Waste of time

Go in cold, and you're likely to emerge with your blood boiling. This has to be seen to be believed.

It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

So this is what Jennifer Lopez can do when she tries! She is well cast as a tough Chicago female cop. I once had a friend who was a female cop in Washington, DC, I hung out with her cop pals sometimes, took part in their banter about their latest arrests, was even taken to see them in the cells, and all of that sort of thing is completely accurately portrayed in this film. This is obviously very much Lopez's own natural element: street life and all that goes with it. I can actually believe that she could have become just such a policewoman. She should play more such roles with true grit, as they suit her better than normal romances. She actually looks completely natural when she is punching people in the face and laying them out cold. (I hope she doesn't do that at home.) Apparently she insisted that the mysterious man in the film must be played by Jim Caviezel, which was the perfect choice, and her instinct was spot on. Caviezel does a wonderful job, and his mysterious eyes are just right for someone who does not actually know whether he is dead or alive, and could be either. The deeper purpose of this film is to show the dark, swirling psychological whirlpools of Lopez's family story on the one hand and Caviezel's tale on the other hand. Lopez is superb at conveying her searing emotional turmoil, which is constantly erupting above the surface as rage. Both her father and her brother are uncontrollably violent wife-bashers. She did the right thing as a girl by calling the police when he was beating up her mother, and had him arrested. Not only did the father never really speak to her again, but the mother could not forgive her either, which is of course typical of many battered wives, who suffer from the psychological sickness of not wanting to put a stop to it, and who have married these men on purpose (subconsciously, of course); the sister-in-law is another one who is just the same. Really, there is nothing more annoying than a battered woman who secretly wants it. The irony is that Lopez herself, in going 'to the side of the law' and becoming a policewoman, ends up using her fists a lot herself, but this time to stop crime, not to beat up a spouse. This shows how violent impulses can be turned away from the bad and be used for the good sometimes. (However, special forces soldiers, who are an extreme version of this, generally end up as psychological wrecks, and I know some.) Caviezel's dilemma and the coincidence of their double meetings border on the supernatural, and talented director Luis Mandoki and equally talented writer Gerald di Pego (they earlier collaborated on the excellent 1999 film 'Message in a Bottle') stress all the most mysterious angles in this tale, which makes the whole film more profound than it might otherwise have been, without ever descending into affectation. Shirley Knight gives excellent acting support, and the whole cast are good. This is a highly worthwhile film, which takes a star who often does superficial films and puts her into something real, with excellent results.

Mandoki's 'Angel Eyes' is one movie that I had walked out on, twice. But for some reason, I stayed through the whole film during the third viewing, and I'm glad I did. Now, the problem with 'Angel Eyes' is the incoherence during the entire first hour. The story unfolds into something different each time while not staying within the frame of the main story. It's confusing. It's misleading. That works for some movies but not for 'Angel Eyes'. The reason why I had walked out earlier was because at some point the movie really drags but once the characters confront their own pain, the conflicts are presented and somewhat resolved. I appreciate Mandoki's attempt in telling the story of two lonely characters: One who is traumatized by a past event that changed his life and the other who has been neglected (almost disowned) by her family because she did the right thing. In spite of the mess in the beginning, he gets most of it right towards the end. The confrontation scene between Sharon and her family at the 'vow-renewal party' and the scene where Catch visits his wife and child's grave are very well executed. I liked the chemistry between Caviezel and Lopez. James Caviezel delivers a quietly subtle performance. It seems as though the part was made for him. Jennifer Lopez is a mixture. While she was terrible in some scenes, there were some shining moments of excellent acting, especially in the beginning and the latter half. She also carries off the copper role very well, just like she did in 'Out of Sight'. So, I guess it wasn't such a bad watch as I had thought earlier. Just needed some patience.

Once again, Jennifer Lopez proves that she is a wonderful actress. Ms. Lopez truly the star of the movie. Also, the story itself is good and there is a strong performance by Jim Caveziel. This movie explores some very sensitive subjects ... death, loneliness, grief ... as well as renewal, restoration and redemption. At times the movie borders on sentimentality but manages to avoid that pitfall as Ms. Lopez's fine performance transcends any weaknesses contained in the script and transforms this movie into something special. A man experiences devastating personal loss, a woman has unrequited anger, both are alone yet both overcome their personal issues to come together and move forward in their lives. When managed correctly and respectfully, these themes are the ingredients that make for a good movie and in this case it works.

couldn't agree more with Jugu Abraham ([email protected])'s comments on this movie!especially when Jugu talks about the movie business 'handling' a modest yet good movie like this, or Jennifer Lopez's 'true acting' in so "Razzie" a manner!? (sure JL's face has some kind of a smile on it often times that doesn't quite go with a sad moment, but hey, that's her natural looks after all! many people are like that ...)well, what better can we expect of the "paparazzi / tabloid" movie industry of Hollywood and its mostly pseudo-intellectual elite? (for the most part though; otherwise, there is a reasonable deal of thoughtful stuff in Hollywood too to be fair.)yes, i think it is really tricky to tell a sentimental story without too sentimentally ruining it while at the same time delving deeper into people's minds and emotions. especially in movies. and this one has done a really good job indeed considering just that fact.and Jugu, you're so right; a movie can be so emotional, sexy, provocative even and all that without necessarily showing sex so directly. in fact, the Stephen-King-style psycho-analytical thriller cliché's and their so naive imitation clones in the last three decades or so, with all the torn apart and violent sex in so many mediocre movies post-'60s, blended with all the shoot 'em up / blast 'em off / kick their butts video games post-'70s, plus all the hype and superstition that is being fed to people in the name of "dooms day" SciFi (majority of them at least) have removed that soft and peaceful and humane experiences of life almost totally! ("Why does everybody have to rush things these days?" Catch'es MIL in the scene JL goes to talk to her about his past.) the 'blues café' scene is particularly good, with one of the best choices of old and forgotten yet so beautiful a melody that is so appropriate not only to the scene, but also to evoke emotions and memories many of us seem to have lost and forgotten ...(yes Ray Romano: we used to play the Love Story on our pianos at home in the not so distant past, didn't we? ... whatever became of that?) another part that is SO good by all standards, is when JL talks directly into the camera in the party scene. not only it is so innovative technically speaking, but it is to the point! a cliché' of our lives (recording our cliché' moments of life on video almost constantly) is broken, or put to good use to use a better term, in this particular section of the movie.there is action in this movie, there is adventure, there is drama, there is fun, there is even sex and violence and everything that the industry requires a "financially successful movie" to have, yet it is neither of them. it is just plain good stuff in here! there are great movies (in terms of production) that are seldom great. there are small movies (in terms of production) that are just so great in content and the effect they have on the viewer can last forever perhaps. this one is one of them: angel eyes."... it doesn't have to be perfect, it can be whatever it is!" - from the movie.