Kirpianuscus
good premises. and a real great novel. great director. the right actors. hard work of each of the members of cast to save a noble project. and an error. like a sand grain. it is not clear its identity. but for me, as admirer of Campbell Scott, "The Innocent" remains a good choice. for the admirable fight of actors. for the noble intentions. and, sure, for the memories about the novel.
Hitchcoc
There are a couple guys whose movies I will automatically see if possible: Gene Hackman and Anthony Hopkins. Because the latter was in this one, I gave it a go. Unfortunately, I never bought into his character. It's not for the effort made by a wonderful actor. It's a bad casting choice. He seems out of place. I'm also intrigued by the guy whose job it is to be involved in espionage, ignoring the warnings of his superiors. Hopkins knows this guys every move and knows that he has become an imperfect cog in the works. Granted, this goes back many years and the sophistication of the world of the spy has changed, but there is so much carelessness here. We also have fragile characters who probably should never have been signed up for this job. Anyway, when Hopkins' character moves in, I just never buy it. I also never buy the business of creating a relationship, only to betray it and ultimately gain nothing from it. This is a poor man's "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy." It is so lacking on so many levels. It also has a pretty schmaltzy ending which I won't betray. See what you think.
trpdean
I knew nothing of this but the fact that it was adapted from a novel by the brilliant Ian McEwan (which I had not read), was directed by John Schlesinger (whose A Kind of Loving, Midnight Cowboy, Sunday Bloody Snday, Far From the Madding Crowd and particularly Darling I have always loved), and starred three actors I liked - Anthony Hopkins, Isabella Rosselini and Campbell Scott.With these people, how could this have been SO awful? Oh my! From the very beginning, when we see that all three lead actors are chosen for roles different than their own nationalities - an absolutely bizarre Anthony Hopkins with an atrocious American accent playing a character created out of some apparent hatred of Americans, a wee timid Campbell Scott playing an Englishman who had apparently never really left the nursery and an Isabella Rosselini playing a German hausfrau -- we realize something is seriously SERIOUSLY wrong here.We see scene after tedious scene that we've witnessed filmed FAR more interestingly in hundreds of other films.We care nothing for the characters.There are whole plot angles that are simply left dangling.This is a disaster. Avoid it.
faustian_jargon
I quite liked this film. But probably because I think there are perhaps more important things than the manner in which Anthony Hopkins is miscast. You just have to overlook that. Campbell Scott is great and really carries the whole film. I really enjoyed the way the film was held together, the cinematography and the use of really bad American Music to get across the brashness and invasiveness of their culture even back then. If you've read books like Spycatcher you'll appreciate this film. On the other hand if you think Bond films are good, you'll most likely hate it. I would have liked the sex scenes to be more, shall we say 'fleshed out', they fade off all too quickly. It's very rare in popular film that you get good sex scenes that are filmed with warmth and tenderness. The use of lighting and angles is great. What got to me more than Hopkin's dodgy accent was the stupid female character. Can't we just forget reality for a bit and stop casting women as quivering idiots. Sure that's how they seem to behave in all important situations, but it's so annoying to be put through it over and over again. Let's have an intelligent female lead who decides she's going to take responsibility for her dumb, impulsive behaviour and make amends. As opposed to leaving everything up to the bloke and then running off with his friend. And did anyone notice that all the men around her drink heavily? I think this would be a good book and there's obviously stuff missing from the film, but still I give it 8/10.
AD
