Not quite the J-Lowest level (Angel Eyes (DVD))

Member Name: a-true-ben

Product:	Angel Eyes (DVD)
Date:	03/08/04 (105 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Potentially moving human story, J Lo looks nice

Disadvantages: It isn't a great film, You may not like J Lo

Often before watching a film on TV I check reviews on Dooyoo before doing so. If that had been the case with Angel Eyes I probably wouldn?t have bothered watching it (3 of the 4 reviews are very negative). As it was, I saw a trailer about an hour before it came on Channel 4 one Sunday night and, with not much else to do, thought I might as well give it a watch.

It was only after I checked the reviews, and I?m surprised how negative they are. Sure, this is hardly a *great* film. It?s not one I?m telling you that you *must* see. I?m writing this just to redress the balance a bit.

The film stars Jennifer ?J Lo? Lopez as a cop, Sharon Pogue. Now admittedly, this was perhaps stretching things a bit. I mean, her character?s almost too perfect ? the only policewoman we really see, but you get the impression she?s top cop, able to hang in the bar with the other guys, beat them in a fight, and look pretty damn gorgeous while doing it.

Ok, I admit it was her I first noticed about the film. She does have a good slim and blonde look, not how I normally see Miss Lopez. That the character?s not entirely believable isn?t her fault though. Apparently she was nominated for a Razzie (like unofficial Oscars for worst actors) for this film. There?s a whole thread on IMDb that don?t see why either though ? ranging from fans to those who don?t like her but admit she wasn?t bad in this.

I wouldn?t recommend this performance for budding actors to study, but I saw nothing that bad about it. Thankfully I haven?t seen Maid In Manhattan (which was apparently dire) ? in fact I only remember seeing J Lo before in Anaconda, and her performance here was probably better than there (as far as I recall it). I can only assume for nominati
on was simply for being her, a pop-diva-turned-actress. In my opinion though, she?s perfectly adequate ? and easy on the eye ;)

Well, J Lo was bound to dominate any film she?s in (like this review!) The supporting cast really are limited though. Aside from Catch (Jim Caviezel), no one gets much screen time. Most of the coppers and thugs (almost all the black gangsta rapper sort) are stereotypes, but that?s enough for the film. They don?t need developing, so why bother?

Caviezel is good though. He?s the awkward, shy guy who always seems slightly uneasy ? not to mention eccentric ? but likeable. I guess we?re supposed to warm to him slightly more than the rather cold Lopez, and I certainly did.

Perhaps it?s about time I mentioned some plot? Well, it?s hard without giving too much away. A lot is carried by the two stars. Let?s just say, they seemed destined to meet. The film covers them getting to know each other, particularly a journey of discovery and ultimately reconciliation with Catch?s mysterious past.

I?ll admit there?s a certain amount of cliché too. The film does lay it on a little more than necessary (but then, I also thought that about, say, the black and white, good versus evil of Gladiator ? perhaps it just depends whether you like things obvious or real). There aren?t that many flashbacks, for example, but I think it?s quite obvious to us what?s going on ? maybe they just didn?t have much faith in the intelligence of their audience!

I don?t think the predictability ruins the film though. There are a number of nice little touches that provide moments of realisation ? why he doesn?t drive, who the lady in the wheelchair is (she gives it away talking to Lopez near the end), why he?s called ?Catch? ? I missed that one, but believe the suggestion on IMDb)

Ge
nre wise I wouldn?t say this is the crime drama you might expect from what may appear a police film (and Ciao?s categorisation). IMDb are closer, calling it drama/romance. It?s a love story, and a rather easy-going one (but not a Rom-Com). Less commercially successful than J Lo?s The Wedding Planner (which came out about the same time) but more serious and less-slated by the critics.

There?s some brief scuffles, but not much in the way ?action?. Likewise for nudity ? you don?t get to see any more than Lopez in her underwear.

The film seems to be going for sentimentality. Not just Catch coming to terms with the past, but Lopez and her estranged father too. With this, on top of the main love story, perhaps it?s a bit schmaltzy for some. Then again, while it was a bit clichéd and all-live-happily-ever-after predictable, it did strike a bit of a chord with me (maybe I was just in a soppy mood!)

So it?s not a great film, but a perfectly adequate way to spend 102 minutes next time it?s on TV. Get the popcorn and don?t be put off by the other reviews I?d say.

(It closes with a song featuring the phrase ?Angel Eyes?. I?d have preferred the Jerry Cantrell track of that name personally?)

http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0225071/
Rated: 15

Summary: