or Altman. But because of the stupid cheat, it only becomes a modest and failed whodunit.
The acting and sceneries are good though. Worth a view - but only to regret how a better film it could have been.
'Just watched this film last night. With a cast like Danner, Ecceleston and Diaz I'd expected something better. It is mainly the direction and lack of story development that stand out like a bruise. There are wonderful location shots of both America and Europe but what use is all this if the film itself is weak? With the story idea it could have been much more engaging. The whole love angle between Brewster and Ecceleston's character was irrelevant. The two actors hardly have any chemistry. The scene where Brewster hallucinates her sister behind the door just create unnecessary deviation. Alright, her character sniffed some coke but how did that fit in with the rest?
Talking of performances, Cameron Diaz stands out. One wonders why she doesn't concentrate more on such roles rather than starring in non-funny toilet-humoured comedies. The actress proves that she can take on a serious role and is wonderful. Her scenes are worth watching and she's the only character we can sympathize with. Ecceleston, though a very good actor, his role seems to lack something. However, he and Diaz do share a good chemistry. Brewster isn't convincing at all. Blythe Danner does well in a small role. So what do we get from this film? Nice shots of Portugal, Holland, France etc, a great performance by Diaz and...that's it.
Talking of performances, Cameron Diaz stands out. One wonders why she doesn't concentrate more on such roles rather than starring in non-funny toilet-humoured comedies. The actress proves that she can take on a serious role and is wonderful. Her scenes are worth watching and she's the only character we can sympathize with. Ecceleston, though a very good actor, his role seems to lack something. However, he and Diaz do share a good chemistry. Brewster isn't convincing at all. Blythe Danner does well in a small role. So what do we get from this film? Nice shots of Portugal, Holland, France etc, a great performance by Diaz and...that's it.
About a quarter of the way into "Invisible Circus," I and those sitting around me found ourselves far more amused by the person snoring loudly than by anything happening on the screen. That, in and of itself, is a partial indictment of the film. But then, there are some really excellent movies that also induce sleep.
The movie traces the obsession of an 18-year-old over her older sister's suicide, and her attempt to follow in the footsteps of her sister's last months. This film falls into that large category of movies that seem to have an interesting set of ingredients, but somehow didn't get cooked right. That's not to say that it is terrible--you need to go to see Anti-Trust for that--it just doesn't fit together too neatly. In trying to be a love story-thriller-mystery-coming of age genre-bender, you end up with a movie that does none of them well. As a mystery it is far too predictable, as a thriller I was unmoved, the love story is monochromatic, the actors rarely move beyond wooden.
Which is all really too bad. This is a movie that could have worked. The cinematography captures some really stunning location shots, and the story itself is interesting. The execution, however, falls flat.
Wait and rent it. Or go rent "The English Patient" instead.
The movie traces the obsession of an 18-year-old over her older sister's suicide, and her attempt to follow in the footsteps of her sister's last months. This film falls into that large category of movies that seem to have an interesting set of ingredients, but somehow didn't get cooked right. That's not to say that it is terrible--you need to go to see Anti-Trust for that--it just doesn't fit together too neatly. In trying to be a love story-thriller-mystery-coming of age genre-bender, you end up with a movie that does none of them well. As a mystery it is far too predictable, as a thriller I was unmoved, the love story is monochromatic, the actors rarely move beyond wooden.
Which is all really too bad. This is a movie that could have worked. The cinematography captures some really stunning location shots, and the story itself is interesting. The execution, however, falls flat.
Wait and rent it. Or go rent "The English Patient" instead.
Those disappointed in the film "The Invisible Circus" would make a better investment by purchasing the novel by Jennifer Egan. Written from the perspective of eighteen-year-old Pheobe, the novel is an enchanting coming-of-age story with the added intrigue of her lost "hippie" sister.
Most of the narrative focuses on Pheobe's inner thoughts; which no doubt made translating it to the screen a difficult task. Debates on whether it is a "chick flick" are warranted; both the film and the novel center heavily on the female viewpoint.
In response to the first posted review, the paintings by Pheobe's father, Gene, are *supposed* to be awful. Part of the narrative focuses on Pheobe's realization that her father was not a sainted, thwarted artist, but an ordinary man.
Most of the narrative focuses on Pheobe's inner thoughts; which no doubt made translating it to the screen a difficult task. Debates on whether it is a "chick flick" are warranted; both the film and the novel center heavily on the female viewpoint.
In response to the first posted review, the paintings by Pheobe's father, Gene, are *supposed* to be awful. Part of the narrative focuses on Pheobe's realization that her father was not a sainted, thwarted artist, but an ordinary man.
Did you know
- TriviaSome UFO forums pointed out a strange object that flies in the sky when Jordana Brewster and Christopher Eccleston arrive at Cape Espichel in Portugal. Possibly just a seagull, but since it doesn't flap his wings, it caught attention.
- GoofsIn the beginning of the movie, Phoebe and her mother, Gail, are watching TV which is showing the opening credits to the show "The Rockford Files." The sound coming out of the TV is not the opening theme for "The Rockford Files."
- How long is The Invisible Circus?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $77,578
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $55,388
- Feb 4, 2001
- Gross worldwide
- $494,630
- Runtime1 hour 33 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content