Trouble jeu

After the suicide of his wife (Amy Irving), David Callaway (Robert De Niro) takes his mentally disturbed 9-year-old daughter, Emily (Dakota Fanning) to a new home in the country in upstate New York. Instead of getting better, Emily begins to withdraw further, and she announces to her father that she has a new imaginary friend named "Charlie." At first, her father sees Charlie as a way for Emily to express her feelings. Then a series of vicious acts such as menacing writings appearing on the bathroom walls, and other mysterious occurrences start happening around the house. David blames Emily for doing them, but Emily says that Charlie did it. But is Charlie imaginary? You'd have to ask Emily, who is the only one who can see Charlie. Charlie may actually be both real and very dangerous. The movie is well crafted and suspenseful with a great cast. For a thriller, I did jump a few times. The ending was a little disappointing, but not unpredictable. (20th Century Fox, Run time 1:40, Rated R)(8/10)

Widower David and his daughter Emily leave the big city for the country after the tragic death of the Misses. Due to the fate of her mother Emily is going through a tough patch, one might say she has some issues when weird things like mutilated dolls and dead animals appear. But the clincher is her new found "imaginary" friend Charlie. As Charlie asserts himself more and more, darker things start to happen and we all know what that means.

Not a horrible film but the script is horribly clichéd. I enjoyed myself but not quite the way the filmmakers had in mind. My friend and I traded quips back in forth as if we were at our own MST3K party or something. I noticed many others in the audience doing the same so we weren't alone. DeNiro was solid if a bit restrained. Fanning is a pretty good actress for a ten year old. She held her ground with DeNiro and even bested him several times. Hell she barely blinked for the first 45 minutes of the film. The direction wasn't spectacular, not overly flashy but didn't need to be. The script…ahh the script is where the film skids into a tailspin. A veritable Frankenstein's Monster of plots, devices and red herrings that served other films well but became a tepid pool here.

Disappointing but not a total waste of time if you can forgive its shortcomings.

This was okay but nothing special. Frankly, I hate to see a young likable talent like Dakota Fanning play morose, ugly roles like this. Let her be a kid who laughs, has fun and acts like a kid, such as she did in "The Cat In The Hat." Since then, she's playing in rougher and rougher films although "Dreamer" with Kurt Russell, I am told, is a nice film.

Anyway, you know that with her and Robert De Niro, you're going to get some excellent acting. The movie also offers a lot of suspense. While it was not fun seeing a young girl mentally tortured and depressed all the time, it was nice to see De Niro play such a low-key role for most of he film.

I would think, without giving anything away, that one viewing of this film would be enough, even if one likes it. Once you know the ending, well......

If you are not a big fan of either Fanning or De Niro (I am) , I wouldn't even give it one viewing.

All these professional film critics. Oye. Gimme a break. Although they may make intellectual sense sometimes losing the point of a movie as escapism misses the enjoyment that could be... why so much dissection. Of course it's no Witness for the Prosecution or The Shining. But it's edge-of-seat creepy and it twists right to the end. Predictable maybe. But it's still engrossing. I'm not an idiot I love 12 Angry Men for a script and a brilliance in acting that runs circles around something like this. Or something like Fatal Attraction I know great from good from good to mediocre. This barely makes it to the last except it's worth the ride. Why analize a roller coaster if it 'works'. This is no masterpiece but it works. Enjoy the creeps!

I'm not the greatest figurer out of plot twists, and I didn't figure this one out. If you did, then I can see that there would have been an air of disappointment over that aspect of the film. I didn't so, plot-wise, I had no problem with enjoying the movie.

I thought the ending was fine.

And, as usual, I thought Dakota Fanning was quite remarkable, holding the screen with an assurance well beyond her years (although I find her manner in the "Making of.." documentaries worryingly un-childlike).

I did have some other problems, though.

De Niro's character must have been the worst psychologist in the world, given his complete inability to apply any of his knowledge to dealing with his daughter's problem in any constructive way (and, yes, I know "That's because blah blah blah", but it's still a distraction when you're sitting there watching him to fail utterly to exercise a shred of competence.

I failed to understand some of the child's motivation for her actions and attitudes vis-a-vis Charlie and Dad, especially given the nature of the twist.

Elisabeth Shue and Famke Janssen - nice to see them, even if only briefly.

And De Niro - not your finest hour, Bob. Carry on like this, and Norton and Depp will be fighting over the "Greatest Living Screen Actor" crown, while you watch from the wings.

My score of 7 is a point or two higher than it would otherwise have been, solely on the strength of Dakota Fanning's performance.