Very well executed

Really Surprised!

Powerful

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

I am trying to see every movie ever made with Mickey Rourke playing a part in it, no matter how small. I watched this movie just two nights ago, and then came to IMDb to see who the other actors were. I believe this is a very good movie, just to see the workings behind a movie being made, the manipulations of the producers, and the fights that take place between the "stars", and the director were very interesting, and vicious(verbally)! I thought that Mickey played his part with complete believability, as to how a director would try to keep control of the way he envisions a character acting. As opposed to the way the actor playing the main character, see himself playing the part. This main actor seemed to portray somewhat, characteristics of Mickey Rourke, himself in early roles, and had the same personality conflicts that I have read about between Mickey and directors he was involved with while making his own career faux pas. I kept thinking, wow, is Mickey's character going to KILL this jerk-off? Then about the actor playing the producer, wow, is Mickey's character going to KILL this jerk-off? I don't know why, but I kept thinking that they were going to push the director over the edge. Mickey had made a statement that this was a huge opportunity for his character, to be directing this movie, so I thought that the character was going to snap! He didn't, and I breathed a sigh of relief when he didn't. The addition of the real mass murderer character, still alive and in prison, was an exciting insert, because now, his character could interact with the people making the movie of his crimes, and he could (and would) have some input, and also a lot of emotional display to the turns in the plot lines. Not only to his involvement with the way his part was being acted out, but to the way that the actor playing him, lived his own life, outside of the production!! I tell you, it was all very very well thought out and portrayed! By ALL the actors involved with this movie. I had no inkling that there were any "inside jokes". Nor anything about a favorite club, and how the whistled tune, or the radio show, alluded to it. Still this film caught my attention, and held it from first frame to last. I graded the actors thusly: Gene Bervoets:A. Jan Decleir: C+ (only because his part was so short). Mireille Leveque: B. Mickey Rourke: B+. Producer Guy: A-.I am sorry that I don't remember who played the other parts, I mean what their names were, but I do remember the characters named Bob and Dylan. (How could I not, Bob Dylan is an American Icon)! They were funny and I laughed at that. I remember the actress that played Amy, but her part didn't really show if she could act or not. So, I didn't give her any grade. Over all, it was a good film, I would recommend it to anyone, who just likes good films, that have a very rooted plot, and a slick way with the script that is new and humorously done, to all jaded audiences.(Mainly us here in the good ole USofA).

Okidokie.When Shades was first released, they marketed it like hell, or at least, so I've heard. Final result: high expectations, few adorations.Time zap. Six years later. 'Shades' is practically forgotten; it seems to have retreated into the shadows of director Van Looy's acclaimed third film 'Alzheimer Case', a major blockbuster.Thank god for Canvas, more or less the cultural TV station of Flanders, and its great show 'FilmFactory'. Thank god I got the chance to watch 'Shades'. No media attention, no high expectations, just me and a television set.I loved it. Great acting, good story, good cinematics... A superb film, that hopefully can step out of the Alzheimer-shadows. Until then, enjoy this bashed but excellent cult film. Van Looy is truly one of Flander's finest.

This film was shot in my home town, the main reason I went to see it. I have to say I was pleasantly surprised. While certainly not a masterpiece, 'Shades' is a treat for two reasons : its mild albeit funny comment on the film industry and its unashamed 'American' approach. Its main aim is to entertain, and if it manages to work on quite a few levels along the way, who's gonna complain? A smart blend of fact and fiction, it focuses on the filming of the life of serial killer Freddy Lebeck -who, as Belgian viewers may note, looks an eerie lot like real-life mass murderer Freddy Horion. He, for one, is famous for never taking of his shades. Slick and fast-paced direction makes for a flashy thriller, and although no-one in it will be winning an Oscar any time soon, the many jokes and winks will help to hold your attention until the very end -which, I will reveal, is pretty original in comparison to what Belgian cinema has been calling conclusions lately. Add to this the admirable quality to poke fun at itself, and it's perfect for a rainy day.

This movie was advertised on radio, television, magazines, etc. Almost every hour or every issue. So when we went to the Kinnepolis multiplex our expectations were very high. But oh boy, how sad this movie is! It is a movie in Hollywood style about a movie in a movie. Shades shows so clear we aren't ready to produce 'big Hollywood movies'. I am not a movie critic, but I think a good movie starts with a good script. And the script is a nightmare. Like my subject line says, it is nothing, and then looped. You could just stare to the television as well, without really seeing anything. That was the feeling we've got when we saw Shades. Shades is a BAD PRODUCTION!!!