Paul-Anderson Movie Reviews

If you've played the Game then you'd love this Big Screen Version also. Even if you haven't you'll still enjoy this. The movie has some really Great stuff of Action, Special Effects, Costumes and Set design. The plot is quite thin though, a bunch of Mortal men and women trying to save the world from the Aliens of the Outer World. The casting is also good. The movie features a lot of Martial Arts fights. If you're in for a fight after every 10 minutes then you got it. The fights are really well-choreographed. I would've loved to give this movie a 4 start rating had there been some plot also. To be honest, You won't ask for a thicker plot while watching this as the Kick-butt action sequences and Spectacular Special Effects would glue you to your seats. Buy it or rent it but Don't miss it...

I liked Mortal Kombat. I saw the movie when it came out in theaters and was impressed. I own the DVD and am proud to say so.

Mortal Kombat tells the story of the Mortal Kombat tournament. The Mortal Kombat tournament is a tournament for all the marbles. If Shang Sun and his allies when they take control of the portals coming to earth. If the good guys Johhny Cage, Sonja Blade, and Lu Kang win they save earth. The humans are helped by the rain god Rayden(Lambert) in there effort to win the tournament.

The movie has all your favorite characers from the first game. You get to see them all in action. The action scenes are great and are well done. They have real actors that know how to do the martial arts doing it. The character special moves look great, as Mortal Kombat has excellent special effects.

It's a fun movie. There isn't to much redeeming social value out of it, but I like the movie. It's a great martial art action sci fi flick. Don't miss out on it.

Ah, the joys of video games. After the success of STREET FIGHTER, hollywood had another adaptation of the equally popular MORTAL KOMBAT video game series. The result is a fun martial arts film that is reminiscent of such karate films where the action was based in a tournament, films like ENTER THE DRAGON, BLOODSPORT, BLOODFIST, you know what I mean?

Liu Kang (Martial Arts champ Robin Shou), Johnny Cage (Linden Ashby), and Sonya Blade (Bridget Wilson) are all contestants in a martial arts tournament known as Mortal Kombat, but they only belatedly discover they've been recruited by a thunnder god known as Rayden (Christopher Lambert) to take part since the winner of this tournament can determine the fate of the earth. Since evil demon sorcerer Shang Tsung (Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa) plans to conquer and rule the earth if he or his warriors win, it is imperitive that one of the three win. They'll be helped by comely Princess Kitana (Mega-babe Talisa Soto), but will they prevail?

MORTAL KOMBAT just throws all that at you so you can get past the plot and focus on the action, which is sort of an early combination of the fighting in CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON, and THE MATRIX. There's rarely a scene that doesn't feature either gravity defying kung fu fighting, or eye-poping special effects, or both. One scene in particular features Liu Kang in a fierce battle with zombie ninja Sub-Zero, and his victory is aided via "the element which brings life." Liu has another fantastic fight later with the infamous Reptile.

This movie may lack a moving story to hang to action on, but it doesn't matter. It movies like this that give meaning to the term non-stop action. Liu takes part in the tournament primarily to avenge the murder of his brother Chan (by Shang Tsung.) Sonya is there to hunt down crime-lord Kano (Trevor Goddard). And Cage is a hollywood martial arts star, and is in the tournament to rid himself of the presses skepticism. As for Kitana, lets just say she looks great for someone whose 5,000 years old.

In all, I reccomend the film to martial arts fans everywhere. Forget what the crtics say, make up your own mind, and you can't go wrong.

One of the top entries in the eternal Friday the 13th series. When put together, parts 2, 3, and 4 all take place within a very short time of each other. This episode has Jason at his peak, before the deaths became gimmicky. We are also introduced to the most popular hero in the series, Tommy Jarvis. The boy who kills Jason and later resurrects him.

We see a bunch of kids get killed, a good chase scene, and a young boy pushed over the edge. Part 5 is just plain terrible (but I'll buy it anyway when it comes out on DVD).

Probably the creepiest scene is in the basement of the teen's house when Rob gets killed. You almost feel sorry for the guy as he's been hunting Jason for a while.

All in all, it's a great movie. A good horror film and a great slasher film.

Okay, I'm a HUGE horror buff and I say horror films can't get any better then this. True, most people say that 'Halloween' is the best horror film, but I have to disagree. For one thing, 'Halloween' didn't have enough gore, nudity and well developed characters. Any, back to my review. FT13 P4 takes place exactly where the last one left off. Jason escapes from the morgue and goes back home. Then some teens come by to party and sure enough, there will be blood tonight. I actually felt sorry for some of the characters that were killed off. Like Jim for instance. All he wanted was to have sex, not to die. And Ted, he was just very cool and fun to watch. Same with the two girls, Sarah and Samantha. They were VERY hot and shouldn't have been killed off. Same with the twins, Tina and Terri. But, Friday the 13th wouldn't be a horror movie without death. At the end of the movie, Tommy and his sister Trish 'deaft' Jason by machete to the head. Sure enough, Jason lives and Tommy grabs the machete and hacks Jason to pieces. Tom Savini really let lose here with the gore. Hacksaw to neck, cleaver to face, speargun in balls, knifed through raft ect. ect. Anyway, THIS is how horror is supposed to be like. Don't rent it, buy it! If you don't buy it, Jason will be coming! For you!

