Customer Reviews

Proof of Life

5 star:		(38)
4 star:		(50)
3 star:		(42)
2 star:		(14)
1 star:		(15)

 

 

The inherent dangers of living in a country in which political agendas have been compromised, and where wealth takes precedence over integrity, are made brutally clear to an American engineer who takes a job in South America, only to become the victim of a kidnapping for ransom in "Proof Of Life," directed by Taylor Hackford and starring Russell Crowe and Meg Ryan. Peter Bowman (David Morse) is hired by an oil company to build a dam that will facilitate the construction of a pipeline, but is kidnapped at random by a band of guerrillas whose political agenda has long since given way to the more lucrative business of terrorism purely for the sake of capital gains. When it happens, the London based insurance company whose business it is to underwrite conglomerates around the world to cover this particular kind of situation sends in it's "K&R" (Kidnap and ransom) man, Terry Thorne (Crowe), to negotiate the release of Bowman. And it quickly becomes a game in which most of the participants, including Bowman's wife, Alice (Ryan), would rather not participate; the catch is, you play the game, or one of the principles involved-- in this case Peter Bowman-- dies. Hackford's drama examines what it is like to face the reality of a situation over which you have neither experience nor control, and looks at it from the perspective of the victim, as well as that of those dealing with it on the other end. How does one respond to the kind of circumstances previously known only from news reports and movies, the things that only happen to others, but never to you. What would it be like to have to put your life, or the life of a loved one (as in this case), in the hands of a total stranger? It's thought provoking, sobering material that drives home the rather tentative state of the world in which we live. Crowe turns in a dynamic performance here as Thorne, the professional negotiator who of necessity forms a strong bond with the wife of the man whose freedom he is attempting to secure, and he very subtly keeps the conflict within him apparent, while maintaining the integrity of the character on the surface. A terrifically expressive actor, Crowe credibly conveys the complexity of his situation while exhibiting a stoic exterior strength, and it's his ability to give depth (aided in no small part by his magnetic screen presence) to what could easily have been a one-dimensional character that makes him believable, and makes Thorne memorable. Meg Ryan lends emotional depth to Alice, though it's not a part that realizes nor utilizes the best of her abilities as an actress. She does manage to bring some insight to the character, mainly through allusions to recent events in her life, though because of the story she is necessarily kept in the present and concerned with the immediate situation. The relationship between Thorne and Alice is handled delicately and quite skillfully; that there would be a mutual attraction between them is believable, given the lack of intimacy in Thorne's life (which is succinctly established) and the emotional needs of Alice's current condition. The impropriety of any possible relationship at this juncture is never verbalized but is entirely understood; and that Hackford never gives in to the temptation of sensationalizing their feelings for one another is significant, in that it ultimately heightens the emotional impact of the climax. David Morse gives an accomplished performance as Peter Bowman, with his emotional development over the length of his captivity especially well expressed and realized, and he is responsible for many of the very "real" moments throughout the film. His reactions during the kidnapping sequence, for instance, give it an added intensity that make it all the more believable. In a smaller role, David Caruso (Dino) gives a passable performance, but can do little more than create a character that is, in essence, a shallow imitation of Thorne (which makes you appreciate Crowe's performance all the more). Hackford has an eye for detail and tells his story with a very deliberate pace and includes some stunningly expansive visual shots, but allows the overall intensity to wane a bit, which somewhat mitigates the emotional involvement of the audience, though the drama remains intact. In the end, however, "Proof Of Life" is tightly wound and delivered and will hold your interest while bringing you face to face with just how fragile life can be; powerful food for thought that refuses to let you off the hook even as you leave the theater or click off the video.

Once again Russell Crowe follows a great movie role, Maximus in Gladiator, with a totally different persona that holds this movie together. Proof of Life is filled with nuanced moments that only Russell can deliver. While the action sequences are superb, the intimate moments are touchingly handled. Terry Thorne is definitely the man you'd want to be your negotiator if you were ever kidnapped. As always, you know how he's feeling and what he's thinking every moment. It's a pleasure to see Russell as the competent Australian that he is in real life. And the comedic moments promise good comedy roles in the future.

Taylor Hackford uses his visual skills to great effect, giving us amazing high altitude shots and the intense atmosphere of the rain forest. As others have noted, be sure to stay for the credits, the soaring portrait of the Andean landscape is breathtaking.

However, this film could have been very special if the romantic elements had been fully realized, ala Casablanca. We know Hackford removed the love scene after the previews, unfortunately with this we lost "Paris", the emotional center of this film. I enjoyed Morse and Caruso very much, but thought Meg Ryan didn't have enough dialogue to give us a well rounded character in Alice. Pamela Reed was fine as her sister in law.

A good action/suspense film, more emotional exposition featuring the sizzle between the two stars would have raised this up at least two notches. Understanding the full nature of their relationship would have deepened the regret and loss at the end. This one will be a keeper on dvd, with the stunning visuals and good performances, but only if Hackford puts the love scene and remorse afterwards back in.

what really spoke to me about this movie was that it did not go for the over-wrought sensationalism, which major studio films are so often prone to do. instead it stayed true to (what must be) tense and tedious process of negotiations following a kidnapping such as this. the film convincingly portrays the vulnerability and helplessness of the victim's family, that expose them to be preyed not only by the kidnappers but those who come to their supposed aid. there's an especially suspenseful showdown between Russell Crowe and a shady local security guard who was 'helping' the family.

The film culminates in an armed mission to rescue the hostage. This climactic sequence is the epitome of suspense, and its realistic planning and operation would have put a smile even to Tom Clancy's face. Here, the filmmakers have produced a sensational outcome without resorting to sensationalism, and that has made all the difference.

Proof of Life is a good film that has been greatly over-shadowed (or destroyed) by the Hollywood pseudo-moral standards on its co-stars real life romance. And that is unfortunate. The story is good, which has good balance of action and human elements. The acting is excellent. You can trust Russell Crowe in any movies; he will never let you down. And as a happy surprise, after reading so many critics that bashing Meg Ryan, in this movie, Meg Ryan has actually delivered an powerful performance. She comes out as a strong and mature woman who's going through crisis and tries to get out from the bottom of her life in one piece. No trace can be found of the cuteness she usually carries with her in other movies, and there are no showing of melodramatic moments, neither. David Morse has given a solid performance as the husband under hostage that really deserves more recognition he was given. And the supporting actors are also very good. As the director said "this is a thinker's action movie". It throws a lot of questions on you: marriage crisis, in-laws problems (jealous sister in-law), life crisis, unattainable love; how will each character deal with it with the dignity and sense of honor? How will you deal with it if it happens to you? This is a good movie that makes you think.

Movie Summary: Alice and Peter Bowman have lived all over the world going wherever Peter's job as an engineer takes them. It has recently taken them to the Latin American country of Tecala. On his way to work one morning, Peter runs into a road block and is pulled from his car by rebels who make money by kidnapping executives who have Kidnap and Ransom insurance. Terry Thorne (Russell Crowe) shows up to take the case but has to leave when they find out that Peter Bowman wasn't insured by his firm. Terry returns a few days later and takes the case with no promise of getting paid for mysterious emotional reasons. He works side by side with Alice (Meg Ryan) fighting to reach a deal that will bring Peter home.

My Opinion: This movie was a lot better than I thought it was going to be. I found it to be very gripping and exciting. I liked both Peter's plot line and Alice and Terry's. The contrast of the two situations was quite interesting. Peter in the mountains with no comforts, injured feet, and constant stress never knowing if he'll be killed and Terry and Alice in the city with the comforts, injured hearts, constant stress, and never knowing if Peter is alive. I would have liked the deleted love scene to be included as an extra feature on the DVD. I'm not sure if I would have liked the movie more or less with it in it. There is something compelling about unfulfilled forbidden love. What I do know is that David Caruso gives and awesome performance. This is the first thing that I have seen him in since NYPD Blue that I have actually liked. Had everything he'd done since leaving the show been this good, he'd be a lot bigger star today.

