 |
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Under Suspicion / Suspicion (15)
© Unknown - all rights reserved |
| |
|
|
| |
 |
| Tookey's Rating |
|
|
6
/10 |
| |
| Average Rating |
|
|
4.00
/10 |
| |
| Starring |
Morgan Freeman  , Gene Hackman , Thomas Jane
|
| Full Cast > |
|
|
|
| |
Directed by:
Stephen Hopkins
Written by:
Tom Provost and W. Peter Iliff from the screenplay Garde a vue by Claude Miller, Jean Herman and Michel Audiard, and the book Brainwash by John Wainwright
|
|
| |
|
| |
 |
| |
| Released: |
2000 |
| |
|
| Genre: |
REMAKE
THRILLER
|
| |
|
| Origin: |
France/ US |
| |
|
| Colour: |
C |
| |
|
| Length: |
110 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
A remake of Claude Miller's 1981 thriller, Garde A Vue (The Inquisitor), where a meticulous cop (played by Lino Ventura) interrogated an outwardly respectable lawyer (Michel Serrault) accused of raping and murdering two little girls. |
Reviewed by Chris Tookey
|
| An actor's film, made by Morgan Freeman's production company. Freeman (pictured right) plays the cop, and he is totally believable, polite but probing. The realism of his acting is sadly at odds with the unreality of the situation. I never believed for a moment that a real lawyer would submit to the questioning as done here, without calling on his own attorney. Director Stephen Hopkins does a competent job, far removed from his blockbuster Lost In Space, but he might have done better to follow the example of Sidney Lumet in Twelve Angry Men, and confine himself to a single set. His attempts to open out the action dissipate the tension and claustrophobia that made the original film work. Under Suspicion doesn't succeed as a thriller - there is only one suspect in this whodunit, and the twist at the end is far-fetched - but it packs a punch as a psychological drama, an in-depth portrait of a confident, indeed truculent personality disintegrating under pressure. Gene Hackman (pictured left) has always been happy to parade the darker sides of the human psyche. There's a refreshing lack of vanity in him. He uses acting as a way to peel away the outer layers and get to the core of human personality, and (in the case of Under Suspicion) male sexuality. The nastiness he discovers is not a pretty sight, which is one reason why Under Suspicion wasn’t a hit. But it’s worth seeing, because it is truthful and illuminating about the human condition. | |
|
|
|
|
|
