Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

There were a few concepts that are regularly delivered in thick spreads and contrivances by a cast, with the exception of Michael Caine, who are not up to the complexities of the subject matter. It actually looked like the actors themselves didn't really believe in what they were portraying and at odds internally with the ham handed, prejudicial and unreal aspects of the story ie. universal hypocrisy within the church and among ALL it's members, not an honest catholic to be found, all these people were sniveling hypocrites skulking around relying on the principle of absolution without remorse or recompense, atonement and it got a bit thick at times. There was a way to portray the seamier side of church behaviour and politics but this film didn't get it. It came off like a masturbatory exercise to be indulged by judgmental agnostics and atheists both on and off the screen and made to appeal to popularly held though not necessarily universally correct beliefs about religious organizations. Am not a church goer or a defender of catholicism by any means but this film got lost in popular mythology at the expense of the truth.

the best acting was between Charlotte Rampling and Michael Caine, but Tilda Swinton does quiet well also.Perfectly paced, tense throughout, full of no-sympathy for Michael Caine nor all the priests who are helping him. Tilda's role is too stereotyped, but she acts so well it doesn't matter. Northam is something of a throw-in just to have another good character, same as Alan Bates. Caine is superb as the man with the twisted Catholic conscience who thinks he can do immense evil and then confess away hell. There was somewhat too much of the everybody-finds-everybody stuff, and the guys who were killed by Caine were too stupid for words, and that was the only false part of the movie.

Pure rubbish, ridden through with stereotypical Anglo-Saxon anti-Catholic and anti-Continental bigotries and biases. Having said that, some nice scenery but that was about it. I can't believe Michael Caine made something this poor at this point in his career.And now adding more content to satisfy IMDb's requirements: Michael Caine plays an ex-Nazi French collaborator; he "acts" exceedingly nervous throughout the film helped no doubt by the liberal application of some oil-based lubricant to his face; Church officials are of course portrayed as deeply corrupt and dishonest, protecting their pro-fascist sympathies until the heat gets turned on them when naturally they sell out their own man, and so on. Again, the only reason to watch are some nice scenes of the French countryside, one could even let it run with the sound off as a kind of background living-room panoramic.

After the Nazi's were driven out of France, those who had collaborated were mostly rounded up and punished – many by death. However some escaped and were hidden, while others rose in power within the new regime. Pierre Brossard is one of the former and continues to live in fear, protected from those that would avenge his victims by his friends within the Catholic Church. However a close encounter shows that some group is closing in on him, meanwhile political pressure from Judge Livi and Colonel Roux's investigation into his whereabouts mean that he is quickly running out of friends willing to shelter him.It is difficult to know how to approach this film because it itself doesn't seem too sure of what it is trying to do. Is it a drama looking at the idea of fleeing war criminals? Is it a chase movie? Is it a character piece looking at Brossard? It is never clear because it does do some elements of each but it doesn't really do anything that well and I, as a viewer, was a bit confused about what I was supposed to feel or think during it. The story itself is OK, reasonably engaging but not having anything of interest to it. As a chase film I was interested and the themes helped it seem more than the sum of its parts but not in reality. The motivations of the characters are never that well developed; the Livi/Roux parts are dull and quite routine although the sections with Brossard are more interesting.It is a shame then that the film cannot decide what it wants to do with him – do we feel for him, hate him or just watch him? The film doesn't let us decide this in a good way representing the complex nature of the character, but rather just doesn't push out any ideas one way or another. Caine does well despite this and gives a good character a bit of depth. He is where the film is although he probably benefits from the fact that everyone else is quite ordinary. Swinton and Northam are quite ordinary and their parts of the film just seem put of place and half-cooked. Support from Neville, Bates, Rampling and others just about do the job but add little.Overall this is an OK film but nothing at all more than that. Despite the interesting and complex potential the film just delivers an ordinary chase movie and fails to do anything with the ideas and concepts inherent in it. Caine does well to produce quite a convincing character but he is alone in that, with the material and the rest of the cast failing to do anything that interesting. Not bad but not worth trying to find because it is nowhere near as good as one would have hoped.