Bajo sospecha

A film with Gene Hackman and Morgan Freeman in the two main roles is a dream come true for anyone who loves the art of acting, and their performances here (especially Hackman's, who after all does have the more showy part) are stunning. Stephen Hopkins' direction is hip, inventive and unstagy (though it must be said that his "a person can physically visit someone else's flashbacks" trick had already been done three years earlier, in "The Ugly"), the dialogue is sharp, and the story is compelling. So what's wrong with this picture? You guessed it...the ending! Simply put, the ending is baffling and unbelievable, no matter how you try to "explain" it. This film closely resembles the 1994 French thriller "A Pure Formality", and the irony is that, although that was a much worse film overall, it had a genuine surprise at the end, while "Under Suspicion" has the kind of "surprise" that makes the whole film come off as one big red herring. (**1/2)

Most of this dialogue-intensive film takes place in an office in a Puerto Rican Police Department with a top detective (Freeman) grilling a wealthy attorney (Hackman) about the rape/murders of young girls. Featuring outstanding performances by both principals and technical and artistic excellence, the film's story unfolds piecemeal as it scrutinizes the Hackman character with painful deliberation while holding out the "whodunnit" carrot until the very end. More mature audiences with an appetite for this type of film are likely to find "Under Suspicion" a spellbinding tour de force by Hackman.

In the middle of San Sebastian's Feast celebration in San Juan, tax attorney Henry Hearst is guest of honour at a fund raising event to help repair damage from a tropical storm. However, less than an hour before the event, Henry is called into the police station by friend Capt Victor Benezet to clarify some points on his statement. Henry had discovered a dead child on a local beach but the police doubt some of the things in his story. As the time ticks down, Victor comes under pressure to release Henry but at the same time his story begins to reveal lies. The situation is only made more revealing when Henry's wife comes into the station.

Everyone loves a good thriller so it was a surprise to me how quickly this film with it's heavy-weight cast managed to slip through the UK cinemas almost unnoticed. There is nothing significantly wrong with it to justify the low box office it seemed to generate, so I'm not sure why it happened. The story is set, for unknown reasons, in San Juan, a fact that is only distracting as none of the principals are Puerto Rican and their presence there is never really settled. Anyway, the film is very much a play that is carried by the two main characters. The revelations and movement of the plot is engaging and it is great fun to watch. The ending is difficult though - we are taught to expect a certain type of ending in this sort of film and it is slightly disappointing when it doesn't come.

I expected a big twist and, in a way, that happened but the fall out from it isn't well explained by the film and a lot is left for you to think about. In that respect it is difficult, again because we are not expecting that type of ending but also that it is quite hard to understand as it is very tied up in the emotions of complex characters - complexities that we having been watching because we've only been seeing them as `twists' and revelations. That said, I still enjoyed the ending and thought it was brave to be different - just a shame it was badly handled.

The cast are roundly great and are a big reason that the film remains gripping. Hackman and Freeman are great actors and having them both in the same film was enough of a draw to get me watching. The vast majority of their scenes are shared and they interact together really, really well when it comes to the dramatics. What they don't do as well is convince that they really are old friends. Jane is good but his character is far too simplistic and brash. Bellucci is better than I have seen her, but she is a little too wound up emotionally. She is very good looking and I was glad that the film didn't just trade on that, but it didn't (or couldn't) get a great deal out of her.

The director manages to add energy and style to what could have been a rather contain piece (like a play). Visually it is exciting but, looking back, it was more important to develop character than deliver a slick thriller - something he didn't do well at all. The ending is weak because it takes thought, as we have not been forced to look at the complex characters. It was Hopkins' job to make us do that but he can't manage it.

Overall this is an enjoyable film that will frustrate many with the ending. Despite being a clever and different conclusion, it doesn't really work because of the director making the wrong sort of film to suit that ending. However for the vast majority it really works and the strength of the two lead performances mean that, for all it's flaws, this is never a dull film.

Did Henry Hearst rape and kill two young girls? That's the question occupying the whole of Under Suspicion.

For nearly the entirety of its running time, the film is executed brilliantly. There is no action: it keeps the audience's attention through its intelligence, brilliant construction and the reliably excellent performances of Freeman and Hackman. We are not given definitive evidence, and many strange and suspicious things crop up that we yearn to find out about.

This could well have been one of the greatest mystery films I've seen... Until the ending. The ending leaves the audience without an explanation - and not in a good way that lets the audience ponder. It's an ending that leaves you shouting at the screen for an answer.

Overall, I'd recommend this film because it will keep you entertained and on the edge of your seat for more than an hour and a half. Just prepare yourself for an ending that will leave you wholly unsatisfied and rather annoyed.

'Under Suspicion,' a remake of the French film 'Garde a Vue,' is as compelling and engrossing a psychological thriller as I've seen in years. The drama is wonderfully tense and taut, and, best of all, the suspense holds out until near the very end of the film, lingering on afterward for hours in the viewer's mind.

Gene Hackman plays Henry Hearst, a successful attorney in San Juan, Puerto Rico who lives an apparently blissful life of luxury--he's got money, respect, a gorgeous house on the coast, and, most of all, a stunningly beautiful young trophy wife, Chantal (Monica Belluci, the voluptuous heir-apparent to Sophia Loren, in one of her first US roles).

On the eve of the feast of St. Sebastian, during which Hearst is set to deliver an address at a fundraiser for hurricane relief, he is called in to the police department by his longtime acquaintance Victor Benezet (Morgan Freeman) for additional questioning surrounding the death of a young girl. It seems that earlier that day, Hearst discovered the girl's body while jogging. It doesn't take long to discover that Hearst is a suspect, particularly when he is repeatedly threatened and insulted by the tactless Owens (Thomas Jane), a loose-cannon junior detective hot to make his first big bust. As the interrogation progresses--interspersed with stylish flashbacks combing memory and real-time--it becomes apparent that the case is far more complicated than it first appeared. It seems that the imminently respectable Henry Hearst has a fetish for young girls and a secret life involving internet pornography and prostitutes. Simultaneously revealed is Captain Benezet's longstanding jealousy of Hearst, whom he has watched gain wealth and prestige while Benezet has lost his wife to divorce and struggled to get by. As the intense intellectual combat continues, truth becomes more and more murky, to the point that the characters are not even sure of their own motives or actions.

This movie really stuck with me. Without giving anything away, let me say that the film will force you to consider the complexity of truth and memory and the degree to which psychological trauma and coercion can influence what we know about ourselves. Hackman and Freeman are superb, and it's a pleasure to watch them stretching their skills and chewing up the excellent dialogue as their characters confront each other. Thomas Jane gives one of his better performances as the hot-tempered Owens, and Monica Belluci gives a subtle and convincing performance while simultaneously being so unbelievably gorgeous that you can't take your eyes off of her. The direction by Stephen Hopkins is superb--creepy and stylish, the cinemetography makes maximum use of San Juan's many settings.

For some reason this one really flew below the radar when it was released. I highly recommend it as an excellent, memorable suspense thriller with meaning and substance.