MikeMagi During World War II, Pierre Broussard was responsible for the execution by firing squad of seven Jewish prisoners. Now, in 1992, he's a tired old man with a heart condition, still trying to escape his past. The result, under Norman Jewison's surprisingly uncertain direction, is a series of routine set pieces. Broussard is tracked. He shoots the assailant. He's followed again. Another shooting. His only hope is that the ultra-right wing friends of his wartime days will provide sanctuary and perhaps even a passport to South America. That they are almost all Catholic clergy gives the film an odd and disturbing bias. Michael Caine is, as always, terrific. He somehow manages to give Broussard depth and insight. But as for the movie itself, the real mystery is why was it made?

whpratt1 Enjoyed this great drama and thriller dealing with the killing of seven French Jewish people during World War II. Pierre Brossard, (Michael Caine) was present during the execution of these Jewish people and after many many years pass, Pierre is still being hunted down and goes into hiding within the walls of the Catholic Church in France and he is even given financial help in order to stay protected from being killed. One day, Pierre is driving his car and is followed by a man who was out to kill him and Pierre whipped out a gun and killed this man without any problems. This picture also shows how religious Pierre is because he is always praying and asking priests to absolve him from the killing he has recently performed. Tilda Swinton, (Annemarie Livi) and Jeremy Northam, (Colonel Roux) are both assigned to investigate this case which has been reopened and they both gave great supporting roles, it looked for awhile there might be some romance between these two, but they seemed to like flirting than getting into a serious romance. Michael Caine might be getting older, but he sure carried this film on his back, right to the very end.

BroadswordCallinDannyBoy Pierre Brossard is a man hiding an ugly past - he collaborated with the Vichy Regime in Nazi occupied France during WWII. This led him to being responsible for the execution on 7 Jews. Now, after years of hiding and living a quiet pious life, his past has caught up with him.One thing that can strike an audience about this film is its relatively quiet nature. Things happen, but they don't always happen fast. There isn't any real "action" and "thrills." However, the movie nonetheless remains engaging, though it is not a conventional revenge thriller movie. It is more about the people involved than the things that they do or did in the past. There are only hints at Brossard's past and not whole flashback sequences showing war crimes. Even as characters travel throughout the film their travel times are even spared quick montages or vast establishing shots. This might make the film seem slow and uneventful, yet there are a few suspense scenes that are, well, just good suspense scenes. Slow, yes, but tense.Also the movie makes an indictment about the violence. Does violence cure violence? Is fighting fire with fire always the right thing to do? It solves somethings, but does it solve everything? The film certainly ends on a hum that leaves the viewer thinking about the subtleties that it drops throughout. --- 8/10Rated R despite minimal violence. Almost any PG-13 action film is significantly more violent.

bob the moo After the Nazi's were driven out of France, those who had collaborated were mostly rounded up and punished – many by death. However some escaped and were hidden, while others rose in power within the new regime. Pierre Brossard is one of the former and continues to live in fear, protected from those that would avenge his victims by his friends within the Catholic Church. However a close encounter shows that some group is closing in on him, meanwhile political pressure from Judge Livi and Colonel Roux's investigation into his whereabouts mean that he is quickly running out of friends willing to shelter him.It is difficult to know how to approach this film because it itself doesn't seem too sure of what it is trying to do. Is it a drama looking at the idea of fleeing war criminals? Is it a chase movie? Is it a character piece looking at Brossard? It is never clear because it does do some elements of each but it doesn't really do anything that well and I, as a viewer, was a bit confused about what I was supposed to feel or think during it. The story itself is OK, reasonably engaging but not having anything of interest to it. As a chase film I was interested and the themes helped it seem more than the sum of its parts but not in reality. The motivations of the characters are never that well developed; the Livi/Roux parts are dull and quite routine although the sections with Brossard are more interesting.It is a shame then that the film cannot decide what it wants to do with him – do we feel for him, hate him or just watch him? The film doesn't let us decide this in a good way representing the complex nature of the character, but rather just doesn't push out any ideas one way or another. Caine does well despite this and gives a good character a bit of depth. He is where the film is although he probably benefits from the fact that everyone else is quite ordinary. Swinton and Northam are quite ordinary and their parts of the film just seem put of place and half-cooked. Support from Neville, Bates, Rampling and others just about do the job but add little.Overall this is an OK film but nothing at all more than that. Despite the interesting and complex potential the film just delivers an ordinary chase movie and fails to do anything with the ideas and concepts inherent in it. Caine does well to produce quite a convincing character but he is alone in that, with the material and the rest of the cast failing to do anything that interesting. Not bad but not worth trying to find because it is nowhere near as good as one would have hoped.