Let me just sum it up, Jason comes back and goes on a killing spree and is totalled into mush in the end. Don't worry he will be back. Go out and buy it.

SESSION 9 (USA 2001): Five professional contractors - each with their own personal problems - are hired to strip asbestos from a huge, abandoned asylum where the horrific events of the past intrude on the present, invoking a murderous confrontation.

Notable as the first movie shot in the scope format using high-definition video at 24fps (transferred to 35mm film for theatrical screenings) - the same process used by George Lucas for STAR WARS EPISODE II ATTACK OF THE CLONES the following year - director Brad Anderson describes SESSION 9 as an exercise in 'creeping dread', filmed at the deserted Danvers Mental Institution in Massachusetts whose crumbling interior suggests nothing less than the hellish Marsten House of Stephen King's 'Salem's Lot'. As the audio commentary on this DVD attests, Anderson takes his visual cue from slow-burning thrillers like THE SHINING and DON'T LOOK NOW, favoring long, deliberate camera movements and wide-angle shots which transform the Institute's vast, empty spaces into an oppressive, tomb-like structure. Few Hollywood movies of recent years have used the scope format to such impressive effect. A terrific ensemble cast is headlined by David Caruso (TV's "CSI: Miami") and Scottish actor-director Peter Mullan (MY NAME IS JOE), both of whom give committed performances as men on the edge of despair, and strong support is given by Josh Lucas (THE DEEP END), Brendan Sexton III (WELCOME TO THE DOLLHOUSE) and co-writer Steven Gevedon as the hapless co-worker who stumbles on a series of audio tapes which contain ultra-creepy psychiatric sessions involving a former patient suffering from split personality disorder.

Memorable sequences include Lucas' unscheduled late-night visit to the Institute, where he finds himself sharing the darkness with... something that shouldn't be there, and the inevitable moment when Sexton - who had earlier declared his morbid fear of the dark - finds himself trapped in the bowels of the building just as the lights begin to go out... Two endings were filmed, one of which involves a subplot that was ultimately dropped from the final assembly, but in truth, neither one of them lives up to expectations. The combination of tragedy and horror will still take many viewers by surprise, but one is left with the distinct impression that few of the participants were interested in making a REAL horror film, even if the movie ends up being one anyway, in spite of itself. Beautifully judged for the most part, and genuinely frightening in places, SESSION 9 is worth a look, despite minor reservations.

USA Films' region 1 DVD - which runs 99m 39s - letterboxes the HD24p scope frame at 2.35:1 (anamorphically enhanced), and while the film's origins as a video production are betrayed by evidence of smearing during rapid movements by the actors, picture quality is otherwise flawless. Thankfully, the disc remains true to the film's non-digital theatrical soundtrack and reproduces the Dolby Stereo format in 2.0 surround, an unsettling fusion of atonal music (written by the experimental combo Climax Golden Twins) and the tortured echoes of a restless building turning over in its grave. Extras include a number of deleted sequences, including the aforementioned subplot and 'alternative' ending, and a short documentary in which various actors and film crew pay tribute to the Danvers Institute and its gruesome history. A trailer has been included, and there are closed captions but no subtitles.

The night after I saw The Others, I went to see Session 9 out of curiosity, again, knowing very little about it, during its opening weekend. Session 9 centers on a team of asbestos removers working to renovate a closed mental institution. The job would take three weeks, but desperate for work, the four men of Hazmat Elimination Co. opt to do it in two. When they are told that there would be a $10,000 bonus if they could get the job finished in a single week, they reluctantly conform to work like hell under the overwhelming, disturbing backdrop of an ominous insane asylum. The character dynamics of the team leader, Gordon (Peter Mullan), his friend and right-hand man, Phil (David Caruso), the astute and curious law-school drop-out, Mike (co-writer, Stephen Gevedon), and the arrogant bastard who stole Phil's girlfriend, Hank (Josh Lucas), as well as Gordon's young nephew, Jeff (Brendan Sexton III), are what drive the movie. It becomes a haunting psychological thriller that will jolt you and compel you with its spectacular visuals, superb acting, and extraordinary integration of the real-life Danvers institution with amazing recordings from the actual asylum used as the hook of the movie. As the four workers become more immersed in their rigorous one-week elimination deadline, the atmosphere of the deathly place begins to consume them. Writer-director Brad Anderson was looking through the abandoned Danvers institution, and was suddenly inspired to write a screenplay that has become Session 9: a fictional plot based on frightening truths. The dark, fearless movie is not nearly as much fun or even as satisfying as The Others. Most likely it will leave you with an unsettling feeling, possibly hungry for more answers. It may be a bit heavier and less exciting, but it is equally intense, and still an exceptional movie.