DVD Quality: Widescreen anamorphic 2.35:1, DD5.1. Extras include trailers, commentary, Making of Documentary.

What You Should Do: See it. A rental will probably do unless you are a Crowe or Ryan movie collector.

With my Amazon Prime membership, if a movie doesn't grab me soon after opening--bye bye. Here, the opening segments pulled me into the movie quickly and deeply, due to amazing action sequences that were "edge of the seat" gripping. That initial promise was real, because more of the same was delivered royally for the movie's entirety. Beautiful scenery and top stars aside, if you like fast-moving plots, interesting and unpredictable characters, and a story line that keeps you guessing, then you'll love this movie!

The three lead characters share the load of carrying the film. Russell Crowe's character is a professional hostage negotiator, who travels the world arranging high-level, often dangerous, extractions. David Morse's character works as an engineer for humanitarian projects, and that involvement has taken him and his wife (Meg Ryan) to a country called Tecala in the South American highlands. This couple is situated in a mountainous area filled with cocaine farms and the criminals who run them--criminals who happen upon Morse, and see him as easy money.

Just prior to Morse's kidnapping, we're clued in to the loose ends in the Morse-Ryan marriage. Of course, these ends are left flapping by the unexpected and horrendous kidnap.

The way Morse portrays his character is appealing. He comes across as a decent, grounded man who's deeply committed to humanitarian work, but who's also nobody's fool. In the early part of the movie, I expected to also like Morse's wife (Ryan), but I didn't. Instead, Ryan's character seemed immature, inconsistent, and off balance. I knew the movie blurb had given away that the negotiator falls in love with the wife, so in the early parts, I often thought to myself: he falls in love with that??

Pamela Reed (as Morse's older sister) flies down from the States after her brother's capture. She adds even more distress to the situation with her controlling, annoying behaviors. (I found myself wondering how she and her brother could have come from the same family--but then I remembered, oh yah, I've seen that happen!) I suppose her slot in this plot was to contribute to a potential solution. Except for that, however, she didn't add much. It seemed like a less than optimal use of an otherwise fine actress.

As for the negotiator, Crowe is on screen awhile before his character actually commits to helping with this rescue. The way his involvement was finalized seemed improbable to me. (Besides Crowe, there were a few other minor aspects where I also winced over improbabilities.) Even so, in a fast-moving action and suspense story like this one, details that raise one's eyebrows, can easily become forgivable bumps in the road as the story hurtles forward.

Crowe's characterization of the negotiator was subtle and compelling. Often Crowe is cast as a macho figure, but here, his persona was nuanced. OK, the story did call for him to be a fearless action hero a few times (thrilling!). Even so, his character's personality was primarily revealed in his quiet control--in his ability to ever be the masterful center of calm in the chaos.

David Morse's character showed what he was made of by how he responded to imprisonment, where he dealt with crude accommodations, wounding, danger, and uncertainty. A key focus strengthened Morse through-out his ordeal (and you'll see what that was when you watch the video). In the prison camp, Morse meets a fascinating captive who is other than he initially seems. This captive strengthens the plot well, ultimately becoming essential to the forward movement of the story.

The pacing was indeed artful--something I was vaguely aware of while watching, but which grows in my appreciation now the more I reflect on it. Often the pacing subtly reiterated the content of a scene, which was particularly true for Crowe's character's unfoldment. Because the story delivers twists and turns right through to the final scenes, you definitely won't notice time passing, and this makes the movie fabulous escapism.

Beyond that, I won't give away more, except to say that the ending was genuinely satisfying. Some movies disappointingly "stop," but without actually concluding. In lieu of a conclusion, the credits roll, and loud music is the signal that the film is over. To me, this is a mindless way to end which blows off the viewer. This movie, however, respects its characters, as well as the audience, because it never goes for cheap ground. Consequently, by wrapping up key threads, it lands soundly on its finale (and you might even realize later that the ending was subtly foreshadowed.) It's definitely a conclusion that will stay with you.

