Heart of Town

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.

Heart of Town_720p(480P)

source: Heart of Town

The good thing about the IMDB is that you can read ALL the reviews, see the votes, and pretty much figure out who is working for a studio and planting good reviews, and who the real movie fans are. Real movie fans, listen up; don't waste your time with this movie. The plot I'll leave to other reviewers with much more time and patience on their hands, I'll just say this; it doesn't make a lot of sense. But the good thing is, you don't care, because you're busy doing your laundry and making phone calls while the movie drones on. There is no chemistry at ALL between Lopez and Cazivel. Not one bit. There's no good camera work, and the music is bad too. Don't bother with this one.

So this is what Jennifer Lopez can do when she tries! She is well cast as a tough Chicago female cop. I once had a friend who was a female cop in Washington, DC, I hung out with her cop pals sometimes, took part in their banter about their latest arrests, was even taken to see them in the cells, and all of that sort of thing is completely accurately portrayed in this film. This is obviously very much Lopez's own natural element: street life and all that goes with it. I can actually believe that she could have become just such a policewoman. She should play more such roles with true grit, as they suit her better than normal romances. She actually looks completely natural when she is punching people in the face and laying them out cold. (I hope she doesn't do that at home.) Apparently she insisted that the mysterious man in the film must be played by Jim Caviezel, which was the perfect choice, and her instinct was spot on. Caviezel does a wonderful job, and his mysterious eyes are just right for someone who does not actually know whether he is dead or alive, and could be either. The deeper purpose of this film is to show the dark, swirling psychological whirlpools of Lopez's family story on the one hand and Caviezel's tale on the other hand. Lopez is superb at conveying her searing emotional turmoil, which is constantly erupting above the surface as rage. Both her father and her brother are uncontrollably violent wife-bashers. She did the right thing as a girl by calling the police when he was beating up her mother, and had him arrested. Not only did the father never really speak to her again, but the mother could not forgive her either, which is of course typical of many battered wives, who suffer from the psychological sickness of not wanting to put a stop to it, and who have married these men on purpose (subconsciously, of course); the sister-in-law is another one who is just the same. Really, there is nothing more annoying than a battered woman who secretly wants it. The irony is that Lopez herself, in going 'to the side of the law' and becoming a policewoman, ends up using her fists a lot herself, but this time to stop crime, not to beat up a spouse. This shows how violent impulses can be turned away from the bad and be used for the good sometimes. (However, special forces soldiers, who are an extreme version of this, generally end up as psychological wrecks, and I know some.) Caviezel's dilemma and the coincidence of their double meetings border on the supernatural, and talented director Luis Mandoki and equally talented writer Gerald di Pego (they earlier collaborated on the excellent 1999 film 'Message in a Bottle') stress all the most mysterious angles in this tale, which makes the whole film more profound than it might otherwise have been, without ever descending into affectation. Shirley Knight gives excellent acting support, and the whole cast are good. This is a highly worthwhile film, which takes a star who often does superficial films and puts her into something real, with excellent results.

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.

Possible Spoilers Although Sharon Pogue, the central character in this film, is a Chicago police officer with a beat in one of the city's roughest districts, this is not a traditional 'tough cop' thriller. Rather, it is the story of a romance between Sharon and a mysterious stranger named Catch, which begins when he saves her life while she is confronting a violent criminal. Catch is a strange figure who lives alone in a deserted building and who wanders the streets performing acts of kindness to strangers. Sharon finds herself emotionally drawn to this baffling young man, who appears simple-minded but gentle, fey and vulnerable yet nonthreatening, and the two begin a romantic relationship. As the film progresses, we realize that Catch had a previous life very different to the one he leads now. We learn, for instance, that his real name is Steven Lambert and that he is a talented jazz musician. There are also hints of a secret in his past which has left him with an overwhelming sense of guilt; we eventually learn what that secret is, although I will not reveal it here. Sharon also has psychological problems arising from her difficult relationship with her family, particularly with her abusive father, which started when she reported him to the police because of his violent behaviour towards her mother. The main themes of the film are the need for forgiveness- of oneself as well as of others- reconciliation and redemption. We see how Sharon and Catch deal with the shadows of the past which are threatening to destroy their chances of happiness. Unlike some, I did not see Catch as a Christ-figure (possibly those who did were influenced by the fact that the same actor, Jim Caviezel, also played Jesus in Mel Gibson's recent 'The Passion of the Christ') or the film as an overtly religious one. The themes of forgiveness and redemption are capable of being understood in a secular way as well as a religious one. It is, however, possibly a spiritual film, and certainly a poetic one. Certain scenes- such as the one where Catch and Sharon realize their love for one another while swimming in a disused quarry and the one in the nightclub where Catch rediscovers his love of jazz- struck me as having a particularly haunting quality. I was also impressed by the two leading actors. This was the first of Caviezel's films that I had seen, other than 'The Passion', and I was touched by his portrayal of the lonely, guilt-ridden but kindly Catch. As for Jennifer Lopez, I was pleasantly surprised. On the previous occasions I had seen her in films- such as the truly appalling 'Anaconda'- she struck me as being not so much an actress, more a singer who had wandered into the movie business because someone - probably her accountant- had told her it would be a good career move, without her having much idea of what would be required of her. In 'Angel Eyes', however, it seems that, by and large, J-Lo has at last realized what this acting thing is all about. Although some of her lines are occasionally indistinct, the overall impression is one of emotional and psychological truthfulness. That, in fact, can be taken as my overall impression of the film as a whole, not just Miss Lopez's performance. 7/10

I have to say I can't believe some of the reviews I've read of this film here. I thought this film was extremely well acted, had an original story line, and a quirky but interesting script. I'm impressed by Jennifer Lopez's acting, James Caviezel's interpretation was fantastic and there was great chemistry between them on the set. I was intrigued right throughout. It was well-paced, and just had a good feel about it, something which I find is missing in 95% of films being made these days. 9 out of 10.

I have to say, I thought this was one of the best movie's I'd seen in a long time back when it came out. It's a shame the producers chose to use perhaps the worst marketing ploy in the history of film. Sharon Pogue (Jennifer Lopez) is a lonely woman in Chicago with no real life to speak of. She is estranged from her family, has problems with insomnia, and her only friends are the people she works with. Enter Catch (Jim Caviezel), a shy, quiet man who saves Sharon's life. They both seem to have problems with insomnia and reclusive behavior. They start a cat and mouse game - she brings him to her apartment, he seems to want to leave, he wants to come back, she tries to kiss him, he doesn't want to be kissed. She stands him up, he gets upset, then he doesn't seem to care; so, she follows him into his apartment, etc. It seems like it would get repetetive, but the story is actually quite good. Lopez gives a good performance, probably second only to her portrayal of Karen Sisco in Out Of Sight. Caviezel is good at these sort of parts, and seems to be in danger of being stereotyped as "the guy that weird stuff happens to". People often complain that the two of them have no chemistry together, not realizing that this is the whole point - their relationship is made intentionally akward by director Luis Mandoki, most likely to make it seem all the more impressive that they still want to be with each other. I have one big problem with the advertising, and two smaller problems. They tried to make this seem like some sort of cop thriller - it is not. You'd think by watching the trailer that Catch is a menacing person, the opposite of what the character really is. They should have made this film out to be what it really is - a chick flick about an unlikely couple with no chemistry who love each other enough to stick with each other anyway. Consequently, the film only brought in about $24 million. Which brings me to my second problem, the budget. Why did this take $38 million to make? I noticed that this was released by Warner Brothers, and distributed by two different production companies, internationally. That was unnecessary. They could have easily made just as good a film for a lower budget. Even with Lopez's $9 million paycheck, the rest could have been shot for $5 million, putting the total budget at $14 million. Also, Catch seems a bit too spacey. There perhaps should have been more attempts to humanize him, which could have been done without killing the aura of despair around him. I also didn't get the sex scene - the character didn't seem like the type to have sex with someone after only a few weeks.[End spoiler] Despite these last few problems, I rated this film very highly, as it is one of my favorites. I just noticed the bad parts from watching it so many times. Don't be fooled by the advertising - is it worth seeing.

Surprisingly moving film with Lopez proving she is more than just her looks for a change. It's an early chance to see the guy who was later to play Jesus Caveziel. The director creates a touching scene when they are at the relative's graveside. Lopez plays a woman alone in Chicagio with no real friends until the shy man (Cavaziel) comes into it. They form a rapport over their shared insomnia. They start a disastrous relationship as it is afflicted with a cat and mouse game with both playing hot and cold. Because of their isolation and loneliness, the film is concerned with the need with forgiveness of self and others, reconciliation and redemption through a relationship. This is demonstrated through Cavaziel's previous secret life which he is running away from like the Lopez character. I can recommend this movie as I really enjoyed an intelligent and psychological work that had the courage to direct Lopez in something more challenging than popcorn liked Anaconda. Prior to this the most convincing thing I'd seen her in was in a couple of sketches by the actor Stephen Armourae and that was just pencil, paper and pastel. I hope she continues to be cast in these more demanding roles.