"session 9" surpasses stanley kubrick's "the shining" in terms of both atmosphere and pacing, and i don't make the comparison lightly. i was astounded that a USA film which I expected to be nothing more than fun, typical modern horror garbage to laugh at with friends turned out to be one of the best horror movies i've seen in the last two decades. although it starts slowly and the opening scenes, which should have established the overwhelming power and mood to come are merely jumpy and mediocre, it quickly takes off and the increasing edginess of the characters as they come under the derelict asylum's depraved influence is acted perfectly by the genuinely sterling performances given be the five characters. the bizarre collages on the wall by former patients and the dialogue by one of the more intelligent workers about the reasons why the asylum was closed flawlessly establish the atmosphere, and the character gordon is brilliantly deranged into submission to the building right from the outset. the best touch in this movie is the really disturbing soundtrack of 'repressed memory' therapy recordings that are played while the characters slowly lose their minds and turn against one another. the ending sequences are so deeply disturbing as to be indescribable. while the film obvious has logical flaws, this is more intended as a study of madness, desctruction and hopelessness perpetrated by unseen forces of evil, and to say the least, it works. a delightfully demented piece of incredible inspiration and imagination.

SESSION 9 (USA 2001): Five professional contractors - each with their own personal problems - are hired to strip asbestos from a huge, abandoned asylum where the horrific events of the past intrude on the present, invoking a murderous confrontation.

Notable as the first movie shot in the scope format using high-definition video at 24fps (transferred to 35mm film for theatrical screenings) - the same process used by George Lucas for STAR WARS EPISODE II ATTACK OF THE CLONES the following year - director Brad Anderson describes SESSION 9 as an exercise in 'creeping dread', filmed at the deserted Danvers Mental Institution in Massachusetts whose crumbling interior suggests nothing less than the hellish Marsten House of Stephen King's 'Salem's Lot'. As the audio commentary on this DVD attests, Anderson takes his visual cue from slow-burning thrillers like THE SHINING and DON'T LOOK NOW, favoring long, deliberate camera movements and wide-angle shots which transform the Institute's vast, empty spaces into an oppressive, tomb-like structure. Few Hollywood movies of recent years have used the scope format to such impressive effect. A terrific ensemble cast is headlined by David Caruso (TV's "CSI: Miami") and Scottish actor-director Peter Mullan (MY NAME IS JOE), both of whom give committed performances as men on the edge of despair, and strong support is given by Josh Lucas (THE DEEP END), Brendan Sexton III (WELCOME TO THE DOLLHOUSE) and co-writer Steven Gevedon as the hapless co-worker who stumbles on a series of audio tapes which contain ultra-creepy psychiatric sessions involving a former patient suffering from split personality disorder.

Memorable sequences include Lucas' unscheduled late-night visit to the Institute, where he finds himself sharing the darkness with... something that shouldn't be there, and the inevitable moment when Sexton - who had earlier declared his morbid fear of the dark - finds himself trapped in the bowels of the building just as the lights begin to go out... Two endings were filmed, one of which involves a subplot that was ultimately dropped from the final assembly, but in truth, neither one of them lives up to expectations. The combination of tragedy and horror will still take many viewers by surprise, but one is left with the distinct impression that few of the participants were interested in making a REAL horror film, even if the movie ends up being one anyway, in spite of itself. Beautifully judged for the most part, and genuinely frightening in places, SESSION 9 is worth a look, despite minor reservations.

USA Films' region 1 DVD - which runs 99m 39s - letterboxes the HD24p scope frame at 2.35:1 (anamorphically enhanced), and while the film's origins as a video production are betrayed by evidence of smearing during rapid movements by the actors, picture quality is otherwise flawless. Thankfully, the disc remains true to the film's non-digital theatrical soundtrack and reproduces the Dolby Stereo format in 2.0 surround, an unsettling fusion of atonal music (written by the experimental combo Climax Golden Twins) and the tortured echoes of a restless building turning over in its grave. Extras include a number of deleted sequences, including the aforementioned subplot and 'alternative' ending, and a short documentary in which various actors and film crew pay tribute to the Danvers Institute and its gruesome history. A trailer has been included, and there are closed captions but no subtitles.

The night after I saw The Others, I went to see Session 9 out of curiosity, again, knowing very little about it, during its opening weekend. Session 9 centers on a team of asbestos removers working to renovate a closed mental institution. The job would take three weeks, but desperate for work, the four men of Hazmat Elimination Co. opt to do it in two. When they are told that there would be a $10,000 bonus if they could get the job finished in a single week, they reluctantly conform to work like hell under the overwhelming, disturbing backdrop of an ominous insane asylum. The character dynamics of the team leader, Gordon (Peter Mullan), his friend and right-hand man, Phil (David Caruso), the astute and curious law-school drop-out, Mike (co-writer, Stephen Gevedon), and the arrogant bastard who stole Phil's girlfriend, Hank (Josh Lucas), as well as Gordon's young nephew, Jeff (Brendan Sexton III), are what drive the movie. It becomes a haunting psychological thriller that will jolt you and compel you with its spectacular visuals, superb acting, and extraordinary integration of the real-life Danvers institution with amazing recordings from the actual asylum used as the hook of the movie. As the four workers become more immersed in their rigorous one-week elimination deadline, the atmosphere of the deathly place begins to consume them. Writer-director Brad Anderson was looking through the abandoned Danvers institution, and was suddenly inspired to write a screenplay that has become Session 9: a fictional plot based on frightening truths. The dark, fearless movie is not nearly as much fun or even as satisfying as The Others. Most likely it will leave you with an unsettling feeling, possibly hungry for more answers. It may be a bit heavier and less exciting, but it is equally intense, and still an exceptional movie.

