1negevoli I don't usually enjoy "special effects" movies but this movie was an exception. For one thing, Kelly Rowan is a really, really good actress. Very realistic. For another, it was interesting learning about the different ways bombers can wreak havoc on the rest of us when they have the brains, resources and, needless to say, no humanity. Also it reminded me of the utter bravery of our "public servants," who risk their lives to protect society. I have only seen Kelly Rowan a few times. Once on "DaVinci's Inquest," an old Canadian episode drama with an excellent cast that is the best thing on television, despite being all reruns, and despite not being aired on ABC until 1:30 or 2 a.m. on Saturdays and Sundays (or later, depending on football). But then, beggars can't be choosers, she said as she yawned from lack of sleep.Currently, Rowan also is very good as Peter Gallagher's wife on "The O.C.," a somewhat thankless role all things considered -- you know, its being on TV for the kids, not us grownups. (In fact, the series can only improve now that Misha Barton is, hopefully, never coming back. After all, she did die. Sure, she has a beautiful face. But her curve-less body and stick-like legs spoil that. Most important, she couldn't show emotion if her life depended on it. Like the untalented Cohen character, who is almost as bad an actor as Ms. Barton.)As pure entertainment, Greenmail was not bad at all. Better than Titanic or one of those other overblown film excesses. Rowan, who is genuinely, outstandingly beautiful, and appears to have achieved that status without plastic surgery, seems to be excellent in everything she does. The rest of the cast was above average, as well. I especially enjoyed the bomb technician who portrayed realistic emotion when he thought he was going to be blown to smithereens. Of course, the Skerrit role (Rowan's retiring boss) had to die -- that was pretty obvious. But the way he died was not obvious and tied together a loose end.All in all, I enjoyed this flick. Certainly much more than Titanic, which has earned more money than practically any other film and which I could not stand. (Can you tell?) But then, of course, not being a geek or nerd or electronic engineer or tracker of plastic explosives or Einstein or otherwise a genius, I found the movie enjoyable as pure entertainment. As a normal, average person, that is.

kapecki As a card-carrying member of a half-dozen or more environmental groups, I was attracted to `Greenmail's' advertised plot about the mismatched union of an activist and an ATF agent to stop an environmentalist gone over the edge into a spree of fatal bombings.Alas, the environmental angle is nothing more than an excuse for a very standard genre thriller where the villain blows up a lot of people. Even the potentially interesting Seattle setting (actually, the ever-popular Vancouver, save for a few establishing shots) is not utilized to any particular advantage.The competent cast does what it can with a basically uninteresting script and surprisingly languid direction. What suspense there is consists of far too many scenes of people hesitantly snipping wires on bombs which either blow up or do not with fair predictability.Too bad. There was the opportunity for some genuine ideological conflict between the two main protagonists and a more thoughtful motivation for the cardboard villain. The one very minor plot twist is reduced to a simple throwaway line because we really don't know much about why the characters do what they do to their friends or to others.

Per A. Some films "know" they are bad, and they have fun with it. But Greenmail isn't fun, it's just average, in fact the most "average" film I have ever seen.I just could not believe that the cops were supposed to be cops at any stage of the film. For one thing, they all look like they just went shopping at The Gap. They all have nice haircuts and manicures. They are all like fluffy cats.The "police station" is actually the interior what looks to be Adobe Software's site in Fremont (if you know Seattle). My point is that it just simply doesn't look like a police station.Now everyone just shopped at the Gap and they're all in their cubicles at the software company (err.. police station). Some strange faxes show up from the mystery bomber, a la "exposition". The cops read the faxes. It's in a nice font, since we are at Adobe Software, anyways. Boy, are the cops scared. One nearly drops his coffee mug.Ok, there was one part where I really laughed. Basically they had to defuse a bomb, and the lead Gap-clothes cop says, "don't worry, I've done this before". She walks up to the bomb. Now all of them are supposed to be wearing these visors that cover their heads. Now OBVIOUSLY if there was a bomb nearby, wouldn't you want your visor down? But they are all just hanging out by the bomb, having a good ol' time. In other words, they aren't scared, they don't have their visors down, in fact some of the extras are just kind of hanging out near the bomb... which means NO DRAMA. Wouldn't a real bomb squad be called in? Wouldn't the real bomb defuser be in an elaborate bomb-proof suit, while everyone else was a safe distance back? Wouldn't there be a little bit of tension.. at all?It has some wonderful, experienced actors in it, but they cannot save it. Unfortunately the lead actress (forget her name) just cannot play a cop - especially a tough, bomb-defusing cop.The script is laden with too much exposition (a ridiculous amount of exposition, in fact), and dialogue that consistently derails any dramatic tension. Even the "prisoner", Baldwin, wears an orange fuzzy sweater from The Gap instead of a prison/jail jumpsuit. COME ON! These are supposed to be talented actors.They had a large enough budget for explosives and decent actors, so I don't think the faults in this film can be chalked up to "low budget"-ness. The difference between a great director and a mediocre director? See "traffic", and watch the scenes that can be done on a low budget. Compare. Contrast. And realize that Soderbergh deserves his success, while the director of "Greenmail" is a very average director.Ok, to be fair, they make an effort with the gunfights, explosions, and so on.. but overall it is just one average boring film. Blah.

bernie minim Greenmail is an economic term having to do with corporate takeovers. This is a story about ecological activism gone awry. During a night time mission for water samples explosions occur, and someone dies. The ATF is called in and the story proceeds. The whole thing is quite predictable, and you know what is going on from fairly early. There is frequent (probably fewer than 400 times) referral to events "15 years ago" (when Stephen Baldwin was in diapers, I think,) although they have only passing importance to the story line. Since there are bombs, there is plenty of the usual dithering about wires and the normal Hollywood detachment from the real world. For example, why is there always such a ready supply of Semtex and C4? On the other hand, there is one really great line, and when someone takes a torso shot wearing body armor, it HURTS. Amazing. In general, not bad, not good. Baldwin is OK, Tom Skerrit can do it in his sleep but D.B. Sweeney could have been replaced by a rock and you wouldn't notice.