A Sombra do Medo

"Shadow of Fear" draws upon the elements of suspense from the famous genre of film noir. It also shares similarities to films from earlier decades in "The Brotherhood of the Bell" (1970) and "The Star Chamber" (1983). All three films focus on a secret male society that goes outside the law to protect the interests and advance the agendas of its members. I admired director Rich Cowan's camera angles and stylish cinematography in "Shadow of Fear." There was also good suspense sustained in the mysteries activities of the secret club.

At the heart of the action is the character of Harrison French, admirably played by Matthew Davis. Harrison is caught in a web of intrigue after an unfortunate incident of manslaughter while driving in a blinding rain. He is subsequently manipulated by the ringleader of the secret brotherhood, performed with great relish by James Spader. The cast is rounded out with veteran actors Peter Coyote and Aidan Quinn, along with good support from Robin Tunney, Alice Krige, and Lacey Chabert.

Beyond the effective and suspenseful plot, I was especially intrigued by the consistently morose and clinically depressed cast of characters. Despite the great affluence portrayed in the film, the main characters all suffered from guilt for their past conduct and by the obsession of keeping their skeletons in the closet, through assistance of Spader's oily attorney, William Ashbury. It is especially revealing when throughout the film, the protagonist Harrison is chomping on prescription antidepressant medication in order to cope with even the slightest setback.

In "The Brotherhood of the Bell" and "The Star Chamber," the secret society went outside the lines of society's ethics in the pursuit of such concepts as "truth" and "justice." By contrast, in "Shadow of Fear," there were no redeeming ideals as the members of the society sought only to cover up one another's past transgressions. Literally, no one seemed happy in this film. Not even the powerful attorney Ashbury could remedy their sorry state of depression.

I'm surprised this movie has got such a high rating. It starts out very promising with some nice images in the rain. In fact, it is extremely fascinating about until the time when he gets back to his wife and they begin talking. After that the movie falls apart little by little, until it becomes so borderline non-sensible that I just had to turn it off. It is not a matter of "plot twists" as some viewer suggested. Obviously, it is a question of just not being able to put a decent plot together. I see an alarming trend in the new DVD-market where many movies are put out quicker and easier to DVD than it was possible in the good old video days. American horror has suffered in recent years, and did not improve with the pathetic remakes of brilliant Asian horror. Anyway, "Shadow of Fear" is not a horror-movie. It is hardly even a movie. If it had only lasted until he got back to his wife, and she then turned into a demon or something; then it would have been a good "Twilight Zone"-episode but when a movie-plot collapses like that in one superfluous scene after the other then it becomes irrelevant to watch. As one viewer suggested, we are never told what this "organisation" does. I think, this is a major problem. On the back of the DVD it said something about a secret "cult"-organisation with big power. It sounded promising but in the movie this organisation seems completely devoid of power, so what's the point?

a movie about a secret society of men who are made to pay too high a price to redeem themselves of their sins. The movie focuses around main actor Harrisson French who is made to believe that he ran over his brother -in -law by the leader of this secret society, William Ashbury and the only way he is to keep from getting busted by the cops is to provide favours for Ashbury. Surprise, surprise French becomes the hero of this really boring story. A very average performance coupled with an even poorer plot make this one something that will probably and most rightly so, never be seen by the lucky majority. My rating: 4.5

I liked this movie. I even watched it a second time so that I could catch the little things I missed the first time around. I suppose it was a lame plot with lame actors (average B movie), but I liked it. James Spader plays his usual sleaze-ball rich guy and as usual, he does so quite well. I thought he was pretty tricky in the way he trapped society's best. I have to admit I was a bit confused the first time through as to the exact purpose of the Tuesday meetings--things became clearer as the movie progressed. Overall I thought the "secret Tuesday society" was a pretty cool (albeit sick) idea. The ending was very cool and worth the wait. I love murder mysteries and this was a good smooth-flowing storyline.

I felt quite at a loss after this movie. I wondered and wondered, remembering fine details that might contain some important clue for the story. There might be, but I found none. So I concluded either it may be a very intelligent mystery thriller, or it may be just pure crap. So when they showed the film again four days later I began to see it again and found it intolerable after 30 minutes.

I don't know just what the screenwriter was thinking. Same old premises, average locations, predictable camera angles and not-too-bad acting. You can't make a masterpiece out of this. Probably the director or screenwriter set a goal too high. Well, James Spader as an actor is always nice to watch and here's no exception. But the others were below average (especially Robin Tunney). Really, I expected the film not very good, but I didn't know I won't get the story at all.