"session 9" surpasses stanley kubrick's "the shining" in terms of both atmosphere and pacing, and i don't make the comparison lightly. i was astounded that a USA film which I expected to be nothing more than fun, typical modern horror garbage to laugh at with friends turned out to be one of the best horror movies i've seen in the last two decades. although it starts slowly and the opening scenes, which should have established the overwhelming power and mood to come are merely jumpy and mediocre, it quickly takes off and the increasing edginess of the characters as they come under the derelict asylum's depraved influence is acted perfectly by the genuinely sterling performances given be the five characters. the bizarre collages on the wall by former patients and the dialogue by one of the more intelligent workers about the reasons why the asylum was closed flawlessly establish the atmosphere, and the character gordon is brilliantly deranged into submission to the building right from the outset. the best touch in this movie is the really disturbing soundtrack of 'repressed memory' therapy recordings that are played while the characters slowly lose their minds and turn against one another. the ending sequences are so deeply disturbing as to be indescribable. while the film obvious has logical flaws, this is more intended as a study of madness, desctruction and hopelessness perpetrated by unseen forces of evil, and to say the least, it works. a delightfully demented piece of incredible inspiration and imagination.

This film is an excellent direct-sequel to The Wrath of Khan. While not quite as good, it's still worthwhile.

Despite the holes in the plot and the need to willingly suspend disbelief at times, Star Trek III is among my favorite of the original cast films. I even like it better than Star Trek IV.

The special effects in this film are really good and I love James Horner's score enough to have bought it on cassette. There are many dramatic visual moments, including when the Enterprise approaches the giant space station orbiting Earth and the destruction of the Genesis planet, and of course, the destruction of the Enterprise.

The cast is in their usual fine form. Uhurua gets a smaller role in this movie because she stays behind, but she does get one really good scene giving a young Starfleet cadet his comeuppance. Scottie gets to shine as temporary engineering officer and vandalizer of the new starship Excelsior. McCoy is funny, occasionally slipping into his Spock mode. One of his best lines, upon hearing that he is carrying Spock's "katra" inside him is "It's [Spock's] revenge for losing all of those arguments!" William Shatner has a really good dramatic scene when Kirk learns that his son has been killed by the Klingons. Christopher Lloyd is good as the Klingon commander Kruge. Unrecognizable as one of his subordinates, Maltz, is the guy who played Dan Fielding in the Nightcourt sitcom on NBC.

Merrit Butrick and Robin Curtis are not particularly memorable as David and Saavik, but accomplish what is expected of them. Another reviewer observed that the film barely hints that Saavik sleeps with the young Spock as he experiences Pon Faar. I read the novelization of Star Trek III, and not only does it make it clear that she is "intimate" with him, if indeed Vulcans can be intimate, but that she also sleeps with Kirk's son David as well before they go to the Genesis planet. Had it been included in the film, it really would have added another element to it, though in the end it might have been distracting too.

It is a bit of a coincidence that Kirk gets Spock off the Genesis planet at just the right age, and the way in which Spock is brought back is a bit hard to swallow, after all, even the Vulcan high priestess declared that the process had not been done in ages, and then only in myth. Why would Spock then be confident that it would work? Then again, since all of us Trekkies wanted Spock back, we won't quibble. Star Trek III is a good combination of action, humor and drama. If there is an off numbered curse in the Star Trek movies, it clearly does not apply to this one.

In the footsteps of "The Wrath of Khan" Director's Edition DVD comes the Special Collector's Edition of "The Search For Spock", in my opinion the best Star Trek movie of all. The writers held nothing back, giving us an ingenius way of bringing Spock back. Though definitely no among the most exciting of the series, it does the best job by far of illustrating the eternal friendship of the Enterprise crew.

It also sprouts first-rate preformances, notably Christopher Lloyd as Commander Kruge, who perfectly personifies the ultimate Klingon. Robin Curtis, replacing Kirstie Alley as Saavik, makes a more traditional Vulcan, showing hardly any emotion whatsoever (the way Vulcans are supposed to). The entire Enterprise crew is in top form. And, of course, Spock; Leonard Nimoy's screen time, no matter how limited (only a couple of minutes), makes you want to stand up and cheer.

The special effects more than match up to (and at times surpass) those of "The Wrath of Khan". And James Horner once again engorges himself, providing a haunting and incredibly beautiful score that perfectly captures the sense of Vulcan mysticism (as well as everything else in the movie). All of which is displayed very nicely on the DVD.

I've been waiting for this new two-disc DVD for well over two months, but it was worth the wait. The picture quality is nothing short of spectacular. The cast and crew interviews are once again very interesting and funny (William Shatner is utterly hillarious). I have not yet seen the "Terraforming & The Prime Directive" or "Star Trek Universe" documentaries, but you can bet your *** that I will.

Now I just can't wait for the two-disc edition of "The Voyage Home" to be released. If it's half as good as the Special Collector's Edition of "The Search For Spock", I'll gladly pay my money for it!

This film is an excellent direct-sequel to The Wrath of Khan. While not quite as good, it's still worthwhile.

