Bardlerx Strictly average movie

Flyerplesys Perfectly adorable

pointyfilippa The movie runs out of plot and jokes well before the end of a two-hour running time, long for a light comedy.

Abegail Noëlle While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Joe Bob Jones Jeremy Sisto and Elizabeth Hurley very earnestly work hard to make this shockingly bad film decent, but they simply can't. It is a maudlin mess of poorly written and directed dreck from Duncan Roy. Plot summary already attached to this film's IMDb posting, I will dispense with much of the redundant plot summary, but when Hurley barks out of the shack door to drifter Sisto's character "Hey, can you mend a fey-ance?" (it is turn of the century Indiana after all, so expect heavy accents), I knew this thing was heading down state in a durn hurry. Perhaps five minutes later, gentleman callers are arranged by mail to come see the impossibly beautiful Hurley to arrange marriage. With heavy brows does our fence fixer Sisto disapprove of Hurley's mail order suitors, referred to as her brother. Do we even need to delve into the budding melodrama of this period piece? Wait! O dreaded gimmicks, worse than a triptych, first person narrative, or chapter supertitles, we are fed a steaming dish of a film within a film. My word, I don't think this kind of thing has ever been done before! Oh wait, well, you know. The only interesting things about Method are Hurley's beauty, Sisto's effort, and the infamous off screen battles between the insane director Duncan Roy and Liz Hurley. The final product, though, stinks to high heaven.

TwoCrude I admit I have watched many of Liz Hurley's movies. Almost every one of them has been a disappointment (she was actually very good as an addict in "Shameless" about 15 years ago).Hardcore Liz fans should stick to "Bedazzled" and "Passenger 57". Sisto has plenty of good work in circulation; I am amazed that he stooped to this tripe. The DVD set of the short lived TV show "Kidnapped" is worth the price of admission. It even has Carmen Ejogo, an Englishwoman who can act circles around Hurley.Do not waste your time on this poor excuse of a mystery. You'd be better off doing your income taxes. And at least the tax return has a conclusion worthy of being called that.

dromasca If there is something like an average B movie nowadays 'Method' would fill in this role. The story combines in two interleaved threads the story of a 19th century serial killer, a widow attracting older man with promises of re-marriage and killing them to rob them of their money with the story of the making of the movie, in which the the principal actors live their own love story which becomes soon a murder story. The rather thin premise of the movie is that the acting method of identifying with the real life character can lead to the violence of the story penetrating real life.Although decently filmed and acted the movie suffers because lack of ambition and imagination. Much more could have been achieved by a more skilled director out of the violent fiction story slowly penetrating life. Although crime and suffering happens on the screen, we really do not care too much about this as viewers, one of the reasons being maybe because it is not clear whether the suffering happens in the fiction plan we are less involved with, and also maybe because the flat performance of Jeremy Sisto, the weakest from all the cast, in my opinion.It's a film easy to forget. I will probably remember nothing about it in a week or so.

Roy Fenimore A total waste of a rental fee. The story involves a method actress who believes in 'becoming the character'. She plays a serial killer and bodies start turning up. Did she or didn't she?It's an interesting idea, but why-why, why, oh why--would producers spend so much money on period sets, fine actors, beautiful photography, and then use such an incoherent, cliché-ridden script. My mother and I watched it together, and together we couldn't figure out what was going on half the time. The movie jumps back and forth between the film and the film-within-the-film and the filming-of-the-film-within-the-film (still in period costume, so you don't know at first), and from reality to hallucination. At the end it's not really made clear who killed who, and some of the answers aren't really credible. Why waste a lovely woman like Elizabeth Hurley in such a piece of poo-poo?