Hidden City

I am another one who can't understand the good reviews. Maybe you have to be British to like it. I'm not so, I don't. Why did Charles Dance's character keep following the girl around? Tell her to give you the money she promised for ripping your jacket then tell her to go away. Movie over.

Instead we get, I'll take you here but I'm not going in. Next scene, he's in. Okay I'll take you there but I'm not going in. Next scene, he's in. He shows no interest in what she's looking for. Why keep following her? Does he really need the money to fix his jacket? She did steal his book too. Call the cops, have her arrested, end of bad movie.

I only watched this picture because of my current obsession with Charles Dance. It's a very strange film, rather too artsy and noir for my taste, but in general a pretty good picture.

A few items: far too much is made of the "hidden city" component. Any older city has subterranean tunnels and chambers. Disused subways, dry drains, utility shafts and connectors, power cable channels, catacombs, and sewage pipes form a veritable honeycomb beneath a city's surface. Not secret so much as not relevant to the daily life of ordinary people. That these areas might be useful for file storage is sensible and efficient.

The more intriguing mystery for me was why the writers writers (who otherwise did an excellent job) failed to give us explanations to these questions:

Why would an intelligent, sophisticated, educated man disregard several days' worth of scheduled meetings in order to assist a complete stranger in an ill-defined quest for information of questionable value?

Why, having learned the mysterious government secret, do the pair do absolutely nothing with what they've learned? It's implausible that anybody would go to so much trouble merely to satisfy idle curiosity.

And finally, why do the pair decide to continue rummaging for secrets?

On the plus side, "Hidden City" does include a very excellent performance by Charles Dance. I think that one of the more difficult challenges for an actor is speaking lines that convey information the audience needs but would never be uttered in real-life conversation. The film contains an astonishingly large number of such lines, and Dance delivered them so naturally that only when I'd finished watching did I realize. In fact, I can't think of a better example of that sort of acting. Well done, Charles Dance!

This film is a such a unique gem. Anchored by two amazing main characters, with so many differences between them, and there are also so many side characters introduced, and every single one of them is likeable, interesting and believable. So many shots and scenes that give you the idea that this was a tremendous production. The opening scene through the water tunnels is mesmerizing.

The back and forth dramatic dialogue between the two protagonists is something you don't get much anymore. There are so many lines that consist of something you may have never heard of. This film rewards itself for having the magical combination of an ambitious and creative filmmaker, talented actors and a unique and thoroughly interesting script. Not only that but it takes place in some incredible locations.

This is a vibrant film, obviously the masterpiece of a painstaking and meticulous production. This film will show you parts of London many people have likely never seen. Kudos to Stephen Poliakoff. It is highly recommended to watch this with his commentary on the Blu-ray release.

The film is not without faults. I got the feeling that there was sometimes too much music. In some scenes, the music was perfect and elevated the moment to new heights. In other scenes, I wanted to plug my ears and enjoy the fantastic cinematography. Many of the best scenes are also the quietest and I think that says something. Quite possibly it could have been elevated to greater stardom if the music had just let the scenes breathe. This film will test your patience if what you're after is the mystery itself and not the journey. In this film you should be patient and enjoy the ride if you want to appreciate it more.

At times you might think the film takes itself a little too seriously. But if you keep watching you'll realize that they should indeed be taken seriously.

I read all the other comments - are we watching the same movie?? Apparently this director went on to bigger and better things, but this movie was not good, not even for a starter. The premise was okay, but the execution was not. The female lead needed to stop yelling, at the least. She was never a sympathetic character; I thought she was annoying. The dialog was shallow, and did not really develop the characters. Lots of walking, no talking. It was a 15 minute plot in movie form. Charles Dance seems to have spent most of his earlier film career in fuzzy, badly produced movies. I wonder what could have happened had he spent more time in Hollywood, or if Merchant and Ivory had found places for him in their films.... When he has the right material, he is good. I waited for this movie to show more intrigue - all I got was waiting for scenes where there was some real action and some real acting (and scenes that did not feature the female lead). Oh, well.

I loved this film for two reasons.

Firstly, it was well written and the direction was strong which is something often lacking in a British film.

Secondly, the scenes of London were fantastic; especially those parts of the city not always open to the public eye.