Despite the holes in the plot and the need to willingly suspend disbelief at times, Star Trek III is among my favorite of the original cast films. I even like it better than Star Trek IV.

The special effects in this film are really good and I love James Horner's score enough to have bought it on cassette. There are many dramatic visual moments, including when the Enterprise approaches the giant space station orbiting Earth and the destruction of the Genesis planet, and of course, the destruction of the Enterprise.

The cast is in their usual fine form. Uhurua gets a smaller role in this movie because she stays behind, but she does get one really good scene giving a young Starfleet cadet his comeuppance. Scottie gets to shine as temporary engineering officer and vandalizer of the new starship Excelsior. McCoy is funny, occasionally slipping into his Spock mode. One of his best lines, upon hearing that he is carrying Spock's "katra" inside him is "It's [Spock's] revenge for losing all of those arguments!" William Shatner has a really good dramatic scene when Kirk learns that his son has been killed by the Klingons. Christopher Lloyd is good as the Klingon commander Kruge. Unrecognizable as one of his subordinates, Maltz, is the guy who played Dan Fielding in the Nightcourt sitcom on NBC.

Merrit Butrick and Robin Curtis are not particularly memorable as David and Saavik, but accomplish what is expected of them. Another reviewer observed that the film barely hints that Saavik sleeps with the young Spock as he experiences Pon Faar. I read the novelization of Star Trek III, and not only does it make it clear that she is "intimate" with him, if indeed Vulcans can be intimate, but that she also sleeps with Kirk's son David as well before they go to the Genesis planet. Had it been included in the film, it really would have added another element to it, though in the end it might have been distracting too.

It is a bit of a coincidence that Kirk gets Spock off the Genesis planet at just the right age, and the way in which Spock is brought back is a bit hard to swallow, after all, even the Vulcan high priestess declared that the process had not been done in ages, and then only in myth. Why would Spock then be confident that it would work? Then again, since all of us Trekkies wanted Spock back, we won't quibble. Star Trek III is a good combination of action, humor and drama. If there is an off numbered curse in the Star Trek movies, it clearly does not apply to this one.

In the footsteps of "The Wrath of Khan" Director's Edition DVD comes the Special Collector's Edition of "The Search For Spock", in my opinion the best Star Trek movie of all. The writers held nothing back, giving us an ingenius way of bringing Spock back. Though definitely no among the most exciting of the series, it does the best job by far of illustrating the eternal friendship of the Enterprise crew.

It also sprouts first-rate preformances, notably Christopher Lloyd as Commander Kruge, who perfectly personifies the ultimate Klingon. Robin Curtis, replacing Kirstie Alley as Saavik, makes a more traditional Vulcan, showing hardly any emotion whatsoever (the way Vulcans are supposed to). The entire Enterprise crew is in top form. And, of course, Spock; Leonard Nimoy's screen time, no matter how limited (only a couple of minutes), makes you want to stand up and cheer.

The special effects more than match up to (and at times surpass) those of "The Wrath of Khan". And James Horner once again engorges himself, providing a haunting and incredibly beautiful score that perfectly captures the sense of Vulcan mysticism (as well as everything else in the movie). All of which is displayed very nicely on the DVD.

I've been waiting for this new two-disc DVD for well over two months, but it was worth the wait. The picture quality is nothing short of spectacular. The cast and crew interviews are once again very interesting and funny (William Shatner is utterly hillarious). I have not yet seen the "Terraforming & The Prime Directive" or "Star Trek Universe" documentaries, but you can bet your *** that I will.

Now I just can't wait for the two-disc edition of "The Voyage Home" to be released. If it's half as good as the Special Collector's Edition of "The Search For Spock", I'll gladly pay my money for it!

As a general rule of thumb I rarely ever review films but after being subjected to Adrian Lyne's incredibly pompous and sordid offering " Unfaithful " I felt a critique was not only needed but somehow necessary. If nothing else to exercise some demons that I still feel when reminded of this montrosity.

Where to begin!? Theres so much that is wrong with this movie that is difficult to know where to start. Lets begin with pretentions. If this movie is guilty of anything its simply that by disguising this tacky, sordid mess as a poor mans art-house film Mr. Lyne is equally guilty of attempting to dress up this blunder as a movie that tries far too hard to " say something " about the consequences of maritial infidelity. There is simply little to be found here that might even be considered remotely original or noteworthy. Diane Lane, portraying a housewife/fundraiser, who obviously has far too much time on her hands, literally runs into Oliver Martinez a young Frenchman ( major cliche! ) in Manhattan and begins a torrid affair with the young man. Its bad enough in this directors feeble attempts to portray our star as " good person " by casting her as someone who does charitable work i.e. thereby she, deep down, must be a really good person, No!? A move that seems truly contrived and desperate. Plus, since absurdities seem to abound, they make our young Romeo a book enthusiast...again a desperate attempt to portray this character as someone who isn't just a pretty face! Playing on the audiences sympathies there is actually a scene in which our misguided heroine sits in an empty subway car home and breaks-down after here first tryst with our young stud. In a feeble attempt to cast Ms. Lane as one who understands the seriousness of her mistake but one who nevertheless continues to fall victim to this same error in judgement time after time. And yes, while Ms. Lane's performance is noteworthy I seemed to be unable to gather little sympathy for her. No matter how hard the director may have tried to paint her with a rather large dose of understanding! Its difficult to gather any empathy for a grown woman who seems to run strictly on emotion and has little intellectual skills at her disposal. Thereby awarding Diana all the emotional developement of a sixteen year high-school student! And to make this family truly complimant each other we have Richard Gere playing the clueless husband. An obvious good provider, all-around wonderful father and all that he seems truly miscast as an equally thick father figure.

