Le Pacte

Although a number of reviews play down this film, I thoroughly enjoyed it. I quite like Nicholas Cage, ever since Con Air - he seems to play the laid back, slightly relaxed good guy to whom it all just gets a bit too much. You are quickly engaged with the theme of the film although I have to say I find it difficult to imagine Mr. Cage as a High School English lecturer. No massive brain power needed to follow the story line which moves at a satisfying pace.

In this, at times, quite plausible film he again enjoys the hard done by guy but you find yourself drawn along with him almost feeling for him.

A very nice way to spend 105 minutes and well worth your viewing time. a definite 7.

Nicolas Cage and Guy Pearce aren't exactly my favourite actors, I can't put my finger on why but they both just really annoy me. So I didn't have very high expectations going into this film, thinking that I would be rolling my eyes at every word they uttered. The fact that I enjoyed the film, is either a nod to my ability of being able to withstand irritating people or that it was actually a really good film.

The untimely incident with Will's (Cage) wife (January Jones), was made even more disturbing by the juxtaposition of him playing chess. Such an ugly event opposed to a tranquil game, it worked really well. I did have a little pernickety moment, when Will went to visit his wife in hospital. His character just didn't seem believable, he didn't even ask what had happened to her or how she was. Most normal people would (ok, moment over).

The snakeskin shoes worn by the villain is a great reiteration of the phrase several characters use, "This place (New Orleans) is going to hell," and judging by the choice of the initial villain's footwear, he's going to be the one to take them there.

January Jones shows how to fight back, with her major "girl power" moments and as a teensy feminist, I loved it. Alongside a thrilling plot, I was pleasantly surprised.

After his wife (January Jones) is assaulted, a husband (Nic Cage) enlists the services of a vigilante group to help him settle the score. Then he discovers they want a "favor" from him in return.

This is neither Cage's best film or his worst. It is also not his best hair, or his worst. In fact, I may have to give Cage some credit... his acting was far better than this film ended up calling for.

Not that the movie is all bad. Had it been a novel, it would have been a best-selling thriller. But it sort of crumbles as a film for one reason: plot holes. Simon and his cronies are just too powerful, know too much, too soon. It is not adequately explained, and the logical answers that the audience might dream up without evidence only leads to an even wilder conspiracy... in short, try not to think too much while watching this.

The action is good, the humor is decent, and the suspense is top notch -- it is the most tension you will ever feel while watching a man buy a candy bar. But it just does not add up. Good acting, good action and suspense do not make a movie if the story itself is not complete. In short, this film's biggest problem is the lack of a script doctor. A few tweaks, a tightening of events, this could have been a blockbuster and demanded a franchise or sequel.

What did the rabbit do? You'll know if you watch(ed) the movie. But this movie does not have answers for everything. There are plot holes and real inconsistencies all over the place. Plus Nicolas Cage is not really ideal for the main role. He's too normal. I should say his character is too normal.

Jennifer Carpenter is credited but not really that much in the movie. There are subplots that come and go, plus there is one thing that I think remains unresolved. The "inciting incident" (let's call it that), that kick starts all the rest. But again, if you start questioning things, you might as well not watch the movie at all, because you won't like it. Try to enjoy the action, the suspense even if you have seen this formula a dozen (or more) times!

Nicholas Cage has participated in ambivalent movies, but this one is definitely among the better ones. And he is pleasantly complemented by Guy Pearce whose character is controversial to the end. Development of events and characters is logical, and viewers have - similar to various characters - constant dilemmas what kind of standpoint to take up with, as the background issue is serious, and good intentions get out of control quite fast. I felt that it must be horrible if you can trust nobody during peacetime.

Recommended to all desiring to spend a thrilling time in front of TV or at the cinema.