Angel Eyes

I stumbled on this film--because there was nothing obvious that made it look like a film worth your time. It's a film with a lot of misplaced evaluations. For instance, Jennifer Lopez was nominated for a "Razzie" award but the film shows a very fine effort from the lady. Again some comments on the photography infer the late cinematographer Piotr Sobocinsky has done a shoddy job because obvious Toronto landmarks appear in a film set in Chicago. This again is a fault of the Director and editor, not the cameraman who was one of the finest in his business (Kieslowski's "Dekalog" and "Three Colors--Red"). An intense viewing of the film affords the viewer to appreciate the opening shots, the alley shots, and the corridor shots that evoke feelings. It is quite different from the typical Hollywood camera-work.

There are flaws in the film. The film jumps to situations without a build up--Catch appears on a life saving situation, seemingly out of nowhere; two beers appear on Catch's table in the restaurant, without him ordering the second; no mention is made of why Catch chose this name; etc.

Yet despite those faults the film sails through as fine entertainment because of fine believable performances from Caviezel, Lopez, Sonia Braga, and Shirley Knight. The casting of these four was perfect (thank you Lopez for insisting on Caviezel!). The film is great entertainment because the film refrains from sex and promotes fine values--including family values, reconciliation, dealing with bereavement and doing good to make a better world. How many films are brave enough to deal with such subjects today without depicting sex and violence?

The film touches on subplots that could have been fleshed out--Catch's lonely neighbor who invites him share a pizza, Catch's friend who recognizes him at the restaurant but Director Mandoki clearly steers clear to present the two psychologically wounded persons and their healing by coming together through a sheer accident. The film may be very Christian in character but it presents a very secular, humane scenario that will uplift any viewer. Though unevenly woven, the film has several sequences that show Mandoki has fine capabilities. One only wishes he took greater care of details.

Flaws apart, the film is above average cinema that the publicity has shrouded by misplaced evaluations.

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.

There are many films in the past years that are so under appreciated, tossed

away from theaters and dismissed by the masses. Films like Donnie Darko and

Rounders fall into this category. And Angel Eyes follows their path. It's a very well-written, well-acted drama with the unstoppable Jim Caviezel and Jennifer Lopez. As many have said, this IS Lopez's best film to date and she truly shines. And Caviezel is amazing. He's one of my favorite actors and his performance,

like all of his other films, is utterly spectacular. The dialogue is flawless and although the story takes a while to progress and the pacing is slow, Angel Eyes is worth checking out.

Do you remember the previews for Angel Eyes? Many of us don't. What few of us remember is a 30 second preview that ran only a handful of times that showed Jennifer Lopez as a female cop. That was it. Na drama, no emotion, the previews told the audience a story about a female police officer, nothing else. This is probably the biggest reason why nobody went to see this movie when it went to the cinema. Only when it hit the video stores, did people start wo watch. A beautiful film, Angel Eyes is a romance. Dealing with redemption, it deals with many degrees of love and hope. In fact, many people detail Jennifer Lopez as "Angel Eyes." This is not true. Take a deeper look and you will see that James Caviezel is the true Angel Eyes.

I found this movie really engaging, even though it's imperfect directorially. Much of my admiration, though, may be because I fell madly in love with Jim Caviezel and his quiet, handsome, troubled but gently noble character (so bear that in mind!)...

Jennifer Lopez did very well - a sparky performance as always. Her police officer role appears to come very naturally to her, and the pairing is interesting with the initially mysterious Caviezel character.

Overall this movie may not win awards, but the lead characters are well drawn and their developing relationship is engaging, unpredictable and endearingly life-like. It's a nice romantic movie which draws you in.