To take this brilliant mistake even further Mr. Lyne awards his viewer with a couple of steamy sex-scenes in which our heroine and her young lover are shown in full nudity all the while making Whoppee while the audience is supposedly to buy into how truly passionate they really are and how Ms. Lane, apparently in need of a hobby, just needs to have her sexual desires fulfilled.And, in a relentless attempt to make Ms. Lane's character even more sympathetic, our young Frenchman turns out to be a cad! It seems as though our heroine cannot catch a break! Not that that prevents her from just one more sordid tryst with that two-timing Frenchman. Granted most Americans are easily 'titillated' but I suspect these episodes were thrown in, sadly, in an attempt to gather the film some badly needed notoriety. Although with all the talk of these "hot and heavy' scenes it seems to have worked! It's all so obvious in its panderings and low-brow unoriginality!

But it does get better. Obviously Mr. Lyne felt that a film about infidelity wasn't enough so at the half-way mark we have this movie doing a complete about-face and becoming a murder mystery! At this point I've thrown up my hands and wondered if I'd changed the channel unknowingly and am now watching a different movie! And yes, even then the movie simply falls apart even more so leaving the viewer with an ending that was far too ambiguous and self-serving for anyone to muster up any enthusiasm for. Overall an uncomprehensible mess that that never seemed to find its own direction and one in which relied far too heavily upon pathetic and contrived episodes that pandered to an audiences most basest instincts. After watching " Unfaithfull " is there anyone else who feels a hot shower would be in order to cleanse oneself from this grimey, vulgar mess?

I wasn't expecting a good movie, I'll admit it. I was expecting more Hollywood churned out assembly line garbage. This isn't garbage at all, it was refreshingly edgy.
I was suprised to say the least. It takes a lot to put me on edge. This movie succeeded. I was a nervous wreck. Especially when Diane Lane starts acting shady and gives herself away. I was talking to the movie, screaming she was gonna give herself away, lol, much to the dismay of my date.
Adrian Lynne does a beautiful direction job. It reminded me of "Nine 1/2 Weeks" meets "Fatal Attraction".
The love making scenes really are super hot too!
My only beef is the deleted scenes are better than the scenes in the movie. Make sure you check out the alternative ending! Much better.
This isn't a first date movie. If you end up giving the cheating wife pointers on how not to get caught, it may make you look like a pro, a-hem.
I give it 3 1/2 stars.

This story is basically about infidelty. It is about an adulterous wife played by actress Diana Lane. The sex WAS hot and intense(should be explicit full frontal nudity- censored for sale in all Singapore video shops as VCD). This is a PWC film(pass with cut) based on MDA's censoring guidelines. This is another good movie to watch.

I really expected to enjoy this movie based on the hoopla surrounding Diane Lane's performance. However, when it was all over I wasn't all that moved and was left with several questions, such as: 1.) Why did she cheat? 2.) How will they ever get away with "it" when so many people have seen Diane Lane's character and the Frenchman together (Richard Gere's disgruntled employee, the private investigator, another female character I presume was the Frenchman's wife)? While I enjoyed much of the cinematography (the wind sequence was absolutely beautiful) and seeing Richard Gere playing against type, I still just didn't get what was so great. In fact, I saw this as another vehicle made to show gratitutious sex and then laud an Oscar nomination on the female lead. Anyone remember Halle Berry in "Monster's Ball"?

There is a certain beauty contained within this film that makes it beyond a film about infidelity and its consequences. Diane Lane didn't get my attention until the recent "The Glass House." As a new fan, I had to see 'Unfaithful'...her performance is nothing short of remarkable.
The story revolves around a 'happily married', middle-aged couple living in the suburbs of NY with one small son. Their life is the picture of the 'American dream', until one day, Mrs. Sumner (Diane Lane) goes into the city on business and cosmically collides with the much younger Paul Martel (Martinez). When he invites her in to clean up her skinned knee a most deadly affair begins.
What makes this movie different from all the other films with themes such as betrayal, etc, is that we see the struggle and transformation Diane's character makes. Several times we see Diane reflect on her various 'visits' to Martinez and all at once her face displays pleasure, pain, and paranoia. She brings likability to a character we should hate. Richard Gere is one of my favorite actors and I deeply respect him for taking a 'backseat' role in this film. His character torments himself wondering why his wife would possibly want to cheat on him, as he thought he was providing a perfect life.
Added suspense and thrills come about when Gere starts to suspect and eventually finds out about the affair. We then see the direct effect affairs have on families. The murder mystery was thrown in more for entertainment value but the true artistic aspect remains in the adultress' mind.
We've seen affairs start from heartbreak, drunkeness, seduction...any reason other than this film's...boredom. From boredom and seduction we get obsession, we see Diane become addicted to her breakaway from daily life. For those of you who love Richard Gere as much as I do, you really have to bite your lip watching him getting cheated on! However, there is great remorse as Connie (Diane) really does love her husband, but someone dies before the affair is ended. This movie truly remains with its viewers. I recommend picking up the haunting tracks 'Moby - Rushing' and 'E.S. Posthumus - Nara' to reexperience the emotions captured through watching 'Unfathful.' This is a definete must see!

Unfaithful, a sensual and somber drama about infidelity, stars Diane Lane and Richard Gere as a married couple headed for tragedy. Connie (Lane) and Edward (Gere) are successful suburbanites with a seemingly happy marriage, until Connie meets an attractive younger man and begins an affair. Edward wonders what's going on, hires a private detective, and gets the answer he suspected all along.

Diane Lane's character is the focus of the film. Lane is memorable as the guilt-ridden wife who is obsessed with her lover. She is lovely, mature, and honest in her portrayal. Gere is almost a supporting actor here, but he is wonderful playing an average guy. The usually stunning Gere actually has a few moments where he looks frumpy, with his glasses, slouched posture, and extra pounds. Olivier Martinez plays Lane's paramour. His character was fairly one-dimensional and could have been developed further, but he was very good in the role.

I had to watch Unfaithful twice to decide if I liked it or not (I do.). The first time, I thought it was relatively dull because of its relentlessly low-key presentation ad leisurely pace. However, on the second viewing, I found it a real winner. There are long periods without dialogue, where the camera focuses on facial nuances. The silence gives one a chance to appreciate the fine acting. The photography is excellent, from wide shots of dirty urban streets to warm glimpses of home, with child and dog. Lane did have chronically messy hair and she tugged at it endlessly, but I suppose this was to emphasize her nervous energy. The musical score was lovely; lilting and romantic.

Diane Lane certainly deserved her nomination for Best Actress; all the actors were outstanding. I recommend Unfaithful to those who looking for a thoughtful story that examines the effect of an affair on a husband and wife; it is erotic and tender, with some surprises and an excellent ending.

I really expected to enjoy this movie based on the hoopla surrounding Diane Lane's performance. However, when it was all over I wasn't all that moved and was left with several questions, such as: 1.) Why did she cheat? 2.) How will they ever get away with "it" when so many people have seen Diane Lane's character and the Frenchman together (Richard Gere's disgruntled employee, the private investigator, another female character I presume was the Frenchman's wife)? While I enjoyed much of the cinematography (the wind sequence was absolutely beautiful) and seeing Richard Gere playing against type, I still just didn't get what was so great. In fact, I saw this as another vehicle made to show gratitutious sex and then laud an Oscar nomination on the female lead. Anyone remember Halle Berry in "Monster's Ball"?

There is a certain beauty contained within this film that makes it beyond a film about infidelity and its consequences. Diane Lane didn't get my attention until the recent "The Glass House." As a new fan, I had to see 'Unfaithful'...her performance is nothing short of remarkable.
The story revolves around a 'happily married', middle-aged couple living in the suburbs of NY with one small son. Their life is the picture of the 'American dream', until one day, Mrs. Sumner (Diane Lane) goes into the city on business and cosmically collides with the much younger Paul Martel (Martinez). When he invites her in to clean up her skinned knee a most deadly affair begins.
What makes this movie different from all the other films with themes such as betrayal, etc, is that we see the struggle and transformation Diane's character makes. Several times we see Diane reflect on her various 'visits' to Martinez and all at once her face displays pleasure, pain, and paranoia. She brings likability to a character we should hate. Richard Gere is one of my favorite actors and I deeply respect him for taking a 'backseat' role in this film. His character torments himself wondering why his wife would possibly want to cheat on him, as he thought he was providing a perfect life.
Added suspense and thrills come about when Gere starts to suspect and eventually finds out about the affair. We then see the direct effect affairs have on families. The murder mystery was thrown in more for entertainment value but the true artistic aspect remains in the adultress' mind.
We've seen affairs start from heartbreak, drunkeness, seduction...any reason other than this film's...boredom. From boredom and seduction we get obsession, we see Diane become addicted to her breakaway from daily life. For those of you who love Richard Gere as much as I do, you really have to bite your lip watching him getting cheated on! However, there is great remorse as Connie (Diane) really does love her husband, but someone dies before the affair is ended. This movie truly remains with its viewers. I recommend picking up the haunting tracks 'Moby - Rushing' and 'E.S. Posthumus - Nara' to reexperience the emotions captured through watching 'Unfathful.' This is a definete must see!

Unfaithful, a sensual and somber drama about infidelity, stars Diane Lane and Richard Gere as a married couple headed for tragedy. Connie (Lane) and Edward (Gere) are successful suburbanites with a seemingly happy marriage, until Connie meets an attractive younger man and begins an affair. Edward wonders what's going on, hires a private detective, and gets the answer he suspected all along.

