Admirable film.

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

simply terrible ... even kate beckinsdale who is apparently a competent actress in other roles, is just ridiculously bad in this pathetic adaptation of one of the finest novelists of the last 50 years ... it is just beyond me how they could watch the dailies during the filming and think they had anything other than the poorest type of community theatre production ... either ridiculous reactions to other character's actions or words or stomach curdling overwrought howling fits by beckinsdale make this one of the 10 worst movies i've seen in the last 20 years ...and to ruin one of the fine novels of Arturo Pérez-Reverte is truly a crime ... this kind of movie unfortunately reflects on the novelist and makes movie adaptations of his other works unlikely ... as if it's his fault ... read his novels ...and furthermore the soundtrack almost made me turn the movie off in the first ten minutes ... my god ... it's as if they searched royalty free soundtracks and then chose a mixture of the worst ones ... annoying at times to where you're thinking of murder but not from the plot ... so pathetically 'obvious' as when they suddenly insert an old sax-dominated noir type section when beckinsdale is searching her apartment ... just awful and kate is playing a brit ... why are her pits hairy? and of course why bother having actors at least use a Spanish accent for the parts that are supposed to be spaniards ... just use a British accent ... that sounds 'european' enough ...jim mcbride should be horsewhipped for doing this ... actually he should get double punishment for directing it as well as completely mucking up the novel with his input on the screenplay ... the other two dolts credited with the screenplay are obviously adleminded since they wanted their name on this piece of trash and again why can't we give ZERO STARS???!!!

This is a worthwhile experience, despite all the many flaws the film has. It's a weak work in most of the skills you may think of, related to film technique, and film expression: The acting is childish, this applies to practically every participant. Exception made to Beckinsale, she moves around in a naive boyish manner, but she distills sex, she is that character who concentrates attentions, without being excessively aware of that. She does it well. The rest of the acting is weak. The editing doesn't help as well. The premises for the montage work in a film such as this one weren't so hard to follow. They just had to tell physical actions, linear and common. Yet there are transitions, basic continuity problems that aren't solved, expressions in the faces that change, and so on. The music is also not well placed, it's a bad soundtrack in its own musical value, but above all in the mood that transmits. The tribal references weren't needed, and in the kind of story depicted, noir influenced, it would have been nice to have the music link the sets and evolutions in the story line.But there are three things for which i think this is worth taking a look. One is the narrative structure, how the story moves on. This is based on a novel by Pérez-Reverte, the man who also wrote Ninth Gate. So we have a merging of art and life, the story happening in front of us was "written" or at least determined many years ago, buy an artist, in this case a painter. The first scene is masterful in transmitting this, really it was one of the most economic and meaningful first scenes i saw ever. It basically starts with a closeup of a hand in a painting (a hand as a synonym for power, ability to do things), and the camera moves away from the painting (it moves, it's not a zoom out)and we get to see the border of the painting fully merged with the "real" environment surrounding it. This illusion of merger works for a few moments after which we get into the environment and momentarily forget the painting. This really works.Other thing is the use of House Batló, by Gaudi. It's interesting how the camera (and the editing) lies about the building, to enhance it's qualities. It's not a particularly brilliant exploration of the space, but it's quite competent: what happens is, we get Beckinsale going up the stairs that lead to the first floor, she rings the bell in that first floor. These stairs are beautiful, they curve like the back of an animal, you get the sensation of elevation, instead of going up. Than this is edited and the inner space we get is from inside the attic, which is built with bows that remind an animal spine and bones. Later in the film, we have an outside establishing shot that leads the camera, from the outside, all the way up to the attic. We understand that the character lives in the attic, not in the first floor. This was interesting and showed a specific interest in playing with the house. A side note is that this film is a good opportunity for you to check the great ground floor of the house, which is today polluted by the bars which conduct the tourists, and the tourists themselves, lining up to get in, and filling the sidewalk around. Pity. I have a theory that tourism is literally killing and sucking life out of our best places in the world, but this is another discussion.Anyway, the touristic gaze can also be seen in the shots that depict the city. Here we also get lies, usually related to the intention of getting the establishing shots. Here i think they messed up. They didn't have to show all the known places all the time. There are fantastic relatively hidden places in that city that show more of its mood and life than the monuments. One of those places is actually used, the St Antoni market (the protagonist lives in front of it). The place is alive, and they use it well in some scenes. But than they lie about the city, so we have her going from Batló, to Rambla, to the Temple, to the market as if they were close enough to walk to, one after the other, sequenced like i said. It's a lie, i have nothing against it, but i have against making the postcard taking nothing useful out of it. A good use of common architecture is the one made with Beckinsale's house, especial its central stairs, and central lifter. The use of Park Guëll is not particularly interest, except for some movement between columns, but that's it. And in that movement, they inserted some staged flirting between couples. Very poor, very artificial, they didn't need to do it, the park has an interesting life on its own.My opinion: 3/5http://www.7eyes.wordpress.com

This film has had some negative reviews but I don't feel that they are entirely fair. The book that the film is based on is very literary and lifeless and the events improbable. So even though the book has a clever plot it is TOO clever. It's like clockwork where you can see little wheels moving instead of living people. The film tries to correct this by changing it into a story of characters of flesh and blood that can arouse the interest of the audience. It succeeds in some ways but the whole thing somehow falls apart and never manages to be entirely engaging or convincing. A good example of this is that the reason why and how the murders have a connection with the painting and the chess problem is never explained in the film. I mean why would the murderer bother to connect what he does to the chess problem? It's explained in the book but not the film. It's still worth watching and it certainly has more life in it than the book.

This movie is a very poor translation from the novel. Loosely based at best, with location and characters changed to the point where they are barely recognizable. The original plot of this story was intriguing and one that would make a great movie, had it been written with clarity and thought. However this version is designed with plenty of liberties taken on character development and plot continuity. Some I am sure would love the generous portion of nudity without reason or cause. Kate Beckinsale wandering around on the screen naked for no apparent reason is something I doubt we would see much of now. If you enjoy laughing over a miserable attempt to make a mystery, then by all means, rent this one, have some friends over, make popcorn, and have a cooler of beer on hand, and prepare to be entertained. But if you are looking for an edge of your seat afternoon of entertainment, look elsewhere.