Proof of Life:

While I did feel that the movie was lacking in some points, I really liked the plot and the way the characters' situations were portrayed.

I completely disagree with the opinion that a "steamy love scene" would have made the movie better. Russell Crowe gave an amazing performance as Terry, a man deeply in love with a woman whom he knew he could not have. What gave his role such intensity was the fact that he kept his passion secret.

He was falling for Meg Ryan's Alice, and this was shown in subtle moments, in the way his eyes met hers, or in the way he responded to words or events. The scene where Terry silently tried to comfort Alice when she was crying in the kitchen spoke volumes in itself. Terry's refusal to discuss his feelings for Alice with even his good friend and fellow hostage negotiator Dino added to my perception of how deeply and privately he really did care for her.

The kiss was much more meaningful by itself than it would have been after a love scene. It was perfectly set up -- the one brief moment when Terry let his feelings loose. It was ironic -- and that much more effective -- because it occurred just as Terry was leaving to bring Alice's husband home to her. Personally, I loved the fact that their relationship never progressed any further than a brief, heartfelt kiss. I'm sick of people in movies meeting, deciding they kind of like each other, having sex, then going their separate ways. Terry's love for Alice would have been cheapened if the "love scene" had been included.

Terry's inward struggle with his feelings was evident throughout the film, first as he struggled to keep his passion a secret, then as he had to let go of Alice at the end. He proved how much he loved her by never pushing for any affection in return. He could easily have let Alice continue to believe that her husband was dead, thus freeing her emotions for himself; however, he loved her too deeply. He knew she loved her husband, and he respected that, even though it hurt him.

Although it wasn't perfect, the movie was interesting and entertaining -- and, as usual, Russell Crowe gave a great performance. Of course "Proof of Life" can't measure up to "Gladiator," but how many movies can? (Katrina)

I watch Russell Crowe movies to watch Russell Crowe. I have seen Proof of Life twice to absorb the physicality and emotive expressions of Mr. Crowe portraying Terry Thorne. Crowe's maleness is direct and in your face like a soldier of fortune. Combined with the intense passion of a poet (read his song lyrics), there is a concoction of obsessive screen presence that makes you want to know more about the character.

I think many critics are missing the point of Meg Ryan's character. Alice is a foil to the choices Terry has made in his life. The downplaying of sexuality in the film was masterful by the director. Intimacy is given up when career is so completely chosen over relationship. Russell Crowe's facial expressions at the end of the film unforgettably recall the pain of that choice. This is why I watch Russell Crowe the actor. (Katherine, Northern California)

The film Russell Crowe fans wanted to see was left on the cutting-room floor. Proof of Life proves to be a big disappointment: no spark between the Ryan/Crowe characters; action/thriller scenes made unintentionally laughable with pop-up hostages looking like they came out of the opening shots of an old Monty Python episode; and ludicrous dialogue in the key rescue scene: "Downtown 1, Downtown 2, etc." Anyone who remembers Hackford's haunting "Against All Odds" had hopes that Proof of Life would exceed that film and capture the essence of forbidden love and ripped-from-the-headlines kidnap/ransom drama. Instead, we're left with a hollow shell of a film which could have been filled with memorable images for Crowe fans to linger over and savor.

As with Against All Odds, the film ends with a powerful ballad. How different the reaction: Phil Collins' Against All Odds resonated with the results of the film. Van Morrison's "You'll Be My Queen" seems dropped out of nowhere.

And so, some advice to all future directors of Russell Crowe: Let Crowe be Crowe -- masculine, virile, quick to act and quick to love.

I saw this film in San Francisco the first week of release--approximately 10 people in the theater. Guess that says it all. Sigh. (Katherine)

I found Proof of Life to be visually stunning. The performances from Russell Crowe, David Morse and David Caruso were honest and captivating. I found the idea of the story to be original and interesting although I found the actual dialogue to be less than stellar. I like Meg Ryan, just not in this. I think that she really tried and that it just did not translate on film. The very thought of Russell Crowe being a white knight is by no means any kind of stretch and I felt that he really delivered in that sense as well as establishing himself in the action genre. I believe that L.A. Confidential is his best work to date but I was not upset that I paid full price to see this movie. (Lori)

I was quite disappointed in this film. I know what moving and exciting and powerful performances Russell is capable of, this wasn't one of them.

Fantastic actors, big budget, lush locations, thrilling premise, I expected so much more of this movie. Like excitement. Like an involving story. Like a reason to care about the hostages. The best things about this movie were my jujubes and popcorn refill.

And of course, seeing Russell onscreen (I'd pay to watch the man do laundry.) His Terry as a super macho, yet soft-spoken thinking man was appealing; intelligence shines in all of Russell's roles. But it wasn't enough to carry the movie beyond ho-hum.

His last silent scene with the play of emotions on his face would have been powerful, if there were a STORY to explain the emotions. The script and story were so very lacking -- the "romance" between Terry and Alice was totally unmotivated and unexplained and unconvincing. This movie did nothing to change my opinion of Meg Ryan's acting abilities.

The brightest moments in the movie were when David Caruso was onscreen. He breathed some life into this very average movie. (Connie B.)

The first time I saw "Proof of Life", I was a bit disappointed. I expected the more expressive Russell. I found the camera lingered on him much too short a time. It is his facial expressions and body language, as much as his spoken words, that show off his awesome talent. I felt that was left out of this movie.

I went to see "Proof of Life" again. This time I watched the movie in total, not just concentrating on Mr. Crowe. I enjoyed it much more.

The movie was interesting but not as deep as some of Russell's other films. The depth of the characters just wasn't there. However, overall, if you want to be entertained by beautiful scenery, an interesting storyline and good acting, "Proof of Life" is a movie to see, even more than once. (Brenda from Cajun Country)

I thought it was very well done, as far as an action film goes. However, there is one thing that has been bothering me, and that is the love plot. . . . I admit I'm a sap, and I like to see a happy couple, but it was so insignificant and really wasn't necessary. The ending simply didn't leave me satisfied. (Phoenix)

A very good movie. Refreshingly absent from this film were the choreographed moves and hemorrhoidal stares that Hollywood and it's larger audience have come to accept as the norm. Acting is about credibility. Proof of Life is believable. [Crowe is] a rare breed who understands the difference between veracity and contrived intensity. A great performance. And those smoldering looks in the middle of negotiations. Is he even aware of the camera?

Apart from Ryan's rather flat performance, the other flaws in this film only served to make it more realistic. The truth is that sometimes reality is mundane. Even in an event as nerve-wracking as a kidnapping, I suspect there may be days when there is little or no drama, except in the hearts and minds of the victims and their friends and family. This film is true-to-life. (Heather B.)

Proof of Life, despite the alluring television spots, will fail to bring in much of an audience due to the fact that the film has been marketed at the wrong crowd. This is not a dramatic romance. It is nothing like Casablanca. But the movie does wonders for those accustomed to viewing action sequences. The opening act is extremely effective, as is the closing. In fact, any section of the movie involving guns and fighting seems to be perfectly paced.

This is another flaw in Proof of Life. To start quickly, slow down, speed up, slow down, speed up, and then drag for a good 45 minutes before settling on a racing speed for the last 15 minutes of the movie is a huge mistake. I personally did enjoy the movie, not only because I am a dedicated fan of Russell Crowe, but also because I love a good action film. I also greatly appreciated the cinematography. Some shots are dizzying, most are breathtaking. Overall, the film reminded me of an MTV commercial: quick pace, strange angles, bits and pieces of stories. (London O'Neill)

Proof of Life opens and closes with an edge-of-your-seat action sequence; unfortunately that's as much action as you'll see in between. It's too bad. Proof of Life had the potential to be more than what it turned out to be. It appears that someone forgot to mention that substance is always a good thing. Even the acting seemed to be missing something -- Crowe (Terry Thorne), whose facial expressions are able to convey a world of meaning without ever uttering a single syllable, is never given the opportunity to draw upon the depth of his character. Ryan's character (Alicia Bowman) is no exception; her acting abilities seem to have gone to waste in this role. With her spending half the time crying in an attempt to convey her pain, one wonders if the scriptwriter forgot that verbal expression can be a powerful ally. Instead, she has an affair with Terry, the subplot of the movie that never takes off.

The sparks between the two characters never come close to igniting, and it becomes difficult to feel sorry for Terry's loss in the end when it appears that he never had anything to begin with. The only backbone for the movie seems to come from the scenes involving Crowe and Caruso (Dino) but they aren't enough to let the movie stand on its own.

The opening sequence of the movie is what the movie should have been. There's the proof that "Proof" had potential. But somewhere in between a weak script and a poor director, it got lost. (Calipsa Blue)

Devastated is not a strong enough word to describe my disappointment in this film. I don't need to take notes to tell you that everyone stunk -- including Russell. The only thing I can think is that Russell pretty much directed himself in his wonderful Aussie films, and that the director of Mystery, Alaska let him do his own thing. The Insider came from inside of Russell also. He may have thought that this movie would make or break him with mainstream American audiences and that we are all stupid. Well, I'm not. And this is a boring, disjointed movie with unconvincing performances from everyone. I think he'll survive this disaster, but Meg Ryan won't. (Pauline Stafford)

I actually had to eat "crow" with some fellow MFA's (grad students) when I saw Proof of Life. Taylor Hackford has missed it. Proof of Life forgoes a quality script for techno-stunts and pretty places. The man should shoot documentaries. I find this especially disappointing considering Russell's comments on Jay Leno about shitty scripts and money. (Abigail D.)

I waited a long time to see this movie since Gladiator, with mixed feelings. After reading some previews, I knew to lower my expectations. However, I certainly didn't expect the movie to go below even my already-lowered expectations.

Problems with the movie can be summarized in 3 phrases: unfocused, meandering and weak script; good action-sequence directing but nothing else; and sporadic good acting by but a few actors.

I saw one of the director's previous movies, "The Devil's Advocate," and got a similar impression. He's fitfully competent at handling action scenes, but totally missed the bull's-eye on deeper emotions. Casting Meg Ryan as a dramatic Alice was the biggest mistake of this movie. She failed to convince anyone as a grieving, frustrated, ambivalent, emotional woman. And enough of the close-up shots of her perfectly made-up face and nails please. Until she learns to alter her physical appearance to suit, forget acting lessons.

Poor Russell. Our best actor ever nowadays was given so precious little to do, emotionally speaking. All that talent, passion, focus, preparation going in is but one gigantic waste. He is good and reliable in the movie, of course, but he can be so much more. Maybe I'll just have to wait for Ron Howard to bring that out of him in "A Beautiful Mind." (Stephanie)

(Warning: spoilers)

This was a movie made, or should we say inspired, from a magazine article. Sorry to say, but maybe all the excitement about Proof of Life was in the making of it...dealing with the bombings, altitude sickness, and weather.

The film hints of a personal crisis for Terry. The film hints at a career that Alice has had in all the other countries she and Peter have been to. The film hints at Alice's dislike of the corporate office. Maybe that is the problem with the film, it just hints at most everything while withholding any substance.

Pamela Reed does a fine job as Janice, Peter's older sister. I was sorry to see her leave. And what was Alice hinting at when she said that she thought she and Peter had done all their traveling just to escape Peter's sister?

Dino (David Caruso) was a candle in the dark. He stole the show whenever he appeared on screen. Dino is your typical American. Excited as all get-out when he realizes his fellow soldier is going to live AND he and Terry just pulled off what others had viewed as impossible.

There were times though that I wanted to ask for proof of life from Meg's character. Sure she hugged her sister-in-law, and she broke down crying at one point. But if she is attracted to Terry, was her marriage in that good of shape when Peter was kidnapped? Besides the miscarriage, I didn't see anything that would make Peter want to come home to Alice.

Russell did his usual impressive job of making you feel his character's feelings and emotions. It was especially apparent when Terry was talking to his son at the soccer match. But did Taylor Hackford want Terry's character so reticent?

The off-screen attraction was present whenever Russell and Meg were together on-screen. . . . The actors did their best with what they had to work with. The director and writer could have done better. (Sherri W.)

Many critics have compared "Proof of Life" worthy of a "Casablanca" remake. I did see many parallels from that classic film which should be mentioned. Hands down Russell Crowe was the Rick Blaine character made famous by Humphrey Bogart with his cool exterior and loner persona. David Morse was exceptional as the noble and heroic character of Victor Laszlo. David Caruso clearly stood out as the comical Captain Renault. (Maxine)

I should have known when Gene Shalit called this "a thinking man's action movie" that there was trouble in paradise. Who is this 'man' and what was he thinking??? I wanted to like this movie. I like action movies and Russell Crowe. Sounds like a good time, right? Nah. Something is seriously wrong with this movie.

I can't put my finger on any one thing is because it isn't any one thing. It's a bunch of little things that add up wrong. There are scenes that distract -- Terry visiting his son, Alice meeting her sister-in-law at the airport, Terry on the way back to London -- and so are a waste of film. We're told the premise in a series of disjointed scenes that really screw up the flow. And it takes so long to do it this way that the movie becomes pretty boring in parts.

There's no fault with Russell Crowe's portrayal of Terry Thorne -- I did get the feeling that Terry was falling for Alice, but I had no clue why. I have to wonder what editing did to this movie.

There are other plot problems -- Peter's whole company disintegrates, the insurance goes unpaid, the crazy co-captive. . . . I'm not the kind to buy dead horses! Frustrating movie that makes me want to be an editor. (Lee)