Diane Lane's character is the focus of the film. Lane is memorable as the guilt-ridden wife who is obsessed with her lover. She is lovely, mature, and honest in her portrayal. Gere is almost a supporting actor here, but he is wonderful playing an average guy. The usually stunning Gere actually has a few moments where he looks frumpy, with his glasses, slouched posture, and extra pounds. Olivier Martinez plays Lane's paramour. His character was fairly one-dimensional and could have been developed further, but he was very good in the role.

I had to watch Unfaithful twice to decide if I liked it or not (I do.). The first time, I thought it was relatively dull because of its relentlessly low-key presentation ad leisurely pace. However, on the second viewing, I found it a real winner. There are long periods without dialogue, where the camera focuses on facial nuances. The silence gives one a chance to appreciate the fine acting. The photography is excellent, from wide shots of dirty urban streets to warm glimpses of home, with child and dog. Lane did have chronically messy hair and she tugged at it endlessly, but I suppose this was to emphasize her nervous energy. The musical score was lovely; lilting and romantic.

Diane Lane certainly deserved her nomination for Best Actress; all the actors were outstanding. I recommend Unfaithful to those who looking for a thoughtful story that examines the effect of an affair on a husband and wife; it is erotic and tender, with some surprises and an excellent ending.

I really expected to enjoy this movie based on the hoopla surrounding Diane Lane's performance. However, when it was all over I wasn't all that moved and was left with several questions, such as: 1.) Why did she cheat? 2.) How will they ever get away with "it" when so many people have seen Diane Lane's character and the Frenchman together (Richard Gere's disgruntled employee, the private investigator, another female character I presume was the Frenchman's wife)? While I enjoyed much of the cinematography (the wind sequence was absolutely beautiful) and seeing Richard Gere playing against type, I still just didn't get what was so great. In fact, I saw this as another vehicle made to show gratitutious sex and then laud an Oscar nomination on the female lead. Anyone remember Halle Berry in "Monster's Ball"?

There is a certain beauty contained within this film that makes it beyond a film about infidelity and its consequences. Diane Lane didn't get my attention until the recent "The Glass House." As a new fan, I had to see 'Unfaithful'...her performance is nothing short of remarkable.
The story revolves around a 'happily married', middle-aged couple living in the suburbs of NY with one small son. Their life is the picture of the 'American dream', until one day, Mrs. Sumner (Diane Lane) goes into the city on business and cosmically collides with the much younger Paul Martel (Martinez). When he invites her in to clean up her skinned knee a most deadly affair begins.
What makes this movie different from all the other films with themes such as betrayal, etc, is that we see the struggle and transformation Diane's character makes. Several times we see Diane reflect on her various 'visits' to Martinez and all at once her face displays pleasure, pain, and paranoia. She brings likability to a character we should hate. Richard Gere is one of my favorite actors and I deeply respect him for taking a 'backseat' role in this film. His character torments himself wondering why his wife would possibly want to cheat on him, as he thought he was providing a perfect life.
Added suspense and thrills come about when Gere starts to suspect and eventually finds out about the affair. We then see the direct effect affairs have on families. The murder mystery was thrown in more for entertainment value but the true artistic aspect remains in the adultress' mind.
We've seen affairs start from heartbreak, drunkeness, seduction...any reason other than this film's...boredom. From boredom and seduction we get obsession, we see Diane become addicted to her breakaway from daily life. For those of you who love Richard Gere as much as I do, you really have to bite your lip watching him getting cheated on! However, there is great remorse as Connie (Diane) really does love her husband, but someone dies before the affair is ended. This movie truly remains with its viewers. I recommend picking up the haunting tracks 'Moby - Rushing' and 'E.S. Posthumus - Nara' to reexperience the emotions captured through watching 'Unfathful.' This is a definete must see!

Unfaithful, a sensual and somber drama about infidelity, stars Diane Lane and Richard Gere as a married couple headed for tragedy. Connie (Lane) and Edward (Gere) are successful suburbanites with a seemingly happy marriage, until Connie meets an attractive younger man and begins an affair. Edward wonders what's going on, hires a private detective, and gets the answer he suspected all along.

Diane Lane's character is the focus of the film. Lane is memorable as the guilt-ridden wife who is obsessed with her lover. She is lovely, mature, and honest in her portrayal. Gere is almost a supporting actor here, but he is wonderful playing an average guy. The usually stunning Gere actually has a few moments where he looks frumpy, with his glasses, slouched posture, and extra pounds. Olivier Martinez plays Lane's paramour. His character was fairly one-dimensional and could have been developed further, but he was very good in the role.

I had to watch Unfaithful twice to decide if I liked it or not (I do.). The first time, I thought it was relatively dull because of its relentlessly low-key presentation ad leisurely pace. However, on the second viewing, I found it a real winner. There are long periods without dialogue, where the camera focuses on facial nuances. The silence gives one a chance to appreciate the fine acting. The photography is excellent, from wide shots of dirty urban streets to warm glimpses of home, with child and dog. Lane did have chronically messy hair and she tugged at it endlessly, but I suppose this was to emphasize her nervous energy. The musical score was lovely; lilting and romantic.

Diane Lane certainly deserved her nomination for Best Actress; all the actors were outstanding. I recommend Unfaithful to those who looking for a thoughtful story that examines the effect of an affair on a husband and wife; it is erotic and tender, with some surprises and an excellent ending.