Cardinals

Ok, I get it's a low budget movie. Acting was fair. The story line above average. However the movie was extremely slow. It never had an exciting moment. The ending was poor. Without spoiling anything, what you are led to believe happened at the end would not have happened by actual law. Can think of a much better ending but I think the person deserved what happened and they just wrote it in the story line. Only watch this if you are extremely bored.

Sad, dark, expressive.... acting with expression was well done, characters spot on, this film held my attention easily, made me think, I really enjoyed its quality....

Saw this at TIFF. Wasn't expecting a lot so was very pleasantly surprised. This is a deliberate (some might say slow) and well drawn psychological thriller. We start with a scene that makes little sense and then fast-forward a number of years. There is clearly a mystery here surrounding a crime that was committed some years earlier by the starring character. However, as the movie begins to unfold and the pieces fall into place, the mystery slowly takes shape. As the viewer, we are anxious to see the next piece of the puzzle reveal itself but the movie takes its time and this only adds to the suspense. All the lead characters contribute effectively to the tension which builds throughout. Peter Spence, in a secondary role as the parole officer adds some much-needed humour to the scenes in which he appears. The combination of his facial expressions and dialogue elicited much laughter in the theater on the day that I watched the film (I didn't think that beef and black bean sauce could be such an amusing expression). And if you like swans, you will be very happy with a scene about two-thirds of the way into the film. The ending is written so as not to hit the viewer over the head and leaves perhaps a number of questions which my wife and I discussed as we walked out of the theater into the bright daylight of the fading summer. A real little gem!

This is an exceptional piece of film work. A very tight, very smart screenplay and an excellent cast make for a terse, intense, complex movie.Sheila McCarthy really is so much of the film's strength. The title role called for a strong, seasoned actor, and McCarthy shows she was more than up to the task. So much is expressed by her without a word; which can also be said of the other expressive actors. Don't pay any attention to the 'Short Attention Span Theater' types calling this film 'slow', 'boring', or how nothing happens. They need to stick to Vin Diesel, Adam Sandler, and rom-coms. The movie's only 84 min. How can it be too slow if it's not even an hour and a half? I'm guessing several were too confused by it much of the way through and were pissed that they couldn't figure out what was up before it was fully revealed. Don't blame the film for being smarter than you.

I saw the first Crack when Mark kept on about the dog or whatever she said ran in front of her.

Even with that stupid angle out of the picture, Mark did not know what his father did, nor did Valerie's ex coworker tell him.

Add what happened at the AA meeting, followed by the stupid nonsense with a parole officer inviting Mark into the house. Hugemongus plot hole right there, unless in Canada they allow such stupidity from those in the criminal justice system.

Soooooo, why would the PO even question her about the accusations, and even more of a face palming. Why after all what she went through before, during and after release from prison would she admit to the crime????? A plot hole the size of the sun.

Hence my 4 out of 10 rating.