Sintz49 My cable blurb for this film listed Juliette Lewis first, then Camille, then described the story in just One sentence. I've enjoyed Lewis a lot in the past, so I viewed the film. But that one sentence blurb was about the right length! I don't want to blame the actors, but the director and writer? Probably. The characters' "character" were mostly hidden: by flashbacks out of context, or by brief sentences or silence in response to direct questions. The dialogue itself may well have been too cryptic to even give the actors insights into their part. Seemed they still had little to show us about their characters in non-verbal ways. When actors don't "get" their character, certainly the director must fill in gaps left by the writer. The feeling I got (& this isn't a verdict, just a description of what scenes "felt like") was that some actors' insights here, maybe weren't heard, or were passed over, by the director. I kept my ears and eyes open for gut level insights, 'cuz the dialogue was empty. When people try to hide something, they may fib but even those untruths can offer viewers some insight into what the character is feeling. Not here, only that they didn't want to talk, or they felt uncomfortable (about good things or bad). Lewis' late scene with Egglesfield's "David" was a bit different, but when everything "Jill" said was nasty, David's verbal response was in disgust, but his behavior wasn't. His character seemed vacuous for not just leaving the cafe - the table seemed empty, and Jill was not "helping". Visually too, like in the cloaked flashbacks, viewers were given little help in several (many?) scenes, like Angie & David sitting inside the trailer, the camera is bouncing around. I'm listening to them talk, and the bouncing is just a distraction. It's almost like the photographer saw too little evidence of the tension in the actor's behavior, or in their words; and so decided to move the camera, at least to supply evidence of some inner struggles in these two friends. If the trailer had at least been in motion, I could have stayed in tune to the dialogue, having seen that the road was bumpy (literally and figuratively). Most of us (the viewers and the makers of the film) know more about the feelings prompted by some situations in this plot, but a better review here, may be implying a reviewer has inserted his/her own experiences into this story; filled it out. I think that viewers can plant more insights into this film, than the film can drop into the viewer.

Claudio Carvalho The Brazilian painter Angie (Camilla Belle) left her mother Glória (Christiane Torloni) and her sister Sônia (Carol Castro) to seek out her father, who left her family when she was a child, in the United States of America. Angie wanders and camps in a tent and works as waitress in diners to raise some money. She befriends the homeless Chuck (Andy Garcia) that protects her while she is camping. When she decides to move to another place, she stops at the roadside to sleep. She is awaken by the highway police officer David (Colin Egglesfield) and she finds that her engine has an expensive problem. David offers a job to Angie with his cousin Jill (Julliete Lewis) and to lodges her in his trailer. Soon they have a love affair but Angie does not want a commitment with David. She leaves him but soon she makes discoveries that will change her feelings."Road Movie" is a road movie with a terrible screenplay since there is no development of the lead character. The viewer does not know who Angie is looking for and how is she tracking this person. However she is an interesting character in the beginning, living in a tent, painting and befriending a homeless that is her best friend. However, when she meets David, their relationship is shallow and poor. But the corny conclusion is ridiculous with the family reunion. My question is, how could Angie be looking for someone that she does not know? Last but not the least, the beautiful Camilla Belle never convinces as Angie. My vote is five.Title (Brazil): "Angie"

kylere This movie feels (at best) like a 1980's after-school special, with lower production values and dialog that would embarrass a 1940's comic book writer. When it feels like it breaks the after-school special mode, it is merely because it slips into feeling like an old VHS tape shared by all the local xian churches.Juliette Lewis was the selling point for me and she failed to deliver, I can blame her on some levels but the writing was just so atrocious that I am shocked she took the part. Andy Garcia must have been bored, and the lead actress basically derps from scene to scene without actually acting.

Ali Khashei except Andy Garcia which is one of my favorite actors of all time,all the actors were terribly bad... the acting was that bad sometimes i thought i'm watching porn.. fake reactions fake laughs and all the fake acts was really really annoying and i just can blame the director because i saw Camilla Belle in good movies that she did well in them or Juliette Lewis has done some very good acting in some movies.. but they were awfully fake in this movie.. the only thing kept me somehow enthusiastic was the writing in some point and some good dialogs and the whole indie mellow theme of the movie which i liked the most about the movie..