While this is an interesting thrill ride (and Caine is a marvelous actor), the problems associated with the movie detract too much to make it worth watching.
The basic story involves a former Nazi affiliate being hunted down after avoiding execution for over 40 years. In short, the Catholic Church has been hiding and supporting the fugitive, because they have also been guilty of anti-semitism, and they believe that he just obeyed orders when he killed 7 Jews and later repented. He now has constant nightmares about the whole thing, and they sympathize, having granted him absolution. They turn out to be as corrupt as mafia.
The half-Jewish now agnostic judge who pursues Caine is a moderately interesting character, but the audience never can truly sympathize with her because she's rude, arrogant and impulsive most of the time - a young, annoying idealist. The Caine character is interesting because he has touching moments (like when he leaves money and a penitant, caring, thankful note for his estranged wife) and seems genuinely emotional, open and desperate at times. Clearly, he's not simply a hard-hearted man, yet he does despicable things like kick an innocent dog. Perhaps this is meant to mimic the Sopranos? Although the movie may be trying to say something about justice and corruption, it's hard to engage, because there is no real protagonist [it's not Caine simply because he's a fugitive although the audience roots for Caine at times because the camera follows him]. The viewer needs a little more affinity with the young female judge or one of the people pursuing the murderer for his crimes against humanity if we are to engage this film beyond its action-adventure.
Secondly, the story is set entirely in France with all French characters, yet NO ONE speaks French! Personne. No restaurant owners, no one conversing on the bus with friends, aucun. It makes the dialog about Caine's character receiving his passport to Canada especially humorous: "Oh good - They speak French there, don't they?" Do they speak French in France too? [see by way of contrast "Last Samurai" where Cruise's character learns Japanese, and most of the movie is subtitled, as Cruise actually speaks Japanese!] To be fair, there is a little nod to France with the occasional French accent, when pronouncing French names. [no I'm not French but how about a touch of cultural sensitivity]
There are a number of similar shortcomings with the writing/directing, but perhaps the most serious detraction in my opinion is that, in an interview, the writer spoke a great deal about conservative Catholicism, saying that it's an important time to expose the history of their anti-semitism. He explained their opposition to Vatican II, their practices and their retention of the Latin mass.... Is this another cheap "guilty by association" slam against Mel Gibson? Wow. The media and entertainment community have stooped to some low levels before, but an entire high-budget movie? Why didn't they just cast Gibson in the Caine role as scary religious hypocrite and anti-semite? I actually liked Norman Jewison (and loved Ronald Harwood's "Piano Player"), but now that I realize the ironic persecution of the Church (or Mel) that drove them to make this movie, I'm repulsed. [and no, I'm not Catholic or a particular Gibson fan!] This movie is loosely based on historical events and yes the truth should be told. But will people conclude that all conservative Catholics - or all Christians - are hateful, anti-semitic liars, hypocrites and moblike villians? Such ridiculous conclusions are the sort that seem to be in the air. The whole hateful idea - the hypocritical motivation behind this movie - should be avoided. Stand clear.
The basic story involves a former Nazi affiliate being hunted down after avoiding execution for over 40 years. In short, the Catholic Church has been hiding and supporting the fugitive, because they have also been guilty of anti-semitism, and they believe that he just obeyed orders when he killed 7 Jews and later repented. He now has constant nightmares about the whole thing, and they sympathize, having granted him absolution. They turn out to be as corrupt as mafia.
The half-Jewish now agnostic judge who pursues Caine is a moderately interesting character, but the audience never can truly sympathize with her because she's rude, arrogant and impulsive most of the time - a young, annoying idealist. The Caine character is interesting because he has touching moments (like when he leaves money and a penitant, caring, thankful note for his estranged wife) and seems genuinely emotional, open and desperate at times. Clearly, he's not simply a hard-hearted man, yet he does despicable things like kick an innocent dog. Perhaps this is meant to mimic the Sopranos? Although the movie may be trying to say something about justice and corruption, it's hard to engage, because there is no real protagonist [it's not Caine simply because he's a fugitive although the audience roots for Caine at times because the camera follows him]. The viewer needs a little more affinity with the young female judge or one of the people pursuing the murderer for his crimes against humanity if we are to engage this film beyond its action-adventure.
Secondly, the story is set entirely in France with all French characters, yet NO ONE speaks French! Personne. No restaurant owners, no one conversing on the bus with friends, aucun. It makes the dialog about Caine's character receiving his passport to Canada especially humorous: "Oh good - They speak French there, don't they?" Do they speak French in France too? [see by way of contrast "Last Samurai" where Cruise's character learns Japanese, and most of the movie is subtitled, as Cruise actually speaks Japanese!] To be fair, there is a little nod to France with the occasional French accent, when pronouncing French names. [no I'm not French but how about a touch of cultural sensitivity]
There are a number of similar shortcomings with the writing/directing, but perhaps the most serious detraction in my opinion is that, in an interview, the writer spoke a great deal about conservative Catholicism, saying that it's an important time to expose the history of their anti-semitism. He explained their opposition to Vatican II, their practices and their retention of the Latin mass.... Is this another cheap "guilty by association" slam against Mel Gibson? Wow. The media and entertainment community have stooped to some low levels before, but an entire high-budget movie? Why didn't they just cast Gibson in the Caine role as scary religious hypocrite and anti-semite? I actually liked Norman Jewison (and loved Ronald Harwood's "Piano Player"), but now that I realize the ironic persecution of the Church (or Mel) that drove them to make this movie, I'm repulsed. [and no, I'm not Catholic or a particular Gibson fan!] This movie is loosely based on historical events and yes the truth should be told. But will people conclude that all conservative Catholics - or all Christians - are hateful, anti-semitic liars, hypocrites and moblike villians? Such ridiculous conclusions are the sort that seem to be in the air. The whole hateful idea - the hypocritical motivation behind this movie - should be avoided. Stand clear.