I rented this alone because it got such terrible reviews that no one would watch it with me. Surprise, it was not too bad. There are definitely some flaws, but I think critics jumped on them, eager to capitalize on the Meg/Russell tryst ... ultimately underrating the movie in favor of Hollywood gossip.

Flaws: 1. Meg Ryan. The absolute wrong choice for this movie. She barely gets beyond the romantic-comedy acting staple of crinkly nose and touseled hair. She is undenaibly adorable, but HELLO! she's in the midst of a kidnapping crisis in a third-world country and she's recovering from a miscarriage. Why is she wearing pink lip gloss? And how come, after months in this crisis, she still looks as fresh as Tom Hanks' daisies from "You've Got Mail?" 2. The romance factor. It was over-hyped by the media ... there is barely any romance. That's not to say that Russell doesn't try, using his "i'm emoting my repressed emotions through one smoldering glare" technique. Very effective. However, it is clearly tacked on and not very interesting. More action, less smoldering, please. 3. Character development. We never figure out why these characters (Russell, in particular) do what they do. It seems as though the writers got in to the tequila between rewrites and chucked the characters out the window. 4. Pamela Reed. How could you be so likeable a person and such an annoying part of this movie? I don't blame her. I blame #3.

Triumphs: 1. Russell Crowe. Though not as brilliant as his "Insider" or "LA Confidential" turns as a tough but lovable and conflicted man, he brings pure emotion to all that he does. That man can convey in a sidelong glance what Meg Ryan would have to take out a billboard to express. 2. David Morse. One of the most consistent, watchable, likeable, talented actors out there. Check him out as my favorite guy in "Green Mile" and as the husband here. He's awesome. 3. The action. Taut, interesting and well put together. You will want to be a kidnap negotiator. Or at least you'll need a manicure to repair bitten down nails.

All in all, a nice diversion and an interesting watch. This movie should have been marketed as an action movie, not a romance. So, if you like action and Russell Crowe, try it out. During the boring parts, play the Meg Ryan drinking game. Every time she attempts to emote, take a drink. By the end of the movie, it will almost be like she's acting!

Terry Thorne (Russell Crowe) is a kidnap and ransom expert. His job is to negotiate the release of hostages and if necessary retrieve them. In a small South American country of Tecala a buisness man (David Morse) is kidnapped. His wife Alice (Meg Ryan) turns to Thorne for help. The captors ask for three million for his release. In the months that follow Terry must not only negotiate with the terrorist's but deal with his own feelings toward Alice.

Before watching this film I had no idea K&R was a billion dollar a year industry. Listen to the commentary it's real informative. The movie shows not only the hell a kidnapped person goes threw but his familys as well. This film gets off to a good start, then drags a bit in the middle but has a great finish. The rescue operation was just awesome. I really liked Russell Crowe and David Caruso's characters. I would love to see a sequel with these characters negotiating another ransom. The DVD contains a documentary, commentary and theatrical trailer. The film is presented in widescreen and DD 5.1 surround.

I've made my living since 1992 testing and evaluating guns, and writing articles for gun magazines. Gun people tend to loath most action movies, since they rarely get the technical details correct. Proof of Life is an exception to that rule.

To start with, Proof of Life totally avoids one of my biggest pet peeves about guns in movies, what I call the "aiming indicator," that ka-chack! sound guns make every time they're aimed at anyone. The director and sound people obviously feel this is very dramatic, and says, "Hey! Someone is actually aiming a gun here!" In real life, guns don't do that. And they don't in Proof of Life, either.

Terry Thorne's (Russell Crowe's) carry gun is a compact 1911 .45 auto (I'm morally certain it's a Kimber Ultra Compact, he said in full gun geek mode), a bit of an unusual choice for an ex-SAS guy. The SAS have traditionally been poster children for the Browning Hi-Power, and then transitioned over to the SIG P226. Granted, Terry's now a civilian so he can carry anything he wants (and at least the 1911 has much same manual of operations as the Hi-Power) but it's not a situation where you instantly look at the gun the character's carrying and say, "Ah yes, these people got it right." But hang in there, good stuff is to come.

When Terry finds Peter in the base camp, he gives him his 1911 for protection, telling him, "Okay, here's the safety, up is Safe, down is Fire." This is totally correct. Later, Peter tries to shoot a terrorist who's threatening Terry but can't make the gun fire. After Terry deals with the bad guy, he walks up to Peter, reaches around to the side of the gun, flicks off the thumb safety, and says, "Now the safety's off." Excellent! What a pleasure to see a scene in a Hollywood movie revolve around a decent knowledge of a gun's technical features.

Later, Peter actually uses Terry's 1911 to save both their lives. He can do this because Terry's placed the gun off-Safe. We have sound effects for eight shots. Again, this is correct. This sort of gun does hold eight rounds. The only small goofs here I might point out are that we hear the sound of the eighth shot while the camera angle shows Peter from behind, and the gun's slide is already locked to the rear; obviously the piece is empty. This is a problem. Then a moment later, we transition to a face-on shot to see Peter's expression - and now the slide is forward. A little sloppy, but still small stuff compared to the overall excellence of the scene.

In the firefight at the base camp, even one of the good guy team, with a far higher level of training than the bad guys, begins firing his assault rifle full auto. By contrast, Terry, ex-SAS, and Dino (David Caruso in fine form), ex-Delta Force, maintain fire discipline and fire their M4s in one- and two-shot bursts. In his director's commentary, Taylor Hackford mentions that Russell Crowe is very weapons knowledgeable, and had definite opinions on how he should handle his M4 in these scenes. It shows.

One other small thing I truly enjoyed. There are two moments in the base camp firefight scene where we see people killed with knives. One of Dino's mercenaries has to use a knife on a guy, and his weapon is what we'd expect from Hollywood, a big, macho, serrated blade fighting knife. By contrast, watch Terry (Russell) do the same thing, notice what he uses: the knife blade from a Leatherman Tool. Low-key, no-BS, effective. What do you want to bet that little detail came from Russell Crowe, as well? Good job, Russell!

I am an avid Russell Crowe fan, which is the only reason I went to see this movie, and boy, was I disappointed. Russell looked tired, and we didn't get to see him in action (and see the arms) until the end of the film. By that time, I was really tired of watching Meg Ryan display her extensive wardrobe and demonstrate how appealing she looks when she cries. She was sad because her husband was kidnapped-I got it- and she was feeling guilty because she was attracted to Russell Crowe's Terry Thorne. The storyline involving the romance between those two was thoroughly telegraphed by the public romance, and I have to agree with the director that it hindered efforts to advertise the movie. In fact, the bad publicity aimed at Crowe almost cost him the Academy Award that he so richly deserved for Gladiator. I can see why he was drawn to this character- he excels at playing tough guys with a heart of gold. But we couldn't root for him in this film because we knew from the start that he was not going to end up with Meg.

The script-at least as much of it as appeared on the screen- was weak. The motivation of Thorne to take on Meg Ryan as a client for no charge could have been explained better. It appeared that his company wanted to promote him out of operations, and he was not ready to leave the field operations to others. That makes more sense then some sappy instant attraction between this hardened veteran and the hippie queen.

The ending was thoroughly disappointing. There is a fake-out about Thorne being blinded, then we see the restrained good-bye between Thorne and Meg's character, and then we see the genuine side of Thorne's character: the male bonding at the end. The best chemistry in the movie was between David Caruso and Russell Crowe. As the credits rolled, I thought to myself: Russell, you are our newest sex symbol, and you've made another movie where you don't get the girl. And now he's making a film about a schizophrenic mathematician. Would someone explain to Russell why he appeals to his legions of female fans, and give us a good romance with a sex scene to cement the relationship?